Rights and Wrongs: Media Reporting of Women Will Speak

A week before the recent Australian federal election, another women’s rights rally was held outside Parliament House in Victoria, and once more some sections of the news media did an Orwellian style hatchet job in its reporting.

Those who attended the peaceful event, myself included, were surprised to discover that - according to the Herald Sun - the women and trans rights protesters “clashed” on Spring St. With police even deploying pepper spray to contain the situation.

The funny thing is, unless my perimenopausal brain had an inconveniently timed bout of anterograde amnesia, no such clash happened.

Regrettably, the inaccurate, deceptive and confusing media coverage of women’s rights protests has continued on from the Let Women Speak event in 2023, but among the latest misreporting were some welcome signs of improvement.

This in part can be credited to Women Will Speak rally organiser Jasmine Sussex, who made use of her communications experience in the lead up to the protest1. As she expressed in a post-event debrief on X, it feels like we may have reached a turning point with the media. Some news coverage however is yet to get its facts and framing straight, and most continue not to engage with the issues.

Before we dive in, let’s take a moment to put this all into context. As you will no doubt recall, the Let Women Speak event outside Victorian Parliament House two years ago fell into disarray, when police found themselves ill-prepared for the rabid antics of trans rights counter-protesters, and the brazen arrival of Hitler saluting neo-Nazis.

What followed was a clusterfuck of slander, misinformation and defamation of the women who gathered to speak about sex-based rights and the well documented harms of “gender affirming care”.

The police, in an effort to keep the multitude of protest groups apart, unhelpfully (and curiously) corralled the men in black onto the steps of Parliament, placing them adjacent to the women. To the casual observer, this gave the superficial impression that the two groups might be somehow connected.

Yet, as anyone who bothered to conduct a few seconds of earnest research would have discovered, there was absolutely no such association between them. The Nazi twats had selfishly gate crashed the women’s event for their own distorted aggrandisement.

This fact however did not stop politicians and media outlets of all persuasions lining up to execute a grotesque misrepresentation of the women as extremist right-wing bigots in cahoots with neo-Nazis.

The fallout of this was devastating for the many women involved. Most notably women’s rights activist Angie Jones and Liberal MP Moira Deeming. Former Liberal leader John Pesutto smeared both women, along with Kellie Jay Keen, and all three launched defamation proceedings against him.

Jones and Keen settled out of court and received an apology. Deeming, who was expelled from the party room on the basis of this false accusation, was ultimately vindicated. The courts found she had been defamed and awarded damages. Pesutto is now facing bankruptcy.

The Deeming vs Pesutto case exposed the lie that the women at the rally were extreme right-wing affiliated. Yet, as media reporting of the recent Women Will Speak event has shown, this has only done so much to shift the mistaken narrative. With news reports continuing to falsely describe the women at the recent protest as “far right”. I’ll return to the “right-wing” baloney further on.

Singer and feminist, Nina, performs a song that summarises what took place at the Let Women Speak event in 2023. Composed to the tune of the Stealers Wheel classic ‘Stuck in the Middle With You’, her lyrics perfectly capture the sentiment among women who attended - stuck between “fake leftists”, as Nina calls them, and right wing extremists. “Clowns to the left of me, Nazi’s the right, here I am stuck in the middle with you”2.

The event on Saturday April 26th was organised by the newly formed Women’s Voices Australia, founded by Jasmine Sussex3. With Victoria’s misogynistic anti-vilification laws about to come into effect, the rally was organised out of concern that the ability to speak freely about women’s rights could soon be penalised and supressed.

The laws raise questions about the legality of speech at future events. If those present call a male sex offender who identifies as a woman a ‘he’, is that legal speech? Will this be considered public “ridicule” of his protected characteristic of “gender identity”, and therefore vilification, punishable by up to five years in prison?

Media coverage started promisingly, with the Herald Sun alerting readers to the potential ruckus outside Parliament House later that day. Refreshingly, the report correctly referred to the event as a women’s rights rally, rather than the usual “anti-trans” tag women’s rights activists usually get branded with4.

However the report misleadingly anticipated “violence between the groups”, as if it were a “both sides” thing. This is despite women having never participated in any violence at any previous events. Not in 2023, nor at multiple protests held since by Women’s Action Group.

