Yes, audiences have changed. But this is destroying a core tenet of news
We've changed. As a result, broadcasters, in an attempt to keep audiences, change what they're offering us.
We know The Project lost its way, but believe me, when it started out, it felt young and fresh, brimming with energy.
Did we start to disengage after it lost Charlie Pickering?
Did we lose our sense of humour? Or did they lose their understanding of what we needed to know and how much that's changed?
How much have we really changed?
I'm not the right person to answer this because I listen, read and watch news all day, every day. But I've got some insights into what's going on at the ABC this week and it makes me want to cry.
This week, the ABC announced it would end its panel show Q+A after 18 years.
Sure.
Despite the fact that ratings for the program, now hosted by Patricia Karvelas, had increased.
She and her team, including the remarkable executive producer Eliza Harvey, kept trying different things.
So is it about the money? Probably.
I think about 10 people will lose their jobs from that program alone, including some who are on the ABC's notorious casual contracts cycle.
We don't need to keep the same thing forever, but it's weird that both its panel shows have now gone.
Let us hope and pray we don't get served up even more Hard Quiz or the bizarrely unentertaining House of Games, which now leads us into the news. I can't think of a less suitable entrée.
Marks continues in his email: "Upcoming initiatives in news include investing in producing additional high-impact premium news documentary programs and embedding Your Say as a permanent initiative."
Much as I love Your Say, I'm not sure it's all that. You answer various online questions and then somehow that's turned into filler, not attached to real humans.
As you know, no need to be honest with a form - and it kind of plays with us, to be more conservative, to be more progressive, to see where it lands. Is it fun? Sure. Is it truly meaningful? Doubt that so much.
Feels like phony participation. Falls far short. I remember my various editors over various decades telling me that the best way of representing what real people felt was to include real people, real names, real lives.
Anyhow, I've asked various staff members at the ABC if they can decode Marks's email to all staff. Most have backed away politely.
They say they don't really have a clue what most of it means. What they do know is that 40 staff will be made redundant, and 10 short-term contracts will be terminated early.
Weirdly, in the more detailed change proposal, the ABC is backing away from digital and dumping innovation.
Do we know any other 21st century organisation doing that?
I'm shocked Marks thinks he can embed innovation in every unit. Real inventive thinking takes time, space and quiet. It is the exact opposite of what daily media production requires.
A couple of insiders have said to me that these changes show a desire by Marks to strut his stuff. What he's doing, they say, is clawing resources (money, people) into television, something he actually knows about.
"He's building a war chest for TV," says one source.
The internal email says: "The objective is to enhance our TV slate in volume and ambition, increase our capacity to commission more high-value journalism, enable more original podcasting and put targeted resources into our metropolitan audio teams." Yeah, translated, TV war chest.
The ABC already does brilliant, high-value journalism.
Back the people you already employ. Fund more episodes of Four Corners. Give more staff to news, especially radio news and current affairs.
The audience cannot possibly tolerate the barely changed iterations of news stories on AM, The World Today and PM.
These are three flagships (and I listen as if news was my religion) and they should be treated that way.
Now, going back to Marks's email to staff. See how TV comes first in that list. He's also decided to rename the ABC's Content division as ABC Screen, which will be led by Jennifer Collins.
This might be the one bit of good news in the entire shemozzle.
Here's an array of adjectives used by ABC employees to describe Collins: respected, no bullshit, pragmatic. And, doesn't interfere in tiny decisions.
READ MORE:
Apparently, she was overlooked when they appointed Chris Oliver-Taylor (he's the one who carried the can on the Antoinette Lattouf fiasco, but there were others, there were others). Bet ABC management very sorry about that now.
Collins has had a long career at the ABC and a short career in commercial screen (as we seem to be calling television now) and has a double degree in television and psychology.
She'll need that, not just in thinking about how audiences work, but in thinking about how her boss works. So many people have described Hugh Marks to me as a micromanager who needs more trust in the people who work for him.
Speaking of micromanagers. In April, the then-newish host of the ABC's Media Watch, Linton Besser and his team, exposed Kim Williams as an apparently activist chair with no business running the most important media institution in the country. Micromanaging madly. And badly. Trying to leverage his status to influence who appeared on the national broadcaster.
