Latest news with #YourSay
The Advertiser
12-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Advertiser
Yes, audiences have changed. But this is destroying a core tenet of news
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. 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.
Sydney Morning Herald
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Sydney Morning Herald
It was once agenda-setting, appointment viewing. What went wrong for Q+A?
At its best, it helped set the national agenda. 'When management moved Q+A to Thursdays [in 2021], before shifting it back to Mondays, it disrupted what's meant to be a habit-based show,' says one high-profile ABC presenter. 'Cutting the number of episodes and putting the show on hiatus in the middle of the year only made things worse. It's hard enough to attract viewers as it is, without expecting them to chase you across different time slots or come back to you after a mid-year break that makes no sense.' One producer notes that Q+A led the way in terms of social media innovation, running a live feed of Twitter comments from viewers before archiving its account on the platform, now called X. 'Before Twitter became a sewer, it was a huge asset to the show,' the producer says. 'But by 2020, when Hamish [Macdonald] took over as host, it became so bad that he had to leave the platform. Stan Grant [who was appointed Q+A host in 2022] copped the most horrible, racist abuse, and you can imagine all the vile comments directed at the female presenters.' Peter Meakin – who spent five decades leading news and current affairs coverage at the Seven, Nine and Ten networks – suspects social media made some politicians more cautious (and therefore, more likely to bore viewers). Loading 'It used to be a sport for them to go on air and spar with each other,' Meakin says. 'You might get a few letters saying, 'That was disgraceful', but not the instant groundswell of hatred you get now. They're more scared of putting a foot wrong.' In a statement, ABC news director Justin Stevens said, 'Discontinuing the program at this point is no reflection on anyone on the show. We always need to keep innovating and renewing.' Stevens said the ABC would produce more news documentaries, and would make its Your Say election initiative – which allows audiences to suggest questions for politicians – a permanent feature. ABC managing director Hugh Marks later announced around 40 redundancies and 10 contract positions that would end early. He also flagged changes to the audio division, separating the sport and capital city network teams into a simpler structure. The ABC's content division will be renamed ABC Screen, led by content director Jennifer Collins. But McEvoy insists the national broadcaster must do more to fill the void created by Q+A's cancellation. 'The ABC always needs to be trying new things, but I don't think an online survey can really give Australian citizens the chance to question decision-makers and politicians – or hold them to account,' he says. 'Engaging Australian citizens in a moderated but open discussion on national issues is a core part of the ABC's obligations as a public service broadcaster … the toxicity of platforms like X that encourage outrage makes the role of a moderated forum like Q+A even more important.' Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who was once a frequent guest on the program, believes Q+A was at its most compelling when it resembled a dinner party. 'It was all about having the right mixture of guests,' he says. 'In its heyday, if you were interested in Australian politics and you didn't watch it, you were concerned you might miss out on something.' Loading Since Jones left Q+A in 2019, the program has had several hosts including Macdonald, David Speers, Virginia Trioli, Stan Grant and Karvelas. 'All formats, after a time, start to feel a little tired,' says Trioli, who now hosts the ABC's Creative Types arts program. 'But I'm a huge fan of the Q+A format. It was a mighty program and one of the most important in terms of news, current affairs and public discussion in this country. 'People say they want accountability and they like to feel that issues are being put directly to politicians, but I think sometimes the audience can struggle with the reality of that,' she adds. 'You will get arguments, or politicians spinning their wheels and avoiding the question, while the host is trying to get them to answer – and that can make things awkward, uncomfortable or combative. It's a crapshoot every time, but the producers worked their guts out to do an amazing job.'
The Age
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Age
It was once agenda-setting, appointment viewing. What went wrong for Q+A?
At its best, it helped set the national agenda. 'When management moved Q+A to Thursdays [in 2021], before shifting it back to Mondays, it disrupted what's meant to be a habit-based show,' says one high-profile ABC presenter. 'Cutting the number of episodes and putting the show on hiatus in the middle of the year only made things worse. It's hard enough to attract viewers as it is, without expecting them to chase you across different time slots or come back to you after a mid-year break that makes no sense.' One producer notes that Q+A led the way in terms of social media innovation, running a live feed of Twitter comments from viewers before archiving its account on the platform, now called X. 'Before Twitter became a sewer, it was a huge asset to the show,' the producer says. 'But by 2020, when Hamish [Macdonald] took over as host, it became so bad that he had to leave the platform. Stan Grant [who was appointed Q+A host in 2022] copped the most horrible, racist abuse, and you can imagine all the vile comments directed at the female presenters.' Peter Meakin – who spent five decades leading news and current affairs coverage at the Seven, Nine and Ten networks – suspects social media made some politicians more cautious (and therefore, more likely to bore viewers). Loading 'It used to be a sport for them to go on air and spar with each other,' Meakin says. 'You might get a few letters saying, 'That was disgraceful', but not the instant groundswell of hatred you get now. They're more scared of putting a foot wrong.' In a statement, ABC news director Justin Stevens said, 'Discontinuing the program at this point is no reflection on anyone on the show. We always need to keep innovating and renewing.' Stevens said the ABC would produce more news documentaries, and would make its Your Say election initiative – which allows audiences to suggest questions for politicians – a permanent feature. ABC managing director Hugh Marks later announced around 40 redundancies and 10 contract positions that would end early. He also flagged changes to the audio division, separating the sport and capital city network teams into a simpler structure. The ABC's content division will be renamed ABC Screen, led by content director Jennifer Collins. But McEvoy insists the national broadcaster must do more to fill the void created by Q+A's cancellation. 'The ABC always needs to be trying new things, but I don't think an online survey can really give Australian citizens the chance to question decision-makers and politicians – or hold them to account,' he says. 'Engaging Australian citizens in a moderated but open discussion on national issues is a core part of the ABC's obligations as a public service broadcaster … the toxicity of platforms like X that encourage outrage makes the role of a moderated forum like Q+A even more important.' Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, who was once a frequent guest on the program, believes Q+A was at its most compelling when it resembled a dinner party. 'It was all about having the right mixture of guests,' he says. 'In its heyday, if you were interested in Australian politics and you didn't watch it, you were concerned you might miss out on something.' Loading Since Jones left Q+A in 2019, the program has had several hosts including Macdonald, David Speers, Virginia Trioli, Stan Grant and Karvelas. 'All formats, after a time, start to feel a little tired,' says Trioli, who now hosts the ABC's Creative Types arts program. 'But I'm a huge fan of the Q+A format. It was a mighty program and one of the most important in terms of news, current affairs and public discussion in this country. 'People say they want accountability and they like to feel that issues are being put directly to politicians, but I think sometimes the audience can struggle with the reality of that,' she adds. 'You will get arguments, or politicians spinning their wheels and avoiding the question, while the host is trying to get them to answer – and that can make things awkward, uncomfortable or combative. It's a crapshoot every time, but the producers worked their guts out to do an amazing job.'
