Share this @internewscast.com
The ABC has admitted to errors in its approach to the dismissal of journalist Antoinette Lattouf, following a Federal Court decision stating that she was wrongfully terminated for a social media post about the Gaza conflict, resulting in a $70,000 compensation award.
Justice Darryl Rangiah ruled that the ABC violated sections 50 and 772(1) of the Fair Work Act by dismissing Lattouf partially due to her political stance against Israel’s military actions in Gaza.
It was determined that the ABC canceled her contract in a hasty manner, a move attributed solely to chief content officer Chris Oliver-Taylor, who acted to address a flood of complaints and to placate pro-Israel advocates, according to Rangiah.
ABC managing director Hugh Marks acknowledged in a statement that the issue was “not handled in accordance with [the ABC’s] values and expectations,” acknowledging that it “caused understandable concern both publicly and internally.”
Marks emphasized, “The ABC’s values should be evident in our operations. In this situation, the judge identified procedural missteps, leading to mistakes.”
“We regret the manner in which Ms. Lattouf was taken off air and the distress caused. We offer our sincere apologies to Ms. Lattouf and wish her success in her future pursuits.”
What did the judge find?
Lattouf was sacked three days into a five-day casual stint as an ABC Radio Sydney host, which began on Monday, 18 December 2023.
The ABC claimed that, a day into her contract, she breached the organisation’s social media policy by sharing a post by Human Rights Watch captioned “HRW reporting starvation as a tool of war”, referring to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in Gaza.
After the program aired on Wednesday, Lattouf was called into a meeting and told she would not be “required” to host the final two mornings. She was not given any opportunity to defend herself against the allegations, Rangiah found.
Lattouf’s lawyers argued her political opinion and/or race, as well as external pressure from pro-Israel lobbyists by way of an email-writing campaign, had pressured management into taking her off air.
The ABC denied it was influenced by lobbyists, instead claiming the freelance journalist was sacked because she was advised “not to post anything that could be perceived as controversial” on her social media platforms.
Lattouf was paid for the full five days, and the ABC had denied repudiating her contract.
The journalist argued at a hearing in February that then-ABC chair Ita Buttrose, former content chief Chris Oliver-Taylor and former managing director David Anderson were responsible for her termination.
But Rangiah found the decision was solely Oliver-Taylor’s as he tried to mitigate further complaints about the broadcaster employing someone with Lattouf’s political opinions.
Oliver-Taylor aimed to pacify the public who might associate Lattouf with anti-Israel and antisemitic views by removing her from the broadcast,” he stated.
Antoinette Lattouf, seen with a supporter outside the Federal Court in Sydney on Wednesday. A judge concluded that the ABC, “in a state of panic,” annulled the journalist’s contract. Source: AAP / Bianca De Marchi
Anderson made a “material contribution” to the decision, however, by giving his views to Oliver-Taylor that the fill-in host held antisemitic opinions.
Rangiah accepted Oliver-Taylor was put in a difficult position by Lattouf’s choice to share the controversial post.
“Ms Lattouf’s making of the HRW Post was ill-advised and inconsiderate of her employer,” he said.
“The ABC would have to brace itself for the inevitable criticism — whether fair or unfair — for permitting one of its presenters to make a controversial post and then allowing her to remain on air.”
The ABC’s claims the journalist was fired for breaching a direction not to post anything about Israel and Gaza during her five days on air were also rejected.
“I find Ms Lattouf was merely provided with advice that it would be best not to post anything controversial about the war,” he said.
The judge rejected claims by Lattouf — who is of Lebanese heritage — that she was terminated due to her race or national extraction.
What next for the ABC?
In his statement, Marks acknowledged concerns about the ABC’s handling of race and political views.
“I wish to emphasise the ABC’s absolute commitment to fostering diversity and inclusion at all levels of the organisation, to addressing racism and discrimination of all kinds, and to accurate and impartial journalism,” Marks said.
He said the national broadcaster had found there was confusion over its personal use of social media guidelines, which had since been reviewed and would be replaced with new “public comment guidelines”.
“We will talk more this about in coming weeks,” Marks said.
Antoinette Lattouf speaks after judge’s ruling
Outside the Federal Court in Sydney, Lattouf said the decision showed she had been “punished for my political opinion”.
“In December 2023, I shared a Human Rights Watch post because Human Rights Watch found that Israel was using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza.
“It is now June 2025 and Palestinian children are still being starved. We see their images every day, emaciated, skeletal, scavenging through the rubble.”
Lattouf’s legal team had argued she was rendered “pretty much unemployable” as a result of her public sacking — the news of which was published in an article by The Australian before she had even returned home the day she was fired.
She has been awarded $70,000 in non-economic loss for pain and suffering. She was seeking between $100,000 and $150,000.
Lattouf offered to settle the case for $85,000 in August.
Antoinette Lattouf’s lawyer, Josh Bornstein, speaks to the media outside the Federal Court in Sydney on Wednesday. Source: AAP / Bianca De Marchi
This was an offer the ABC — which has spent more than $1.1 million defending the case — rejected, her lawyer Josh Bornstein said.
“When organisations capitulate to bad faith complaints against staff, the results are often perverse,” he said.
“It has been a privilege to represent Antoinette Lattouf in this important case about corporate cancel culture.”
A potential monetary penalty will also be determined at a later hearing.
Bornstein said “significant penalties” would be sought at the upcoming hearing to deter the broadcaster from similar conduct.
With additional reporting by the Australian Associated Press.