At the time, Marks said: "I am vigilant to ensure the proper delineation of responsibility between the board and management, and will act appropriately to ensure the best interests of the ABC, its people and audiences as we move forward."
So far, no evidence we are moving forward. Just more bad news. More redundancies.
No evidence that any of the most senior folks at the ABC or Ten have any idea what we, the listeners and watchers, really want. Maybe we don't know either. There's only so many episodes of Shrinking.
This is all our fault. We stopped watching Q+A. We stopped watching The Project. We've stopped appointment television unless it's the footy.
We've changed. As a result, broadcasters, in an attempt to keep audiences, change what they're offering us.
We know The Project lost its way, but believe me, when it started out, it felt young and fresh, brimming with energy.
Did we start to disengage after it lost Charlie Pickering?
Did we lose our sense of humour? Or did they lose their understanding of what we needed to know and how much that's changed?
How much have we really changed?
I'm not the right person to answer this because I listen, read and watch news all day, every day. But I've got some insights into what's going on at the ABC this week and it makes me want to cry.
This week, the ABC announced it would end its panel show Q+A after 18 years.
Sure.
Despite the fact that ratings for the program, now hosted by Patricia Karvelas, had increased.
She and her team, including the remarkable executive producer Eliza Harvey, kept trying different things.
So is it about the money? Probably.
I think about 10 people will lose their jobs from that program alone, including some who are on the ABC's notorious casual contracts cycle.
We don't need to keep the same thing forever, but it's weird that both its panel shows have now gone.
Let us hope and pray we don't get served up even more Hard Quiz or the bizarrely unentertaining House of Games, which now leads us into the news. I can't think of a less suitable entrée.
Marks continues in his email: "Upcoming initiatives in news include investing in producing additional high-impact premium news documentary programs and embedding Your Say as a permanent initiative."
Much as I love Your Say, I'm not sure it's all that. You answer various online questions and then somehow that's turned into filler, not attached to real humans.
As you know, no need to be honest with a form - and it kind of plays with us, to be more conservative, to be more progressive, to see where it lands. Is it fun? Sure. Is it truly meaningful? Doubt that so much.
Feels like phony participation. Falls far short. I remember my various editors over various decades telling me that the best way of representing what real people felt was to include real people, real names, real lives.
Anyhow, I've asked various staff members at the ABC if they can decode Marks's email to all staff. Most have backed away politely.
They say they don't really have a clue what most of it means. What they do know is that 40 staff will be made redundant, and 10 short-term contracts will be terminated early.
Weirdly, in the more detailed change proposal, the ABC is backing away from digital and dumping innovation.
Do we know any other 21st century organisation doing that?
I'm shocked Marks thinks he can embed innovation in every unit. Real inventive thinking takes time, space and quiet. It is the exact opposite of what daily media production requires.
A couple of insiders have said to me that these changes show a desire by Marks to strut his stuff. What he's doing, they say, is clawing resources (money, people) into television, something he actually knows about.
"He's building a war chest for TV," says one source.
The internal email says: "The objective is to enhance our TV slate in volume and ambition, increase our capacity to commission more high-value journalism, enable more original podcasting and put targeted resources into our metropolitan audio teams." Yeah, translated, TV war chest.
The ABC already does brilliant, high-value journalism.
Back the people you already employ. Fund more episodes of Four Corners. Give more staff to news, especially radio news and current affairs.
The audience cannot possibly tolerate the barely changed iterations of news stories on AM, The World Today and PM.
These are three flagships (and I listen as if news was my religion) and they should be treated that way.
Now, going back to Marks's email to staff. See how TV comes first in that list. He's also decided to rename the ABC's Content division as ABC Screen, which will be led by Jennifer Collins.
This might be the one bit of good news in the entire shemozzle.
Here's an array of adjectives used by ABC employees to describe Collins: respected, no bullshit, pragmatic. And, doesn't interfere in tiny decisions.
