The ABC says it wouldn’t have let Zaky Mallah on its show if it’d known he was a misogynist. But is that reasoning a bit off?
Following a week of criticism aimed at ABC show Q&A, host Tony Jones has defended the controversial decision to allow audience member Zaky Mallah onto the show.
Mallah, 31, on last week’s episode said the Federal government’s actions “justified” Muslims joining Islamic State — a comment that provoked uproar and sparked a Liberal boycott of this week’s show.
Addressing the controversy on last night’s Q&A episode, host Tony Jones sought to clarify a few facts in the first minute of Monday’s broadcast.
“Others can and no doubt will judge this program and the ABC … but it is appropriate to put a few facts on the record,” he began.
“The Q&A team were not aware at the time Zaky Mallah appeared of the very offensive and misogynistic tweet that he put out about two female journalists,” Jones said. “Had we known, we would have rejected his participation.”
The tweet Jones referred to, sent in January, suggested that female journalists Miranda Devine and Rita Panahi “need to be gangbanged”.
Jones went on to, rather sensibly, point out that the ABC’s charter requires the presentation of “a diversity of perspectives so that over time no significant strand of thought or belief within the community is knowingly excluded nor disproportionately represented”.
Watch the original Zaky Mallah comment here (post continues after video):
Now, while we firmly believe in the value of representing a diverse range of opinions on by Q&A (read why here), we were uneasy with the logic behind one part of Jones’ explanation: The suggestion that misogynistic tweets are somehow worse than threats to kill.
Because surely they’re both as vile as each other?
Mr Mallah was charged and acquitted of two terrorism charges back in 2003, and he was also convicted that year of threatening to seriously harm or kill ASIO officers. Yep, 12 years ago he pleaded in the NSW Supreme Court to a charge of threatening Commonwealth officers. He was sentenced to a maximum of seven years for the crime.
Look closer: There’s an agenda behind this anti-ABC hype.
So was Jones saying that an abusive, lewd tweet about gang rape is worse than a threat to kill? Because in our books, both are horrendous.
We’re the first to stand against misogyny and abusive tweets, and we know all too well how harmful the online vitriol directed towards female journalists in particular can be.
But surely it’s only logical to condemn death threats just as strongly as rape threats.
So Tony Jones, we’re all for Q&A. But we’re not behind this strange logic-gap you put forward last night.
Related: Five reasons we desperately need the ABC.
What did you think of Jones’ explanation?
Top Comments
Having now read about some of Mallah's history, I am concerned at how he has been treated.
He was subjected to illegal entrapment by ASIO officers and spent 2 years in jail including solitary confinement before he was acquitted of terrorist charges and in a plea deal was found guilty of making verbal death threats about ASIO personnel to an undercover ASIO officer, though the judgement was that he did not seriously intend to carry these threats out. This was when he was 19.
There doesn't seem to be any suggestion that he has ever supported ISIS or any terrorist group.
He appears to support the Free Syrian Army, and oppose ISIS.
The Secretary on Q and A basically labeled him a terrorist, and threatened to revoke his citizenship. Even though he has never been found guilty of a terrorist charge, or even appears to have any links with any terrorist group, and is not a dual citizen.
Then he replies by saying the government is driving young muslims to go and join ISIS. This might be incorrect but it's not exactly an unreasonable point of view.
He also apparently campaigns against young Muslims going to Syria to fight and now cooperates with ASIO.
As for his tweets, would there be any controversy if a woman tweeted that some particularly conservative public male figure "needed a good shag" or something along those lines? I doubt it. Mallah's tweet may have been crass and sexist, but it didn't "condone" or "encourage" rape. The level of media condemnation is ridiculously over the top.
Basically a not so bright orphaned young Muslim man was illegally entrapped by ASIO, which has led to him being branded a terrorist live on national TV by a MP who also threatened to take away his citizenship. Now he's also been branded with supporting gang rape, which he didn't, all across the mainstream media of Australia because of one tweet.
Are we serious? I'd say he has one hell of a case for defamation, though I doubt he'd have a chance against the LNP and Murdoch armies of lawyers. And we wonder why young Muslims feel ostracised and end up hating the community, and look for solidarity in fundamentalist groups. For heaven's sake.
This whole Q and A drama is classic wedge politics from Abbott, certainly backed by Murdoch. It is so ludicrously obvious, that it's just depressing how effective it is, and unfortunate for Mallah that he's caught up in it.
I'll be perfectly honest, Mamamia, I'm big surprised you didn't jump on these tweets sooner.