The coverage from The Age was more positive. While some women complained that the report was framed in the context of the neo-Nazi gate crash of the 2023 rally, this did give context to the reason for the heavy police presence at the forthcoming protest, and also gave a fair hearing of the women’s rights issues to be raised.

Disappointingly however, the online version of the article was filed under “right-wing extremism”. In the print edition, Jasmine, a former card-carrying Labor party member, was pictured next to a photo of saluting neo-Nazis. Two years on, women right’s campaigners continue to have their cause overshadowed by extreme-right men.

Despite the worrying headlines about violence and clashes, what actually transpired was a peaceful event. There was no clash between women and counter-protesters. The police did a brilliant job at keeping TRAs well away from the women’s rally. They clearly learned their lesson from last time. A PORT team (riot squad) was even waiting in the wings beside Parliament House in case things got ugly5.

The counter protesters were kept so far away that their drums and chanting was just background noise. Unlike previous events, attendees could actually hear the speakers. They included: ex-cop and Libertarian Krystle Mitchell, journalist Julie Szego, activist Janet Inglis, outgoing WA parliamentarian Sophia Moermond, Lesbian Action Group convenor Carol-Ann, concerned parent Emma, and ex-Green member Helen Lewers.

The rally ended with a rousing rendition of For Women’s Rights, as sung by our sisters at the UK Supreme Court. Read more about the protest at Jenny Nabben’s substack.

The event came to a slightly premature end at the request of police. The counter protesters were throwing missiles and they feared the situation would escalate6. Women were escorted by police down Spring St towards Little Collins St, where a smaller number of TRAs were contained by the police so women could leave safely.

Apart from one or two verbal exchanges with masked agitators who managed to evade the police cordon, there were no violent clashes between women and counter protesters7. As many women did not feel safe staying in the CBD with TRAs roaming around looking for confrontation, most either went home or regrouped in assorted locations outside of the city to have lunch and mark the occasion.

After the women held their event peacefully and left the area, it was then that violence broke out on the streets, as a portion of the counter-protesters began roaming around the city. But a peaceful event is not a good click bait story for the media. As David Limbrick noted in the debrief, the media is more interested in conflict than the issues.

Cue the misreporting….

The following is an overview of the dozen or so online, print and TV news reports about the protests on Saturday April 26th. It seems more accurate to say that the media covered the counter-protest, rather than the Women Will Speak event.

Although the women’s rally was always mentioned in reports, with a few exceptions (such as 7 News), it was rarely featured in the images. There was the usual smearing of women’s rights activists as “far right”, “right wing” and “anti-trans”8. In a welcome correction, however, a number of outlets did not use these terms at all.

The major issue of course was the conflation of the women’s rally with the counter-protest. It was clearly the counter protest that descended into chaos and not the women’s event, but most reports were frustratingly fuzzy or down right wrong on this important detail. This left readers with the impression that the women’s rally was violent and that women were involved in the “clashes”, when they were not.

A key contributor to this issue was the story framing. Across reports of varying quality was a pattern of digital headlines, article descriptions, image captions and TV introductions not accurately representing the content of the articles or reports submitted. After a journalist submits their report, someone in the digital team puts a misleading spin in the headline and introduction for kicks and clicks.

Take this doozy from the Daily Mail, for example. The otherwise adequate story of TRA disruptions in the CBD had a completely bogus title: “Wild scenes as women's rights protesters and pro-trans activists start a street brawl”.

No, Daily Mail. Women’s rights activists did not start a street brawl. FFS.

Despite the women rights and trans rights protesters being kept separate by the police, multiple media outlets falsely reported the groups had directly “clashed” and that “violence” had erupted between them on the street.

It’s not clear exactly who, apart from police, clashed with the counter-protesters, but it was not with women from the event, as they had already left. From what I can gather it was members of the public (according to 9News) and passersby (The Age) who were apparently pissed off that yet another masked protest mob was disturbing their afternoon in Melbourne. Among them were some men who, according an eye witness who spoke during the debrief, hurled homophobic slurs and yelled “fuck trans rights”.

An initial report published online by the Herald Sun at 1:57pm was full of nonsense, claiming that police deployed pepper spray on both women and trans rights activists.

