background briefing 2-2 ..............8

History repeating itself

The increasing commercialism of the ABC is causing great concern to many. As the corporation has become more cash-strapped, it has sought to increase its income through commercial enterprises. The proposed deal with Telstra is but the most recent of these attempts. Our position is that some attempts to raise funding by commercial means lay the ABC open to commercial pressures and editorial compromises. This is not a hypothetical argument. The ABC has been through all this before and been roundly condemned - managing director David Hill lost his job over it.

This is the story of whistle blower John Millard, who was dismissed from his job in ABC television after he had blown the whistle on the backdoor sponsorship of several ABC television programs in the early '90s.

"What makes this case so interesting is that Millard was a whistle blower inside the ABC, a broadcasting authority with a strong and courageous tradition of assisting whistle blowers in all walks of life to expose wrongdoing." *

IN 1992, while working as a reporter on The Investigators, John Millard began to suspect a story had been 'canned' because it was critical of a builder who was also a reporter on the ABC co-production The Home Show.

He was also concerned about the close liaison between the ABC and the Australian Tourism Association Industry over the infotainment program Holiday. In 1991 the ATIA memoed its members saying that the ABC had asked for help in the production of Holiday, suggesting that tour operators could have a better chance of getting on the program if they offered free accommodation and board to the production crew.

He found that the ABC's health program Everybody was funded by the snack food, junk food and processed food industries - this ensured that serious health concerns about the rise in child obesity and the growing consumption of snack and junk foods were not put forward in the program.

By early 1993, John Millard claimed to have discovered seventeen examples of improper editorial influence on stories potentially damaging to commercial interests working closely with the ABC on various co-productions. He firmly believed that this interference breached the ABC's long tradition of independence. He claimed that ABC staff had been engaged in indirect advertising and that programs avoided making critical comments about current or future funders. He also believed that resources were being diverted from ABC programs to the CO-productions

*William de Maria, Deadly Disclosures, 1999

John Millard took his complaints and concerns up the ladder of responsibility; they were dismissed at every level. Eventually an investigation into his claims initiated by the chairman of the board whitewashed all the allegations.

Ironically, it was Channel Nine's Sunday program that eventually brought it to public attention, on 18/9/94. The following day ABC chair Mark Armstrong announced the setting up of an inquiry under George Palmer QC. Two other inquiries followed, the Coleman Inquiry and a Senate inquiry. All three backed up Millard's allegations and censured the ABC.

Palmer noted several matters which could give rise to potential conflict or compromise, while backing up John Millard's position on backdoor sponsorship absolutely.

These concerns were many. For example, indirect advertising or 'product placement'- accusation of which has more recently been levelled at A River Somewhere. Avoidance of critical comment in relation to matters associated with potential and regular external funders. Political interference via funding provided by Government Departments and Government Business Enterprises. Diversion of resources from the budgets of wholly internally funded programs to those of co-produced programs. Selection of programs conditional on the availability of external funding. The impact on internally funded programs of external funding for other programs.

Senator Alston, 1995 Senate report: At all times the ABC must be prepared to forgo supplementary external funding in favour of the maintenance of the integrity and quality of the existing services.

The Palmer Inquiry found that John Millard had been victimised by senior managers for blowing the whistle on backdoor sponsorship. By this time Brian Johns was managing director. He ordered that Millard be offered a job in ABC television where he had worked for 10 years before being sacked. Johns acknowledged he had 'suffered detriment to his career because he was concerned about the ABC's editorial integrity.' But no apology was made and Johns declared he had 'every confidence' in 'the relevant managers'. No one involved in the flouting of editorial guidelines or in the cover up lost their job.

In July 1996, after the Palmer Inquiry, John Millard said: "A win, for me, would be the recognition that external funding [for television programs], outside CO-production, sponsorship - call it what you like - is corrupting of editorial integrity and the independence of the ABC. That'd be a win. But the very path being signalled through cutbacks by Richard Alston points, not to a reduction in backdoor sponsorship, but to a perpetuation of it." John Millard now works as a producer on the highly acclaimed Australian Story. He is as concerned as he ever was about the corruption of the ABC culture by the dependence of external funding.