READ MORE:
Apparently, she was overlooked when they appointed Chris Oliver-Taylor (he's the one who carried the can on the Antoinette Lattouf fiasco, but there were others, there were others). Bet ABC management very sorry about that now.
Collins has had a long career at the ABC and a short career in commercial screen (as we seem to be calling television now) and has a double degree in television and psychology.
She'll need that, not just in thinking about how audiences work, but in thinking about how her boss works. So many people have described Hugh Marks to me as a micromanager who needs more trust in the people who work for him.
Speaking of micromanagers. In April, the then-newish host of the ABC's Media Watch, Linton Besser and his team, exposed Kim Williams as an apparently activist chair with no business running the most important media institution in the country. Micromanaging madly. And badly. Trying to leverage his status to influence who appeared on the national broadcaster.
At the time, Marks said: "I am vigilant to ensure the proper delineation of responsibility between the board and management, and will act appropriately to ensure the best interests of the ABC, its people and audiences as we move forward."
So far, no evidence we are moving forward. Just more bad news. More redundancies.
No evidence that any of the most senior folks at the ABC or Ten have any idea what we, the listeners and watchers, really want. Maybe we don't know either. There's only so many episodes of Shrinking.
This is all our fault. We stopped watching Q+A. We stopped watching The Project. We've stopped appointment television unless it's the footy.
We've changed. As a result, broadcasters, in an attempt to keep audiences, change what they're offering us.
We know The Project lost its way, but believe me, when it started out, it felt young and fresh, brimming with energy.
Did we start to disengage after it lost Charlie Pickering?
Did we lose our sense of humour? Or did they lose their understanding of what we needed to know and how much that's changed?
How much have we really changed?
I'm not the right person to answer this because I listen, read and watch news all day, every day. But I've got some insights into what's going on at the ABC this week and it makes me want to cry.
This week, the ABC announced it would end its panel show Q+A after 18 years.
Sure.
Despite the fact that ratings for the program, now hosted by Patricia Karvelas, had increased.
She and her team, including the remarkable executive producer Eliza Harvey, kept trying different things.
So is it about the money? Probably.
I think about 10 people will lose their jobs from that program alone, including some who are on the ABC's notorious casual contracts cycle.
We don't need to keep the same thing forever, but it's weird that both its panel shows have now gone.
Let us hope and pray we don't get served up even more Hard Quiz or the bizarrely unentertaining House of Games, which now leads us into the news. I can't think of a less suitable entrée.
Marks continues in his email: "Upcoming initiatives in news include investing in producing additional high-impact premium news documentary programs and embedding Your Say as a permanent initiative."
Much as I love Your Say, I'm not sure it's all that. You answer various online questions and then somehow that's turned into filler, not attached to real humans.
As you know, no need to be honest with a form - and it kind of plays with us, to be more conservative, to be more progressive, to see where it lands. Is it fun? Sure. Is it truly meaningful? Doubt that so much.
Feels like phony participation. Falls far short. I remember my various editors over various decades telling me that the best way of representing what real people felt was to include real people, real names, real lives.
Anyhow, I've asked various staff members at the ABC if they can decode Marks's email to all staff. Most have backed away politely.
They say they don't really have a clue what most of it means. What they do know is that 40 staff will be made redundant, and 10 short-term contracts will be terminated early.
Weirdly, in the more detailed change proposal, the ABC is backing away from digital and dumping innovation.
Do we know any other 21st century organisation doing that?
I'm shocked Marks thinks he can embed innovation in every unit. Real inventive thinking takes time, space and quiet. It is the exact opposite of what daily media production requires.
A couple of insiders have said to me that these changes show a desire by Marks to strut his stuff. What he's doing, they say, is clawing resources (money, people) into television, something he actually knows about.
"He's building a war chest for TV," says one source.
The internal email says: "The objective is to enhance our TV slate in volume and ambition, increase our capacity to commission more high-value journalism, enable more original podcasting and put targeted resources into our metropolitan audio teams." Yeah, translated, TV war chest.
The ABC already does brilliant, high-value journalism.
Back the people you already employ. Fund more episodes of Four Corners. Give more staff to news, especially radio news and current affairs.
