ABSTRACT

ABC managing director Hugh Marks has pledged to change the broadcaster's editorial guidelines on satire and violence following the airing of a four-minute film on the documentary-reality program Race Around the World on 12 July, which included comments about billionaire Gina Rinehart. The announcement has prompted criticism from journalists, academics, and advocates who argue the policy change is unnecessary and potentially unenforceable.

The Guardian

ABC editorial policy review after Rinehart segment draws criticism of overreach

Aug 12, 2026, 11:00 AM

Context

The segment, titled A Very Relaxing Video, was made by film-maker Kate McGuinness and concluded with her stating: 'When the revolution comes will you hide under the bed or will you know exactly how to shove a stick right up Gina Rinehart's butthole, stirring it round, mixing her guts up nice and smooth, to make one big sausage roll to make something out of nothing?'

Following sustained criticism from News Corp publications and The West Australian, and threats of legal action from Rinehart, Marks issued an apology last Thursday. He said the ABC's ombudsman, Fiona Cameron, had found the film did not breach editorial policies on harm and offence, but that it fell short of 'community expectations', and that the ABC would change its editorial guidance.

Speaking on ABC Radio North Queensland, Marks said the updated guidelines would require that 'no individual should be the subject of comedy that is violent in its description in our programming', adding that 'the ABC has to hold itself to a higher standard'.

The ombudsman initially received eight complaints in the week after broadcast. A further 988 complaints followed after criticism from several media outlets, according to its report. News Corp's major mastheads published 46 articles critiquing the program since it aired, and The West Australian published 15.

The ombudsman found 'a reasonable audience member would be likely to understand the remarks as part of a satirical and exaggerated commentary' rather than encouragement of violence.

McGuinness separately apologised, stating: 'My writing is cartoonish and always satirical. Unfortunately, jokes do not land with everyone. Its purpose was never to be taken literally.'

An ABC spokesperson confirmed the changes would be amended 'soon', with approval by the ABC board. The ABC did not respond to questions about whether the program had been upwardly referred prior to broadcast.

Hancock Prospecting said on Saturday it would 'wait to see long overdue changes to the ABC's editorial standards' and accused the broadcaster of normalising 'violent torture against a woman till death'. It called for 'a detailed account in relation to who approved this unacceptable piece to be aired, and who approved the long delay in its removal', stating: 'The buck stops with the heads of the ABC.'

All Perspectives

Matthew Ricketson, Deakin University journalism professor: Ricketson described the segment as poor satire but said that once McGuinness had apologised, that should have been 'the end of it'. He called the promised policy change 'a very ill-advised move', describing it as 'virtually unenforceable' and said it was 'literally throwing fuel on to the News Corp fire', warning that News Corp would 'bank that and move straight on to the next demand which will be a curtailing if not the abolition of the ABC'.

Alan Sunderland, former ABC editorial director: Sunderland agreed with the ombudsman's findings and said the joke was in 'poor taste'. He was not 'perturbed' by the ABC reviewing its guidance if it helped program makers interpret editorial principles in a non-enforceable way, but said 'if it's more elaborate than that then you start to get into problems'. He said the change could affect how much satire could be put to air, citing the 1970s program Aunty Jack as an example, and described it as a 'repeated pattern' to see ABC content amplified by some media and politicians, giving it a 'second life'. He said 'broadcasters can and do apologise without the world coming to an end'.

Dr Margaret Simons, journalist and academic: Simons said Marks was right to apologise but that rewriting editorial policies 'wasn't necessary'. She said 'the problem here is that either somebody didn't make a judgment call or they made the wrong one', and described a satirical threat of violence as 'a pretty serious matter'. She questioned whether ABC editorial policies requiring upward referral of contentious decisions had been followed before the segment was broadcast, saying that if they were not, 'that in itself is arguably a breach of editorial policy', and that substantially rewriting policies in response to what she suspected was a failure of internal processes 'is not good'.

Hancock Prospecting: Hancock Prospecting said it would 'wait to see long overdue changes to the ABC's editorial standards' and accused the ABC of normalising 'violent torture against a woman till death'. It stated that 'satire needs to be funny' and that the content 'was not', and called for a detailed account of who approved the segment and 'who approved the long delay in its removal', asserting that 'the buck stops with the heads of the ABC'.

ABC Friends president Cassandra Parkinson: Parkinson said the ABC had 'overreacted in trying to appease Ms Rinehart'. She said she could understand the apology as a means of avoiding costly legal action, but found it 'difficult to understand the rationale for this new rule'. She said it was 'essential that the ABC hold firm against this sort of external pressure' and that it uphold the independence laid out in its charter.

Kate McGuinness, film-maker: McGuinness apologised over the segment, saying it was not her intention to promote violence. She stated: 'My writing is cartoonish and always satirical. Unfortunately, jokes do not land with everyone. Its purpose was never to be taken literally.'

ABC managing director Hugh Marks: Marks issued an apology and said the segment fell short of 'community expectations' even though the ombudsman found no breach of editorial policies. He said the ABC's guidelines would be changed to require that 'no individual should be the subject of comedy that is violent in its description in our programming', and that 'the ABC has to hold itself to a higher standard'.

ABC ombudsman Fiona Cameron: The ombudsman found the film did not breach editorial policies on harm and offence, and that 'a reasonable audience member would be likely to understand the remarks as part of a satirical and exaggerated commentary' rather than encouragement of violence.

Gaps & Unknowns

The source does not establish whether the Race Around the World segment was upwardly referred for editorial approval before broadcast; the ABC did not respond to that question.
The specific wording of the proposed amended editorial guidelines has not been published or detailed beyond Marks's general description.
The nature and basis of Gina Rinehart's threatened legal action is not detailed in the source.
The timeline between broadcast on 12 July and removal of the segment is not specified.
The source text supplied appears truncated; some material may be missing.

Sources & Further Reading

The Guardian — original

Read the original at The Guardian

Related Coverage