Investigation report no. BI-159Summary

File no. BI-159

Broadcaster Australian Broadcasting Corporation

Station ABC News 24

Type of service National broadcasting—television

Name of program The Drum

Date of broadcast 20 October 2015

Relevant code Standard 4.1 of the ABC Code of Practice 2011 (revised in 2014)

Date finalised 14 March 2016

Decision No breach of standard 4.1 [due impartiality]

OpeningIn December 2015 the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA) commenced an investigation under section 170 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (the BSA) into a complaint about The Drum broadcast on ABC News 24 by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (the ABC) on 20 October 2015.

The complaint alleged that the ABC is biased through censoring criticism of Islam.

The ACMA has investigated the ABC’s compliance with standard 4.1 (due impartiality) of the ABC Code of Practice 2011 (revised in 2014) (the Code).

The programThe Drum is a current affairs panel discussion program, described as:

From politics to sport and everything in between, The Drum gives you lively and thought-provoking perspectives, ideas and commentary, with diverse and robust opinion from some of the country’s leading thinkers and writers [...]

The Drum on TV is hosted alternately by two of the ABC’s most respected journalists, Steve Cannane and Julia Baird. It has an ever-changing daily panel of commentators and newsmakers discussing the events and issues of the day.1

The program broadcast on 20 October 2015 was presented by Ms Julia Baird and included panellists:

Mr Graeme Innes, former Disability Discrimination Commissioner

Ms Ticky Fullerton, presenter of the ABC program The Business

Ms Sabine Wolff, researcher and writer.

The program covered a range of topical news items including the Federal Government’s response to the Murray review of the financial system, a specific Four Corners program, the reaction in India to an Australian man’s tattoo, and the launch of the Australian Liberty Alliance (ALA) political party in Perth by Dutch MP Geert Wilders.

A transcript of the discussion on the topic of ALA is at Attachment A.

Assessment and submissionsWhen assessing content, the ACMA considers the meaning conveyed by the material, including the natural, ordinary meaning of the language, context, tenor, tone, images and any inferences that may be drawn. This is assessed according to the understanding of an ‘ordinary reasonable’ viewer.

Australian courts have considered an ‘ordinary reasonable’ viewer to be:

A person of fair average intelligence, who is neither perverse, nor morbid or suspicious of mind, nor avid for scandal. That person does not live in an ivory tower, but can and does read between the lines in the light of that person’s general knowledge and experience of worldly affairs.2

1 http://www.abc.net.au/news/thedrum/about/, accessed on 25 January 2015.2 Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited v Marsden (1998) 43 NSWLR 158 at pp 164–167.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 2 of 13

Once the ACMA has ascertained the meaning of the material that was broadcast, it then assesses compliance with the Code.

The investigation takes into account the complaint (Attachment B) and submissions from the broadcaster (Attachment C).

Relevant Code provision The ACMA has investigated the broadcast material against the following provision:

4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality

The Code requires that this standard is interpreted and applied in accordance with the relevant principles, which include:

Judgements about whether impartiality was achieved in any given circumstances can vary among individuals according to their personal and subjective view of any given matter of contention. Acknowledging this fact of life does not change the ABC’s obligation to apply its impartiality standard as objectively as possible. In doing so, the ABC is guided by these hallmarks of impartiality:

a balance that follows the weight of evidence;

fair treatment;

open-mindedness; and

opportunities over time for principal relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be expressed.

[...]

Impartiality does not require that every perspective receives equal time, nor that every facet of every argument is presented.

Assessing the impartiality due in given circumstances requires consideration in context of all relevant factors including:

the type, subject and nature of the content;

the circumstances in which the content is made and presented;

the likely audience expectations of the content;

the degree to which the matter to which the content relates is contentious;

the range of principal relevant perspectives on the matter of contention; and

the timeframe within which it would be appropriate for the ABC to provide opportunities for the principal relevant perspectives to be expressed, having regard to the public importance of the matter of contention and the extent to which it is the subject of current debate.

FindingThe ABC did not breach standard 4.1 of the Code.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 3 of 13

ReasonsThe relevant provision requires the ABC to ‘gather and present news and information with due impartiality’. Inclusion of the word ‘due’ indicates an element of flexibility depending on the particular context.

