Non-news items on the ABC

Normally, you can count on the ABC to present interesting and important stories in its radio current affairs programs AM and PM. In the last week, however, two things have taken up an unjustifiable amount of airtime. If it's a slow news day, I'd rather they just admit that and play some music.

First was that Indonesian air crash in which about five Australians died (and one escaped with a cut lip and flew again within hours). Don't get me wrong: it's an important and tragic story. But one or two days after the event it was still the headline article in PM, with at least 10 minutes devoted to it. What was "new" or "current" about the story (it being a news and current affairs program)? That Cynthia Bantham, who survived the crash but with serious injuries, had been transported to Perth hospital. In other words, nothing. The story was endless boring rehash. Again, don't get me wrong. The story made me feel (again) very sorry for all involved. But it went on for too long. It's easy to understand why: Cynthia Bantham is a respected journalist. Other casualties were journos and public servants. The media loves a story about its own and those they work with. The audience (me) feels used. A relevant current affairs story about the plane crash would look at the history of such disasters in Indonesia or something.

Strike two occurred yesterday on AM. Santo Santoro, a federal senator, was in technical breach of the government's long-discredited ministerial standards. As minister for Aged Care and Something Else, he should have registered or disposed of his shares in some biotech company (because it competes for government funds for research into miracle cures for old people) as soon as he became minister. But guess what? He didn't! At first I thought there was something to this story, but then came the boring facts. He wasn't caught: he discovered the holdings and disposed of them straight away; and donated the profits to charity. In other words, he did the honourable thing and no real possibility of improper conduct is apparent. Next story! But nooooo.... I have to sit in traffic and listen to what sounds like some juniour journo's first assignment, interviewing a Labor MP asking what he thinks should be Mr. Santoro's fate. Then asking the question again, slightly differently. Then replaying an interview with Santoro. OH. MY. GOD. HOW. BORING.

Luckily for them, by that afternoon a spark of genuine controversy had been found within this dead horse of a story. The charity he donated to was no real charity at all. It was a Queensland organisation called "Focus on the Family" or somesuch; a non-profit organisation that lobbies politicians to outlaw abortion, po'nography, etc. It claims, reasonably credibly, to be politically non-aligned, but it's hard to avoid the perception that Santoro's donation was politically tainted. He should have exercised better judgement, that's for sure, but no hanging offence was committed.

In summary, ABC, please keep your current affairs stories in proportion and perspective.

Update 19 March: Santo Santoro has since been sacked after several more dodgy share transactions were revealed. That doesn't change my opinion above. The media were right to investigate, but that doesn't excuse boring broadcasting.