week1 podcast(edited version)

Stan Grant's comments during the ABC coronation coverage of King Charles have caused controversy. Grant criticized the monarchy and expressed his anger as an indigenous person. Sky News broadcaster Rita Penehy criticized ABC's coverage, saying it was race-obsessed and divorced from reality. Grant's comments were biased and not objective. Some viewers complained to ABC about Grant's comments, leading to a heated discussion. Sky News also criticized Grant, but their comments were offensive and ethically questionable. The controversy reflects deeper issues in Australian society and the debate about the country's future and diversity. Both ABC and Sky News have different angles on the coronation, but objectivity is in doubt. Monarchy against republicanism. A fantasy Australia we believe in against a real Australia we are in. What causes the controversy in Stan Grant's comments of the coronation of King Charles? On May 7, 2023, Stan Grant criticized the monarchy and expressed his rage as one with indigenous background during ABC coronation coverage. The ABC's coverage of the coronation was over-the-top, race-obsessed, and completely divorced from reality, according to Sky News broadcaster Rita Penehy. In this episode of Behind the Coronation, I'm Cai Yun Huang, joined by Jia Xuan Ye and Ray Hu. We will focus on the dissection of how ABC produced coverage, in contrast to Sky News. In ABC's coverage of the coronation, Grant said that, but, we are a long way from that Australia and the crime is not above politics was because the symbol of that crime represented the invasion, the sale of land, and in our case, the exterminating war. His comments, obviously, were not objective or impartial. He also mentioned, let's not imagine that we can just look at this ceremony tonight and see this as something that is distant, that is just ceremonial, that doesn't hold weight. For him, the crime isn't about politics, that this might seem odd to others, but for indigenous people, it's advocating on their behalf, which is understandable. I'm not saying what is wrong with him as an indigenous person seeking for his interests, but he should respect the freedom of other ethnic groups, just as he owns the freedom to the crime above politics. Others also have the freedom to have strong connections with the British royal family. Just like that, he adds, a prominent ABC presenter would definitely raise problems for the company. We all know that there were nearly a thousand complaints to ABC against him from the perspective of journalism. It is not the appropriate program as a representative of ABC to give biased comments that trigger the audience's emotions, leading to a vast amount of complaints and raising a controversy among the public. Exactly. His identity as a public figure inevitably attracted the attention of the audience, as well as the coronation ceremony of Prince Charles was also an important event for many Australians, which made this news coverage itself very popular. In this situation, he should be more careful about his comments, otherwise it will lead to heated discussion. Yeah, definitely. As an international student, I feel uncomfortable hearing him overemphasize the unfair treatment that indigenous people receive, deny that Australia is a diverse country, and the efforts of other ethnic groups. Well, in the commentary show broadcast on Sky News Australia, the host Rita and James critiqued the appalling decision by ABC to use Stan Grant's comments as an attempt to kind of denigrate everything to do with Australia's history. From their expressions and emotions, I think that they personally have a view of appropriateness of Grant's comments. Nonetheless, I think that they were reasonable because they gave their neutral comments on what Grant had said. In fact, Grant did say something that was not fair enough. I don't think their criticism is neutral so much. It is a directly iterated offensive, like, dutifully offensive. So whatever it is, anyway, it was full of visual, these are just small parts of their discussion. How can you see these views as appropriate? That's what I want to talk about. Some of the Sky News comments about Grant were ethically questionable. I think my IQ has just prompted listening to this. According to Rita Panehi, this subjective judgment of Grant to some extent led to complaints from the audience about Grant, which ultimately led to his resignation. Yes, it's true though. If someone attacked Grant by saying that Reign of Death's grievous mongering gets completely divorced from reality, and to present that as over the viewpoint of migrant Australia, I thought that was the most offensive. It seems to me that the following coverage of Sky News is exaggerating a bit, and they probably have a problem with Stan Grant himself. When we abolish prisons, they thought it is so devoid of sanity, their view that the abolition of prisons is not about giving indigenous people human rights. This is so cruel. Well, Sky News is opposed to Stan Grant's comments. They should also take a local perspective on this pro-treatment. I don't think a broadcaster should say that. And it's unfortunate that Grant expressed the attitude of the indigenous people towards coronation, which is just a different voice that needs to be heard. But he suffered from racist attacks. A country claiming to be democratic, now causing its own disintegration, also shows the hypocrisy of those who insult Grant. Grant's comments strongly deny the world they live in. They are just two different points of view. It is clear to see that each side does not agree with the other's opinion. Yeah, like the name of our episode, Behind the Coronation, this controversy has exposed the long-standing problems in Australian society, a debate about where Australia's future should go, and what we ignore to truly achieve diversity in Australian society. These are the real values and voices that should be discovered behind the phenomenon. I want to say that's why so many other media pay attention to ABC coronation coverage, including Sky News. Actually, Grant is just seen as a target of attack by the audience, a scapegoat who has been chosen to disguise racism. In fact, ABC and Sky News have different angles in this coronation. But it is undeniable that the notion of objectivity remains in doubt. Grant gave his opinion regarding the coronation and revealed his sadness on behalf of the Indigenous people. In contrast, Sky News makes this issue bigger and turns out viral. You know, Sky News always practices these journalistic principles. I can understand the news value of Grant's comments, like their prominence, proximity, impact, conflict, etc, etc. However, Grant and Sky News haven't considered fairness before commenting on that issue. As we return to the surface, we'd like to thank you for joining us for this episode of Behind the Coronation.