Compliance in any given circumstance will depend on the themes in the program, any editorial comment, the overall presentation of the segment and the circumstances in which the program was prepared and broadcast.

A program that presents a perspective that is opposed by a particular person or group is not inherently partial. There is potentially significant latitude under the Code for the ABC to explore issues of controversy, as long as the broadcaster is guided by the hallmarks of impartiality: a balance that follows the weight of evidence; fair treatment; open mindedness; and opportunities over time for principal relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be expressed.

Along with contextual factors, these matters inform the ACMA’s assessment of whether the ABC has complied with the relevant standard in the Code.

The complaint is that the discussion of the ALA exhibited ‘censorship by the guests of any discussion concerning Islam and why it is a problem’, did not present certain alleged facts about Islam and did not question the idea that it is a ‘religion of peace’.

Contextual factors

The Drum is presented as a forum for the expression of opinions on topical news and current affairs.

In this case, the discussion dealt with the launch of the ALA party in Perth by Mr Wilders. The presenter referred to Mr Wilders’ publicly expressed stance, sought the panellists’ views on the likely success of such a ‘far-right’ movement in Australia and raised a question about the statement by a party spokesman that ‘we need to have an honest conversation about Islam’.

Given the nature of the program, viewers of The Drum would expect participants on the program to reflect their own individual views on matters discussed and that these views may not necessarily be representative of all opinions in the community.

In this context a range of perspectives were dealt with on the issues raised. While two of the panellists briefly noted their own views that the ALA party appeared to be a ‘fringe group’ and ‘a bit nutty’, these opinions were expressed within the context of a discussion that covered free-speech versus anti-vilification laws and the causes of religious extremism.

A balance that follows the weight of evidence

The ACMA has previously found that the composition of a panel will not necessarily indicate bias, particularly where a topic of debate covers a range of issues.3

There is no suggestion that any of the matters raised in the material as broadcast were factually inaccurate. The panellists’ comments were expressed as their own opinions on the topical launch of a political party.

The discussion did not explore the tenets of Islam and its ideology was not debated. Although references were made to extremism in the Islamic community, there were no statements to

3 See ACMA investigations 3234 (Q&A, broadcast on ABC on 5 May 2014) and 3226 (Q&A, broadcast on ABC on 31 March 2014)

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 4 of 13

the effect that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’ nor was Mohammed discussed, as raised by the complainant.

As noted above, impartiality does not require that every perspective receives equal time, or that every facet of every issue is presented.

In this case, given the subject of the broadcast, there was no Code obligation for the ABC to provide opportunities for the expression of viewpoints in relation to the nature of Islam as articulated by the complainant.

The ACMA accepts the ABC’s submission that its impartiality standard does not require panels to be evenly split between different viewpoints and that, in this case, the opinions of the panel reflected aspects of the broader debate in the community about the ALA party.

The report displayed a balance that followed the weight of evidence.

Fair treatment

The segment explored the panellists’ views on the newsworthy launch of the ALA party, and the questions posed by the presenter did not distort or misrepresent these views or the publicly expressed opinions of Mr Wilders or the ALA party.

Additionally, the framing of the questions by the presenter explicitly referenced some of the public statements by Mr Wilders and the ALA party on Islam. In this way, the audience would have understood that the opinions of the panellists’ aired in the segment were part of a wider debate in which people may hold different views.

The ACMA accepts the ABC’s submission that the ALA was afforded fair treatment.

Open-mindedness

The presenter gave each panellist an opportunity to present their perspective on the issue and the tone of the brief discussion was respectful.

Although the complaint raises specific concerns about bias against exploring the ‘ideology of Islam’, this was not a topic of discussion in the program except insofar as some of Mr Wilders’ publicly expressed views were noted and approaches to Islamic extremism were touched on.

The ACMA accepts the ABC’s submission that ‘[t]he presenter’s questions about [the ALA party] were measured and enquiring in nature and the segment provided sufficient information for audiences to come to their own conclusions about the issues surrounding the party’.

As such, and given the subject matter and context of the segment, the ACMA is satisfied that segment displayed open-mindedness.