9 News
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- 9 News
ABC confirms plan to axe current affairs talk show Q+A
Your web browser is no longer supported. To improve your experience update it here The ABC will discontinue its current affairs talk show Q+A after 18 years to fund other shows and documentaries. The weekly panel, which was first launched in 2008 and most recently hosted by Patricia Karvelas, will not return after going on hiatus last month. ABC news director Justin Stevens said the axing would allow the public broadcaster to invest in other projects that reflect modern audiences. The ABC will discontinue its current affairs talk show Q+A after 18 years. (Paul Jeffers) "Discontinuing the program at this point is no reflection on anyone on the show," he said. "We always need to keep innovating and renewing, and in the two decades since Q+A began the world has changed. "It's time to rethink how audiences want to interact and to evolve how we can engage with the public to include as many Australians as possible in national conversations." Karvelas will continue hosting Afternoon Briefing and the Politics Now podcast. She will also do more work for Four Corners , which she recently became involved in. An ABC spokesperson said consultation with the remaining Q+A staff is underway, but would not comment on whether there will be any redundancies. "Many extremely talented and dedicated people have worked on Q+A , as presenters and behind the scenes," Stevens said. "I sincerely thank them all, and everyone who has contributed as audience members and panellists." Former host Tony Jones and executive producer Peter McEvoy. (Renee Nowytarger / SMH) The ABC will instead invest in making Your Say permanent, after the federal election forum series resulted in almost 30,000 online submissions and thousands of talkback calls on local and regional radio, and producing more news documentaries. Q+A first hit television in May 2008 as Q&A under host Tony Jones. He hosted the show for more than a decade before resigning in 2019. He was replaced by three rotating hosts, including Stan Grant, before Grant took over solely in 2022. Grant stepped down from the role a year later after being subjected to racist abuse during his coverage of King Charles' coronation. The show was renamed Q+A from Q&A in 2020. Karvelas had been hosting the flagship talk show until it took a break after the federal election last month. Q+A had previously been scheduled to return in August. Earlier this week, Channel 10 also announced it will shut its nightly show The Project after almost 16 years later this month. ABC media national Australia business CONTACT US
Epoch Times
11-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Epoch Times
Australia's Public Broadcaster Axes ‘Q+A' Show After 18 Years on Air
The ABC has confirmed it will not bring back its flagship panel program Q+ A, ending an 18-year run. The weekly show, which went on break last month, will not return to air, the national broadcaster announced on June 11. Hosted by Patricia Karvelas since 2023, Q+A earned a reputation as a high-profile forum for political and public debate. ABC News Director Justin Stevens acknowledged the program's legacy in shaping national dialogue. 'Discontinuing the program at this point is no reflection on anyone on the show. We always need to keep innovating and renewing, and in the two decades since Q+A began, the world has changed,' Stevens said. Stevens said the ABC would now focus on finding new ways to engage the public in political and national discussions. 'It's time to rethink how audiences want to interact and to evolve how we can engage with the public to include as many Australians as possible in national conversations,' he said. The announcement follows Network 10's decision to axe The Project after 16 years, with the final episode set to air on June 27. Karvelas to Expand ABC Reporting Role While Q+A ends, Karvelas will continue in her other ABC roles, including Afternoon Briefing, the Politics Now podcast, and her regular column on the ABC News site. 'Patricia (Karvelas) also recently reported for Four Corners, and we've now asked her to do more for Four Corners as time permits,' Stevens said. ABC staff were informed that the show's cancellation would involve some job losses. In place of Q+A, the ABC will expand its long-form current affairs content, including the creation of a new executive producer role for documentaries and specials. The public broadcaster will also permanently roll out Your Say, a public engagement initiative first launched during the last federal election. The project is aimed at including more community voices in ABC reporting. 'Your Say ensures we have a strong framework for putting the public's views, concerns, and questions at the heart of our journalism, complementing our daily commissioning and reporting,' Stevens said.