The audience cannot possibly tolerate the barely changed iterations of news stories on AM, The World Today and PM.
These are three flagships (and I listen as if news was my religion) and they should be treated that way.
Now, going back to Marks's email to staff. See how TV comes first in that list. He's also decided to rename the ABC's Content division as ABC Screen, which will be led by Jennifer Collins.
This might be the one bit of good news in the entire shemozzle.
Here's an array of adjectives used by ABC employees to describe Collins: respected, no bullshit, pragmatic. And, doesn't interfere in tiny decisions.
READ MORE:
Apparently, she was overlooked when they appointed Chris Oliver-Taylor (he's the one who carried the can on the Antoinette Lattouf fiasco, but there were others, there were others). Bet ABC management very sorry about that now.
Collins has had a long career at the ABC and a short career in commercial screen (as we seem to be calling television now) and has a double degree in television and psychology.
She'll need that, not just in thinking about how audiences work, but in thinking about how her boss works. So many people have described Hugh Marks to me as a micromanager who needs more trust in the people who work for him.
Speaking of micromanagers. In April, the then-newish host of the ABC's Media Watch, Linton Besser and his team, exposed Kim Williams as an apparently activist chair with no business running the most important media institution in the country. Micromanaging madly. And badly. Trying to leverage his status to influence who appeared on the national broadcaster.
At the time, Marks said: "I am vigilant to ensure the proper delineation of responsibility between the board and management, and will act appropriately to ensure the best interests of the ABC, its people and audiences as we move forward."
So far, no evidence we are moving forward. Just more bad news. More redundancies.
No evidence that any of the most senior folks at the ABC or Ten have any idea what we, the listeners and watchers, really want. Maybe we don't know either. There's only so many episodes of Shrinking.
This is all our fault. We stopped watching Q+A. We stopped watching The Project. We've stopped appointment television unless it's the footy.
We've changed. As a result, broadcasters, in an attempt to keep audiences, change what they're offering us.
We know The Project lost its way, but believe me, when it started out, it felt young and fresh, brimming with energy.
Did we start to disengage after it lost Charlie Pickering?
Did we lose our sense of humour? Or did they lose their understanding of what we needed to know and how much that's changed?
How much have we really changed?
I'm not the right person to answer this because I listen, read and watch news all day, every day. But I've got some insights into what's going on at the ABC this week and it makes me want to cry.
This week, the ABC announced it would end its panel show Q+A after 18 years.
Sure.
Despite the fact that ratings for the program, now hosted by Patricia Karvelas, had increased.
She and her team, including the remarkable executive producer Eliza Harvey, kept trying different things.
So is it about the money? Probably.
I think about 10 people will lose their jobs from that program alone, including some who are on the ABC's notorious casual contracts cycle.
We don't need to keep the same thing forever, but it's weird that both its panel shows have now gone.
Let us hope and pray we don't get served up even more Hard Quiz or the bizarrely unentertaining House of Games, which now leads us into the news. I can't think of a less suitable entrée.
Marks continues in his email: "Upcoming initiatives in news include investing in producing additional high-impact premium news documentary programs and embedding Your Say as a permanent initiative."
Much as I love Your Say, I'm not sure it's all that. You answer various online questions and then somehow that's turned into filler, not attached to real humans.
As you know, no need to be honest with a form - and it kind of plays with us, to be more conservative, to be more progressive, to see where it lands. Is it fun? Sure. Is it truly meaningful? Doubt that so much.
Feels like phony participation. Falls far short. I remember my various editors over various decades telling me that the best way of representing what real people felt was to include real people, real names, real lives.
Anyhow, I've asked various staff members at the ABC if they can decode Marks's email to all staff. Most have backed away politely.
They say they don't really have a clue what most of it means. What they do know is that 40 staff will be made redundant, and 10 short-term contracts will be terminated early.
Weirdly, in the more detailed change proposal, the ABC is backing away from digital and dumping innovation.
Do we know any other 21st century organisation doing that?
I'm shocked Marks thinks he can embed innovation in every unit. Real inventive thinking takes time, space and quiet. It is the exact opposite of what daily media production requires.
