[Theme Music Starts]

ANGE:

From Schwartz Media, I’m Ange McCormack. This is 7am.

When journalist Stan Grant left the ABC following toxic racial abuse, he said it was the media that had failed him, his family, and the country.

So, when the news of Matildas’ captain Sam Kerr’s criminal charge was revealed last week, Stan wasn’t surprised that the media failed to cover the story with grace, humanity, or a real interrogation of what racism means.

Today, new columnist for The Saturday Paper Stan Grant, on his reflections on the media since he left it, and where he finds hope.

It’s Tuesday, March 12.

[Theme Music Ends]

ANGE:

Stan, last week news broke about Sam Kerr’s criminal charge, and I'm wondering what you think was strange about how that story unfolded and how we all consumed it.

STAN:

When I look at something like that, my instinct is to ask a question that comes before the question other people are asking. I think something like that takes on a life of its own in the media cycle, it enters into the zeitgeist, and we load it up with all of the politics of our age, and we've seen that immediately, haven't we? We've seen people read into this whatever particular political agenda, ideology or identity that they believe represents them.

Audio excerpt – News Reporter:

"‘White bastard’ is the phrase that has reportedly put the career of Sam Kerr, our biggest female sporting star, in jeopardy.”

Audio excerpt – Channel 9 News Reporter:

“Kerr’s team have thrown a spanner in the works. They're claiming she called the London police officer a stupid white cop.”

Audio excerpt – Channel 9 Host:

“Wayne, if someone was to call you a stupid white bastard, would you be offended?”

Audio excerpt – Guest:

“Happens all the time.”

Audio excerpt – Young Turks:

“I mean man, cops are the most sensitive people on earth, right? You just say the slightest thing against them and they’re ehhh let’s put her in prison for 2 years for insulting me.”

Audio excerpt – Ben Fordham:

“And here's the thing, you can’t throw insults around based on the colour of people’s skin. And if Sam Kerr is heard doing that on a bodycam, she needs to pay a price for it.”

STAN:

So what I wanted to look at was, not just the Sam Kerr’s case, but there's also the case in the rugby league as well, with the Brisbane Broncos player Ezra Mam, and the Sydney Roosters player Spencer Leniu.

Audio excerpt – News Reporter:

“The NRL’s historic Las Vegas season opener has been marred by an ugly incident. A Roosters player accused of an on field racial slur. Spencer Leniu has been charged with contrary conduct and will soon be hauled in front of a judicial hearing.”

STAN:

And we looked at these two, which is, I looked at these issues and they're incredibly complex, because in the rugby league case you had two people who are non white involved in a racial case where one is taking offence that something another is saying. And then in Sam Kerr’s case, as it turns out, there is a non-white person, as we may define Sam Kerr, and a white person, as we may define the policeman. And again, a case of racism. And I think in both of those cases, it reveals something about our age. It reveals something about even the nature of racism, where it becomes something so opaque that none of us can even wrestle with what it particularly means. And so it's one of those things you can read so much into. And when we do that, I think in our particular age, we do that without the measure of good faith, generosity and love, which I think is absolutely essential to human interaction. Without those things that are necessary to open up the space for us to mention. And so we retreat into our corners, we choose our sides, and in places like social media, we wage this low level warfare.

ANGE:

How equipped, do you think, is our media, to have these conversations?

STAN:

Not at all. Absolutely not at all. I haven't heard anything this week in our media discourse that has suggested to me that we have the language or the love to deal with these, with the fragility of the human experience. Modern mass media is built around a paradigm of conflict. That is the modus operandi, that is the business model. And an issue like this comes along and nuance and generosity is lost. I am someone who has experienced racism. I'm not a race scholar, I'm a philosopher and I'm a theologian, my study has been in those areas. But I have a visceral and very personal experience of racism, as does my family. I know what happens when things fall apart. I know what happens when a person is reduced to a caricature. And I know that that happens all the time in media. That is what the media does. And in this case, let's just take the Sam Kerr case, for example. You have something which is loaded up with all the politics of outrage. Questions of gender, questions of sexuality. If you have a non-white, brown skinned, lesbian woman, you have a police officer who is white. So you bring in all of the power dynamics that come with someone in a uniform, and a history that lies between people who are not white, facing predominantly white power structures that are uniformed and armed. So all of that feeds into our analysis of this. And I get that. And I think that is critical to look at. But at the heart of it as well is two human beings. And in this case, as in all cases where these issues flare up, there is, I think, a tendency, and the media is guilty in this, of reducing the human. The police officer, who we know nothing about, we know nothing about this case, by the way, it's still to play out in court, a police officer, who is now caricaturised as standing in for a white male patriarchy. We know nothing of the inner life of this man. Nothing.

We have Sam Kerr, who now stands in, in some people's minds, for a caricature of someone who is a marginalised, victimised, brown gay, whatever other label people want to put on. And again, that does not speak to the full extent of her humanity.

And I think because we are so complex, and I know in my case, when I have been the victim of racism, I feel diminished because I am turned into a caricature that doesn't see the fullness of my humanity. And I think that is one of the problems of our age, and I think the media is utterly guilty of that because we do not have the language or the generosity to do otherwise.

ANGE:

After the break, why Stan Grant decided to step away from the media and why he’s ready to speak again.

[Advertisement]

Audio excerpt – Stan Grant:

“Before I go, I just wanted to say a few words. Many of you would know by now that I'm stepping away for a little while. Sometimes we need to just take time out. Sometimes, our souls are hurting. And so it is for me. I’ve had to learn that endurance is not always strength, sometimes strength is knowing when to say stop. And to those who have sent messages of support, thank you so much. But, I’ll be okay...”

