SMH staff are frustrated to be in the news, again

A note to subscribers has become the source of grumblings in corners of The Sydney Morning Herald’s newsroom this morning, as some staffers grow frustrated about once again becoming “the story” so soon after the paper was forced to issue an apology for its reporting on Rebel Wilson. 

The Herald’s editor, Bevan Shields, stood firmly behind the paper’s work in a note to subscribers late Wednesday, following a spray from former prime minister Paul Keating that took aim at a multi-part series titled “Red Alert” published by the paper and its sister publication, The Age, which warned of Australia’s involvement in an imminent war with China. 

In an address to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Keating labelled the Herald’s political editor Peter Hartcher a “psychopath”, and suggested the paper’s foreign affairs and national security correspondent, Matthew Knott, hang his head in shame for writing the stories. 

One week earlier, Keating described the series as “the most egregious and provocative news presentation” he’d seen in 50 years of public life. 

In his note, Shields took aim at Keating himself, likening the former prime minister to former US president Donald Trump.

The editor claimed Keating disregarded “important” recent events, including comments made by China’s foreign minister, as well as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s appearance in San Diego to announce AUKUS, which he said was “sobering confirmation” of a deteriorating security situation in the Indo-Pacific. 

“For years, we have laughed along with Keating as he hurls his trademark barbs. But it’s not funny anymore,” Shields wrote.

“His attack on Wong, defence of the CCP and the Donald Trump-like abuse of journalists doing their jobs show just how far removed from the political mainstream Keating’s views and behaviour have become.”

Inside the newsroom, the series landed to mixed reviews, Crikey understands. Sources say the reporting has prompted internal criticism of varying shades: some say worthy subject matter was let down by poor reporting; others say it should never have made it into print. 

ABC’s Media Watch didn’t take well to the series, either. Host Paul Barry called it “extraordinary stuff”, citing Keating’s criticisms alongside those of Nick Bisley, dean of humanities and social sciences and professor of international relations at La Trobe University, who called the reporting “hyperbolic”.

Shields in his note to subscribers said Media Watch “professes to be the arbiter of good and bad reporting” but that it failed in its review of the paper’s “Red Alert” series to offer Herald leadership a right of reply before airing the segment. In his note to subscribers, The Age editor Patrick Elligett hammered the same line.

“We will write to the ABC demanding an on-air apology for Media Watch’s hypocrisy and poor standards,” Shields wrote.

In a tweet on Thursday morning, Barry said news outlets like the Herald don’t need to be quoted by Media Watch to defend their journalism. “They have their own megaphone — as you can see,” he wrote, tweeting out a link to Shields’ note to subscribers.

“But we did summarise their defence and quote from the SMH editorial. Fair and reasonable IMHO.”

Corners of the Herald newsroom say the controversy, so soon after the publication was forced to apologise for its reporting on Rebel Wilson’s relationship with Ramona Agruma, has become another embarrassment that risks undermining the paper’s credibility.

Shields told Crikey he had nothing to add to his note to subscribers, and declined to comment. A spokesperson for the ABC said it has nothing to add to Barry’s tweet.