A couple of insiders have said to me that these changes show a desire by Marks to strut his stuff. What he's doing, they say, is clawing resources (money, people) into television, something he actually knows about.
"He's building a war chest for TV," says one source.
The internal email says: "The objective is to enhance our TV slate in volume and ambition, increase our capacity to commission more high-value journalism, enable more original podcasting and put targeted resources into our metropolitan audio teams." Yeah, translated, TV war chest.
The ABC already does brilliant, high-value journalism.
Back the people you already employ. Fund more episodes of Four Corners. Give more staff to news, especially radio news and current affairs.
The audience cannot possibly tolerate the barely changed iterations of news stories on AM, The World Today and PM.
These are three flagships (and I listen as if news was my religion) and they should be treated that way.
Now, going back to Marks's email to staff. See how TV comes first in that list. He's also decided to rename the ABC's Content division as ABC Screen, which will be led by Jennifer Collins.
This might be the one bit of good news in the entire shemozzle.
Here's an array of adjectives used by ABC employees to describe Collins: respected, no bullshit, pragmatic. And, doesn't interfere in tiny decisions.
READ MORE:
Apparently, she was overlooked when they appointed Chris Oliver-Taylor (he's the one who carried the can on the Antoinette Lattouf fiasco, but there were others, there were others). Bet ABC management very sorry about that now.
Collins has had a long career at the ABC and a short career in commercial screen (as we seem to be calling television now) and has a double degree in television and psychology.
She'll need that, not just in thinking about how audiences work, but in thinking about how her boss works. So many people have described Hugh Marks to me as a micromanager who needs more trust in the people who work for him.
Speaking of micromanagers. In April, the then-newish host of the ABC's Media Watch, Linton Besser and his team, exposed Kim Williams as an apparently activist chair with no business running the most important media institution in the country. Micromanaging madly. And badly. Trying to leverage his status to influence who appeared on the national broadcaster.
At the time, Marks said: "I am vigilant to ensure the proper delineation of responsibility between the board and management, and will act appropriately to ensure the best interests of the ABC, its people and audiences as we move forward."
So far, no evidence we are moving forward. Just more bad news. More redundancies.
No evidence that any of the most senior folks at the ABC or Ten have any idea what we, the listeners and watchers, really want. Maybe we don't know either. There's only so many episodes of Shrinking.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
West Australian
13 hours ago
- West Australian
Trade Minister Don Farrell clarifies that Anthony Albanese was not directly lobbied by Donald Trump on US beef
One of Anthony Albanese's senior Cabinet ministers has admitted that he was mistaken after claiming Donald Trump personally lobbied the Prime Minister to lift restrictions on US beef imports to Australia. Trade Minister Don Farrell had on Sunday indicated that the US President had raised the issue directly in one of the three phone conversations the leaders have shared. 'Of course, the president of the United States has raised it with the prime minister,' he told Sky. 'I couldn't tell you off the top of my head which of the discussions, but I'm aware that this issue was raised by the president of the United States.' However, the Prime Minister later clarified on ABC that the import ban had only been raised when Mr Trump said it publicly at his 'Liberation Day' tariffs event in April. Asked whether Donald Trump raised the issue directly with him, the Prime Minister replied, 'No. Donald Trump did raise it at the so-called 'Liberation Day'. He raised it publicly, and so his views were well known'. By mid-day, Senator Farrell had clarified in a Nine interview 'I made a mistake' and had confused that White House address with a private conversation between the two leaders. Australia this week lifted a long-standing ban on US beef imports—specifically meat from cattle born in Canada or Mexico but slaughtered in America —following a decade-long, science-based biosecurity review. Agriculture Minister Julie Collins, Mr Albanese and Mr Farrell had said strict standards remained in place and the decision's timing amid tariff threats wasn't suspicious. Mr Trump had declared the move this week a trade triumph for America, calling it a 'golden age of America,' and warning other countries were now 'on notice.' It comes after concern from Opposition and industry that the Albanese government compromised Australia's strict biosecurity rules to appease Mr Trump amid his tariffs regime. Nationals leader David Littleproud and other Coalition figures have questioned whether the decision was truly based on biosecurity and demanded an independent review. Shadow Foreign Minister Michaelia Cash added to Littleproud's calls on Sunday, saying she too would like an inquiry to come before the Senate. 'We now urgently need an independent review into this decision,' she said. 'It could be an independent review. I think it's incredibly important, based on the responses that Minister Farrell has given… that we get the Department in front of us very, very quickly.' Senator Cash also described Senator Farrell's claims on the Trump phone call as an 'extraordinary interview', adding 'there are even more questions now to answer'.