Opportunities over time for principal relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be expressed

This hallmark provides for opportunities for principal relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be given over time, and across the ABC’s services, rather than within a specific broadcast.

The matter of contention was the launch of the ALA party. The ABC submitted that on this matter it has provided comprehensive coverage, as demonstrated by the broadcasts noted at Attachment C.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 5 of 13

On the complaint that the ABC silences debate about Islam and what it preaches, this was not the subject nor focus of this particular broadcast, as noted above. However, to the extent some viewers may have considered it a relevant point of contention, Mr Wilder’s publicly expressed views on Islam, and the views of Australian members of the ALA party, have been aired in detail in some of the broadcasts noted by the ABC at Attachment C.

Conclusion

The ACMA is satisfied that due impartiality was achieved in the program, having regard to specific contextual factors and the ABC’s hallmarks of impartiality as:

> panellists are selected by the ABC to speak on a wide variety of topical issues within the program and audiences would expect and understand them to be expressing their own opinions

> the nature of the Islamic religion was neither the subject nor focus of the segment, but rather it concerned the launch of the ALA party and touched on related issues including approaches to preventing extremism

> the discussion was framed and presented in such a way that audiences would understand that there are a range of views in the community on the particular matters of contention in the segment

> the ABC has, over time, provided opportunities for the expression of a range of principal relevant perspectives on the matters of contention within the report, including specific and detailed coverage of Mr Wilders’ views on Islam and the position of the ALA party.

Accordingly, the ABC did not breach standard 4.1 of the Code.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 6 of 13

Attachment ATranscript of relevant material from The Drum, broadcast on ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015

Julia Baird: Another matter entirely: right wing Dutch MP, Geert Wilders, is in Australia to launch a new political party called the Anti-Islam Australian Liberty Alliance Party. The launch, at a mystery venue in Perth, is top-secret amid security concerns for Mr Wilders’ safety. Wilders is well known for his anti-Islam right-wing stance. Now he wants to ban full-face coverings in public spaces and has compared the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. The Party say they intend to hold a press conference about their political goals tomorrow.

Graeme, you’ve had some experience in how to deal with certain kinds of rhetoric, certain kinds of thought. This has been dismissed by some as a far-right fringe group. Should it be taken more or less seriously than that?

Graeme Innes: Well, what we have to do, of course, and our Race Discrimination Law requires this, is that we have to balance up the important way in which free speech is viewed in Australia as opposed to the fact that we should not humiliate, insult or offend people. And whilst that law may not apply in these circumstances, depending on what this guy may or may not say, you know that’s a matter that can be determined.

I think it is a fringe group issue and frankly the best thing to do is not give it any more oxygen than it’s got because these sorts of fringe groups from wherever they come can damage the great – not perfect – but really good multicultural heritage that Australia has and I think we need to view them in that way. It’s sort of the start of what Pauline Hanson started many years ago and I’d put this in a similar context.

Julia Baird: Sabine, we have a very patchy history when it comes to far-right movements and political parties in Australia. If we look over the past century they don’t tend to take root, they don’t tend to flourish, but what do you think this party might do now in this current climate?

Sabine Wolff: Look, that’s really to be determined. I agree with Graeme that they’re probably a fringe group. I mean they just seem a bit nutty and a lot of them seem to be covered in Nazi tattoos, which, you know, would have to turn off most people I would think, even if they’re not particular fans of Islam. But I think what’s really interesting is that we need to actually take a root causes approach to what’s causing these people to identify with this very extremist cause. And I think it’s a lot of the same issues you see when you see young people turning towards religious extremism – it’s rooted in disadvantage – they’re

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 7 of 13

often people who don’t have great employment prospects, they feel alienated from society. I think we actually need to look at what’s causing extremism wherever it occurs and address that.

Julia Baird: We are also having exactly the same discussion, Ticky, about extremism in the Islam community. I mean, exactly those sentences we’ve been using over the past few weeks at least. What kind of impact do you think that might have on those in the Muslim community who are trying to prevent extremism in their own ranks?