ANGE:

Stan, in spite of the heavy costs that, you know, being in the public eye has had on you and your family, you are writing again for an audience in The Saturday Paper, and I want to ask why, what's driven you to come back to that?

STAN:

Because I think you need to do love in hard places. It took an enormous toll on me and my family, to the point where I walked away from hosting Q&A ,not just because of the racism, but in fact more because I believe the media was complicit in it. And I, as a member of the media, was complicit in it. And as I said, when I walked away from Q&A, I needed to go away to ask myself, is it possible to do this differently and better? And I, very gingerly, re-entered the public space with a great deal of trepidation, because I know what the risks are, but I also know that it behooves me and others who have the potential and the capacity, the training. And I would hope, some aptitude, to be able to do this, to offer what I think is a gift, to people who want to receive it. That's why I decided to write. And I thought with The Saturday Paper, it is a writer's paper. I can actually talk about philosophy. I can talk about theology. I can talk about art. I can talk about culture. Now, of course, there are people who are going to, of bad faith, who are going to distort that, but I can't allow that to keep me out of that space. I think as a First Nations person as well, there is an important space for us to bring all our points of view. And we have many diverse points of view to that space as well. But fundamentally, I asked myself two questions. I asked myself, will I be reduced by this experience? And by participating, will I contribute to the perpetuation of conflict? Now I think, in this case, my answer in both those cases is, no i won’t be reduced. I think there was an opportunity to enlarge the space and speak of peace in a war with the endless conflict, and I don't think that those things should be seen as ideas that are old hat, or ideas that are romantic or corny. I think they are the things that build a better society.

ANGE:

And going back to, I guess, the media's role in all of this, if we think about the institution of the media, is it to blame, do you think, or is it the people working inside it, or the audiences and how they consume it?

STAN:

I think it's all of it. I think we create the media that we demand. The journalists, often then, seek to speak to the audience that they imagine it to be. But I think one of the things we have to be very mindful in our media, is that people are voting with their feet. Readership is down everywhere. There are fewer listeners. There are fewer viewers on television. And people are seeking other platforms. If you debase the form to this level, if you have such a dim view of humanity, and your media becomes so polarised, you can't blame people for seeking out what their own truths, in some of the worst places, and we see this as well. And that mirrors the slide in our democracy, where democracy all around the world is being corrupted and is diminishing. I think the media both reflects that and it helps to create that. You know, when I have experienced the worst of racism, and particularly last year, with the vociferous nature of the referendum debates, and the Kings coronation coverage, and the pile on of racism, and violence threat against me and my family as well, I was put into a situation where I had to ask myself, how do I respond to this? Do I respond to this with the same hate and vitriol? Do I respond to this as the society would dictate that I should do, pick my side and go to war? Or do I look at what I can bring to what is a corrupted space, to try to bring something that enlightens, something that enchants the space, in a disenchanted world. And that's what I choose to do. I choose to do that.

ANGE:

I'm curious as well Stan, what you think about that label of journalist, keeping in mind all of these kind of complex relationships you're talking about with the media. How comfortable are you with that label on yourself now?

STAN:

I don't think I've ever thought of myself as a journalist, ever. I think I've always thought of myself as someone who is doing theology, doing philosophy in the world, someone who is seeking to answer the questions of my own life. Why did the things happen to me and my family, that happened? What is it like to come from the other side of history? When you have experienced catastrophe, how do you speak back to the world with dignity? They're the questions I'll be asking. Journalism was the vehicle to be able to ask those questions. So I don't know that I've ever been comfortable with the idea of a journalist or reporter. I worked in that business, I used those skills, but I was always, I think, asking different questions. Even when I was covering war, where there were journalists who were thrilled at the kinetic force of war. And I was always interested in what happened after the bomb, after the killing, after the tragedy, when people are picking up those pieces. And that's sort of antithetical to journalism in many ways, as we practise it. We like the explosion and we don't stick around. I want to be there after.

So I don't know that a journalist is really a label that has really ever spoken to me. I think poetry, I think theology, I think philosophy, I think story. I think those things have been far more important. And I think there's a greater truth there as well. In journalism, we diminish truths to facts. We know the facts don't hold the truths. They may point the way to a truth. But I found there are many contested truths. And then beyond truth, there was a greater truth. In the truth of we breathe the same air on a finite planet. And that, I think, is what I've been seeking.

ANGE:

Stan, it's been such a pleasure speaking with you, I've really enjoyed it. Thanks so much for coming on 7am.

STAN:

Thank you for your questions. It's been a real pleasure.

ANGE:

Stan Grant is now writing fortnightly columns for The Saturday Paper.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

ANGE:

Also in the news today…

Four of the world's biggest news photo agencies have warned that the first photo released by Kensington Palace of Kate Middleton since a reported surgery, has been manipulated.

AP, Reuters, AFP and Getty issued various warnings that the photo shouldn't be run as news, without context on the manipulation.

In January, the palace issued a statement saying that Kate Middleton would cease public engagements for two to three months, after needing unspecified abdominal surgery.

And,

The by-election for former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s seat of Cook in Sydney’s south will be held on April 13.

Management consultant Simon Kennedy won the Liberal pre-selection, while Labor is not expected to contest the seat.

I’m Ange McCormack, this is 7am. We’ll be back again tomorrow.

[Theme Music Ends]