News.com.au
14 hours ago
- News.com.au
British comedy actress Sally Phillips gobsmacked by first Logie nomination
Best Lead Actress in a Comedy at this year's Logie Awards is a stacked category – including, perhaps controversially given it's Australian television's 'night of nights', an American (Leighton Meester) and a Brit (Sally Phillips). Phillips is nominated for her role in the first season of the acclaimed ABC comedy series Austin, which returns for a second series tonight. Speaking to the British actress is sad that she won't make it down to Australia for the big night – not that she likes her chances of winning. 'I'm not going to win,' she insists. 'But it is voted for by the public, which is partly why I'm so completely thrilled to be nominated... I think I see it as a step on my citizenship journey.' Phillips' relationship with Australia started when she was a child, and her father, who worked at British Airways, moved the family to Mosman on Sydney's north shore for several years. 'I had an Australian accent, and when we came back to the UK, my English teacher was Australian and so I got mercilessly bullied for trying to suck up to the Australian English teacher... people thought I was just putting it on, but I couldn't hear it, I couldn't get rid of it,' she explains. 'But we loved it out there and consequently, if I get offered a job to do in Australia, I always say yes. Where other people might say 'That's a long way,' I say 'yes please'.' The latest Aussie job for Phillips has been Austin, an Australian / British co-production starring former Love on the Spectrum participant Michael Theo in his debut acting role. Theo plays the titular character, a young man living with Autism who reaches out to his long-lost birth father Julian (Ben Miller) – much to the shock of Julian's wife, played by Phillips, who had no idea this son ever existed. One delightful surprise from the show's first season was just how good Theo was at carrying the show – not because of his disability, but because he'd never acted before (and 'reality TV star to acclaimed comic actor' is not a path well-worn). 'What makes him such a brilliant actor is that he has no armour, so he doesn't have any defences,' Phillips says. It also made filming particularly intense at times. Phillips reveals that her co-star struggled when season one wrapped, finding it hard to adjust to the reality of life as an actor: One minute the cast and crew are like your family, the next minute the show's over and you don't see them at all. 'Making the show, he was living independently for the first time. We were having dinner together most nights, and there were lots of people checking in with him every day, asking: How are you? Do you need anything? And he didn't want to go back to reality, really. It was pretty tough,' she admits. But with Michael in mind, the cast made sure to keep up their connection between seasons – one Phillips says she's sure will continue for years to come. 'Michael held us all to account, and has kind of gone: 'Tell me this is real, this friendship. ' And it definitely is. I mean, we spoke yesterday. But I think he does find it quite hard, the on again / off again thing of acting.' Now, the first time actor is in an unusual position: He's nominated for a Best Lead Actor in a Comedy Logie... the same category as his on-screen father. 'I've told him, it's all right, it's not a competition, and he said, yes it is,' Phillips says with a laugh. 'So I really hope he beats Ben, because it is a competition, as it turns out.' While Phillips' acting career started earlier in the 90s with roles in UK comedies like I'm Alan Partridge, In The Red and Hippies, it was her role in the hilarious sketch comedy show Smack The Pony that became her breakthrough. Running for three seasons from 1999, the show saw Phillips form a comedy trio with Fiona Allen, Doon MacKichan for a surrealist look at everything from modern dating to pop music videos. Despite a rabid fanbase, Phillips confesses they always felt like 'also-rans' in the UK, typically losing any TV comedy awards to Sacha Baron Cohen and his Ali G character. They, did, however, win two international Emmy Awards for the Best Popular Arts Show – but as Phillips recalls, their comedy nemesis Ali G still got the last laugh. 'I remember flying back [from the Emmys] and we were a bit drunk and had the Emmy with us. Sacha was going into first class and I remember Doon going, 'We've got a f**king Emmy. And we're still in economy!' There was a flurry of excitement earlier this year after an announcement that the trio will reunite for shows at the Edinburgh Festival, taking place next month. Tempering expectations, Phillips explained the new show is more of an interview-style format about their TV days, with a couple of sketches thrown in. Might it be a test run for bigger things to come? 