Ticky Fullerton: Look, I was really heartened by, I think it was the Islamic Council of Victoria, and their comments today, which were basically around the fact that – look, it’s a free country, it’s a democracy, people have a right to be heard, but let’s just keep an eye on this group – make sure that they don’t get up to too much no good, but essentially just trying to douse it down, as Graeme says and moving along. And I think the key to this on the Islamic extremist side is leadership from within the Muslim community and that sort of leadership that the Victorian Council have given today I think was excellent.

Graeme Innes: Julia, can I agree with that, but can I also say I think the other thing we need is calm and firm leadership from our national leaders and it was pleasing to see the way that Malcolm Turnbull handled the recent terrorist issue here in Sydney in a much calmer, less excited, less frenetic way than it was previously done and I think that will make a difference too.

Sabine Wolff: I agree with that. Yeah. The words ‘death cult’ really just give these people oxygen. We really need to move away from that sort of inflammatory language and avoid inflaming these extreme groups wherever they might be.

Julia Baird: Now Sabine, one of the party spokesmen today said ‘oh it’s – the problem is political correctness - we really need to have an honest conversation about Islam.’ This is a phrase we hear a lot. Do you think we’re having an honest conversation? What does honest actually mean?

Sabine Wolff: Well I’m not really sure. What’s the conversation we need to have about Islam? It’s there. People practice it. It’s a major religion. And, you know, people aren’t really causing any harm to each other because of Islam, it’s young men, overwhelmingly, who are radicalised and who are marginalised by society. Um, yeah. I’m not entirely sure what conversation we need to have about Islam. I do think we need to have an educative process because, you know, to me I always hear these people talk about Sharia Law and it’s quite clear that they don’t actually really know what that means or what the prospects of Sharia Law actually becoming mainstream in Australia are, which are very low.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 8 of 13

Ticky Fullerton: I think Sabine, also I remember on Q&A Andrew Robb quite early on standing up and being quite strong on this as well and I think a little bit has happened now but it’s actually getting the leaders in the Muslim community to be strong in their condemnation of the extremism. They have the same issue in Britain and I think as the Muslim community is stepping up and doing this, that’s the sort of criticism that has been, you know, to date and I think things are moving there.

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 9 of 13

Attachment BComplaint

Complaint to the broadcaster dated 21 October 2015:

[…]

You are extremely and fanatically biased against anyone who sees in the religion and politics of the ideology of Islam a problem that has to be discussed openly and frankly. You will not allow any discussion about what Islam says. This is while the subject is newsworthy and in the public interest to expose. You avoid all of the facts about Islam that anybody can find on-line but are hidden from television audiences. This is political censorship!

On your program tonight there was censorship by the guests of any discussion concerning Islam and why it is a problem.

Based on surveys, almost 50% of people in Australia believe that Muslims have been bad or very bad for Australia. The Australian Liberty Alliance is anti-Islam because there is a problem with the religion and politics of Islam. Yet the ABC will not allow any discussion about Islam and why it is a problem. One indication that Islam is a problem is that Australia is at war with jihadists both internationally, and nationally through anti-terror surveillance, and Islamic jihad attacks around the World fill the news, as is proportionate to the severity and horror of the attacks.

But the ABC will not allow discussion of Islam - so it resorts to propaganda. The choice of guests that the ABC invites is enough to silence debate about Islam, as was the case tonight on the occasion of the launch of a new political party that represents, in one way at least, the opinions, based upon polling, of nearly half the population of Australia. This should have been something to celebrate in a democratic country, but the ABC - by its choice of who was allowed to speak - basically just defamed and vilified this party and what it stands for. So much for democracy!

The need for discussion of Islam is great and has been completely banned on television. Yet Islam has as its ideology a militarist conquest of "kaffirs" (the derogatory word for non-Muslims used throughout the Quran). It is militarist in ideology and history and has as its military aim the enslavement of everyone on Earth under Shariah law. That is, the enslavement - they call it "liberation" - of all of the people who are not Muslims in the World, including we who live in Australia. And of all of our multicultural relatives and friends in Europe, the Americas and Asia. Why do we not allow this fact to be aired on television?

If you want proof of this read here:

[website address supplied]

This is a very high ranking Shi'ite Muslim scholar, the highest authority in Iraq, speaking on television. Why is this fact of Islam constantly denied with nobody ever allowed to refute the propaganda and lies that the ABC proliferates and which are proliferated in public debate - with the true facts? This is not a small thing. We are living under a dictatorship of the "looney left". Why has the fact that Islam is an ideology that marks us out for death or slavery been banned on television?! […]

Complaint to the ACMA dated 7 December 2015:

[…]

My complaint about the ABC program "The Drum" (and generally regarding the ABC) is that on the occasion I complained about it, which was regarding the launch that night of a new political party, the Australian Liberty Alliance and on almost every other occasion that I have

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 10 of 13

watched this program, there is censorship in the selection of guests on the panel in that all of the guests are left wing.

Only once did I ever see any guest speaking out against Islam, and that was Andrew Bolt. On every other occasion the panel is stacked, and, as frequently happens, the issue of Islam comes up, and on every occasion the panel is pro-Islam. Never is the idea that Islam is a "religion of peace" questioned or allowed to be considered because all of the panellists are always left wing supporters of the view that Islam is a "religion of peace" and that almost all Muslims in the World are "moderate".

The statistical evidence (PEW Research) tells a very different story, and the Quran does not advocate peace (see the link I provided in my letter to the ABC for strong evidence of this which was ignored by the ABC) and the historical evidence refutes this false notion as well.

The ABC does not allow the following three FACTS to be aired:

(i) that most Muslims are not "moderate" and that to say that 99% of Muslims are "moderate" is a proven lie, (Google PEW research) and ; (ii) that Islam is not a religion of peace, but a religion of war and conflict (see link provided in my letter to the ABC) and (iii) Mohammed, the founder of Islam who is regarded as the "perfect human being" by Muslims, never to be questioned, only to be emulated, was not a man of peace and goodwill, but was a warlord, a man who married a six-year old girl and had sex with her when she was nine (a paedophile and child molester to non-Muslims) a murderer, and a man who raped two women whom he had abducted as war-booty, and he led the beheading of 600 Jewish men, thus setting examples to other Muslims, including Islamic State.

These facts are never aired on ABC - Mohammed is equated with Jesus of Nazareth and Buddha, (who were indisputably men of peace) and this is a provable, well known lie. Nobody living today who had done what Mohammed had done would be described as a "man of peace and goodwill". They would be described only as criminals, terrorists, jihadists and as evil and intolerant men, and the reaction would be to try to take out such a man in a drone strike, not to heap honour upon him!

The choice of guests on "The Drum" and the ABC's general modus operandi is to perpetrate and propagate these three lies. That no-one will refute them is not for the reason that there is no-one to refute them or that they are not lies, nor that they are not important and influential lies in light of the global importance of Islam and of global Islamic terrorism - that no-one will refute these lies is solely because the ABC will not invite guests to speak who will refute these lies. Furthermore, the only people that they allow to speak are the people who will propagate these lies. That is not only censorship, but political propaganda worthy of the Nazi Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels and in the tradition and style of Hitler's Big Lie Theory.

To say that stating these facts is "vilification" as the ABC implies in their reply to my letter is false on two grounds:

1. Vilification laws apply to race, not religion. Islam is a religion (and a political ideology) not a race.

2. Stating literary, statistical and historical facts to counter lies and falsehoods propagated by the ABC and in other left wing media is not "vilification" of any kind but is correction, factual and fair comment, and opinion. It is not lies and propaganda, as the ABC sees fit to air all of the time!

It is also essential that lies on television be exposed as such and the blame attributed to those persons propagating such lies so that the facts can be given the status that they deserve - as facts, in the face of left wing political propaganda - and the perpetrators of falsehoods be exposed for doing so and their motives brought into question and scrutinised. […]

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 11 of 13

Attachment CBroadcaster’s response and submissions

ABC response to the complainant dated 7 December 2015:

[…]

Your complaint has been considered by Audience and Consumer Affairs, a unit which is separate to and independent of content making areas within the ABC. Our role is to review complaints alleging that ABC content has breached the ABC's editorial standards. We have sought comments from ABC News and assessed the story against the ABC's standards for impartiality which state in part: 4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality. (http://about.abc.net.au/reports-publications/code-of-practice/)

The discussion you refer to on 20 October was prompted by the fact that Dutch MP Geert Wilders was visiting Perth the next day to launch the Australian Liberty Alliance. The Drum panel included former Disability and Discrimination Commissioner Graeme Innes, researcher and writer Sabine Wolff and ABC journalist Ticky Fullerton, who all gave their views on Mr Wilders’ party. It was acknowledged that free speech is important in Australia, but also that we also have strong anti-vilification laws. The panel also discussed briefly how to combat extremism within the Muslim community; Ms Fullerton said that it required strong leadership from within the Muslim community.