'Well, we're going to share a flat and see what it's like being together – we're all going to live toether for five days. Because we used to hang out so much, and so the show became like a diary, really. You'd come in and say 'this thing happened,' then you'd give it a twist and make it a sketch.' Phillips also recently reprised her role as friend Sharon in the latest Bridget Jones film Mad About The Boy, reprising a role she's now played in four films across almost a quarter of a century. Mad About the Boy earned the best reviews of the whole series, striking a markedly different tone to the slapstick antics of some of the earlier films. But despite the positive reception, Phillips says she and the rest of the cast felt sure this was their last outing. 'The last scene that we shot together was a birthday party. We were in this beautiful house and we danced like crazy for four or five hours, and at the end of it we all put our arms around each other and burst into tears,' she recalls. 'It's the last one, and that's it … but it's been nearly half my life. I went for the first read-through on the day of my 30th birthday, and I'm now 55.'
Sky News AU
15 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Anthony Albanese confirms Australia will not join France in recognising Palestinian state while accusing Israel of breaching international law
Anthony Albanese has confirmed he will not back France's move to recognise Palestine as a state, while accusing Israel of breaching international law after withholding aid from civilians in Gaza. The Prime Minister told the ABC's Insiders program his government would not support any country that has a terrorist organisation at the heart of it. French President Emmanual Macron announced he would be formally recognising Palestine as a state at the UN General Assembly in September. Mr Albanese suggested there needed to be 'structure' for a Palestinian state before Australia could recognise one. 'What we will do is we'll make a decision based upon the time. Is the time right now? Are we about to imminently do that? No, we are not,' he told the ABC on Sunday. The Prime Minister reinforced Australia supports a two-state solution, while asking the question 'how do you exclude Hamas from any involvement there?' 'How do you ensure that a Palestinian state operates in an appropriate way which does not threaten the existence of Israel? And so we won't do any decision as a gesture. We will do it as a way forward if the circumstances are met,' he said. Mr Albanese also appeared open for Australia to make decisions on the statehood of Palestine without advice from the United States. 'Australia will always make our decisions as a sovereign state,' he said. 'But the role of the United States is critical. And the United States was playing a role in negotiating with the Saudis and Jordan and states in the region about how you move the Middle East conflict forward.' Meanwhile, Israel has opened corridors for UN humanitarian aid to enter Gaza while also airdropping aid. Mr Albanese said it was 'a start' after what he labelled was 'quite clearly' a breach of international law from Israel by withholding aid from civilians in Gaza. The Prime Minister added that more work was needed to protect innocent Palestinians. "A one-year-old-boy is not a Hamas fighter. The civilian casualties and death in Gaza is completely unacceptable. It's completely indefensible," he said. On Friday, the Albanese government said in a statement the situation in Gaza had "gone beyond the world's worst fears", and called on Israel to "comply immediately with its obligations under international law". The statement also condemned the 'terror and brutality of Hamas' and called for the 'immediate release of the remaining hostages'. Shadow foreign minister Michaelia Cash unleased on the statement and accused the government of 'pontification' on Sky News' Sunday Agenda. "I think the unfortunate reality for Mr Albanese is he continues to fail to lay the blame for the ongoing war in Gaza directly at the feet of the terrorists who commenced it," she told Andrew Clennell. "Does Israel have a moral responsibility? Yes. Should Israel be getting more aid in to the civilians of Gaza? Absolutely, and I call on the Israeli government to work with the international organisations … (But) any moral outrage is with the terrorists."