While noting your concerns, the ABC is satisfied that the panel was not “censored” as you suggest, and a range of views were provided on the matters to hand. Audience and Consumer Affairs are satisfied that the program was in keeping with the ABC’s impartiality provisions. […]

ABC submission to the ACMA dated 21 January 2016:

[…]

4.1 Gather and present news and information with due impartiality

This edition of The Drum was not focussed on Islam in Australia; rather, there was a segment discussing issues around the launch in Perth of the anti-Islam Australian Liberty Alliance (ALL) by Dutch MP Geert Wilders. This is an important distinction: this was a brief discussion about the ALL and possible ramifications for the Islamic community; not an in depth consideration of Islam. A review of impartiality in this instance is therefore an assessment of the ABC’s coverage of the ALL.

At no point during this segment did any panellist describe Islam as a “religion of peace” nor was Mohammed described as a “man of peace and goodwill”. Further, claiming panellists are “left-wing” does not confirm bias: Ms Jane has not provided reference to any specific content to support this claim. Rather, Ms Jane has provided a particular view on Islam which she believes should have been canvassed in the program. 

The ACMA appears to apply a standard approach to 4.1 matters in its investigation reports, with comments against each of the hallmarks of impartiality. To assist the ACMA’s assessment, our comments follow in this format:

A balance that follows the weight of evidence

The ABC’s impartiality standards do not require that panels on programs such as The Drum be evenly split across a perceived political or other spectrum. Rather, the standards require a diversity of perspectives to be presented over time and prohibit the undue favouring of one perspective over others. 

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 12 of 13

The discussion on the program was news worthy and prompted by a clear news event: the launch of the ALL. As the presenter noted, Mr Wilders has compared the Koran to Mein Kampf. The views of the panel reflected the public and political debate about this highly controversial party; the importance of free speech was noted, along with concerns about the views expressed by Mr Wilders. Extremism in the Muslim community was also acknowledged and panellist Ticky Fullerton made the point that to combat this strong leadership from within the Muslim community is required. In this way, the program achieved a balance that followed the weight of evidence.

Fair treatment

The views of Mr Wilders and the ALL were fairly and accurately described in the panel discussion. The discussion was clearly intended to illuminate the panel’s views on the nature and possible impact of the ALL: is it simply a fringe group, why are people attracted to an extreme party like the ALL, and how this may impact on those within the Muslim community trying to combat Islamic extremism. 

The ALL was afforded fair treatment by the panel.

Open mindedness

The presenter’s questions about ALL were measured and enquiring in nature and the segment provided sufficient information for audiences to come to their own conclusions about the issues surrounding the party. The Drum’s panellists were relevant to the subject at hand: former Disability and Discrimination Commissioner Graeme Innes, researcher and writer Sabine Wolff and ABC Journalist Ticky Fullerton. While in broad agreement about the fringe and concerning nature of the ALL, the panel provided a range of viewpoints. 

Opportunities over time for principal relevant perspectives on matters of contention to be expressed

The matters of contention discussed in The Drum related to the launch of the ALL in Australia: the ABC has provided comprehensive coverage of this issue:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4336410.htmhttp://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4324969.htmhttp://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/anti-islam-party-australian-liberty-alliance/6871700http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-21/geert-wilders-on-launch-of-australian-liberty-alliance-in-perth/6873054http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-20/geert-wilders-to-launch-anti-islam-party-in-perth/6868548http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-21/australian-liberty-alliance-candidates-unveiled-amid-racism-fear/6874336http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4328798.htmhttp://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-08/geert-wilders-anti-islam-activist-australian-visa-granted/6839230http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4336177.htm?site=greatsouthern

ACMA Investigation report—The Drum broadcast by ABC News 24 on 20 October 2015 13 of 13