This is completely false. The cops did deploy pepper spray on trans rights supporters but it wasn’t on Spring St and by then the women were long gone. We never “faced off”. 10 News First Melbourne then repeated this false news on X shortly after at 3:09pm.

The Herald Sun report by Regan Hodge originally slandered the women as “far right”. After an outcry from women who attended, it was amended to say “right wing”. The article was later updated again to remove this reference altogether, but it still contains many falsehoods. According to Hodge, only a dozen women attended the rally. Really? If I was this reporter’s editor I’d be doing an urgent accuracy audit of all his reporting.

The “right-wing” correction came too late. The bogus report had already been spread throughout the Newscorp print and digital network. Misinformation about women clashing in “wild scenes” with trans activists remains on the Herald Sun website9.

Surprisingly, The Australian newspaper, also got in on the act, making a multitude of false claims - that there were “wild scenes” at a “right-wing” women’s rights rally and that a women’s group “clashed” with TRAs. Again, none of this is true.

The actual report was updated and is now somewhat accurate but it is still not clear that women right’s protestors where not involved in any skirmishes. It doesn’t say explicitly that they were, but it is implied by omission and the highly misleading description. The woman featured in the photograph was not part of the women’s rally.

An ABC News report was also suspiciously vague about which protesters threw missiles at police, and which protesters went on to cause chaos in the CBD, even though it was bleedingly obvious who was responsible.

Of the dozen or so news reports I examined, a report in The Age was one of the most accurate. Despite the balanced article, an online version was once again initially categorised under “right wing extremism”, which was later corrected to “protests”.

Unfortunately, a video news report by 9 News accompanied the above piece with a misleading title “Opposing pro and anti-trans groups clash in Melbourne”.

9 News introduced their report on the post-rally chaos in the CBD by saying "pro and anti-trans groups have clashed in central Melbourne, with police forced to use pepper spray to quell the violence".

Again, we have a sin of omission, not making it clear the women’s event was peaceful and women were not involved in the clashes. What is the “anti-trans group”? Were the men that chanted anti-trans slogans in the CBD an organised "group" or just a bunch of opportunist blokes making their feelings known because the opportunity presented itself?

7News went with the angle that they were “splinter groups”. Their video title reads: ‘Protesters clash with police and splinter groups in a city showdown over women's rights’. Intriguing. Who are these mysterious “splinter groups” of men, that.. well, it’s not exactly clear… “splintered off” from the women’s rights rally that they did not attend? There is no evidence that the men who clashed with pro-trans protesters give a damn about women's rights. This was not what their “showdown” was about.

7News introduced it's TV report with "Protest mayhem has returned to Melbourne with a rally over women's rights has descending into chaos on the city streets….”

Correction, 7 News, the women's rally was peaceful. It was the trans rights counter protest that descended into chaos.

Fortunately, the actual report was better than the problematic framing. The 7News report was one of the few that actually featured footage of the women's rally, and spoke to organisers and attendees. Unlike some other news outlets, they had a journalist on the ground doing some good old fashioned reporting. Here is Paul Dowsley’s full interview with Jasmine, captured by Stone the Crone:

Surprisingly, arguably the best report came from ABC News - a media outlet not known for unbiased coverage of trans-related issues. Appearing on the Sunday night Victorian News bulletin, the story focussed on the ongoing disruption that traders in the CBD are facing, due to the regularity of protests. Reporter Mikaela Ortolan not only interviewed Jasmine of Women's Voices Australia but also made it clear that the women's rally was peaceful, and that it was the counter-protest that caused the chaos. It was by far the clearest reporting of this aspect of the day’s events.

Frustratingly, though, the report is nowhere to be found on the ABC’s website or Youtube channel. ABC evening news bulletins are only online for seven days. A copy has been uploaded here for illustrative purposes under the fair use provision.

What is the average punter supposed to make of this mixed bag of reports? Unless they read The Age or saw ABC News Victoria’s Sunday night report, they probably have a complete misunderstanding of what took place.

In going through a rampage in the city streets, the trans rights supporters were able to successfully monopolise media coverage, and therefore draw attention away from the issues women’ right activists were seeking to impart. Having spent my younger days at many a left-wing protest, I wouldn’t be quick to assume that this outcome was incidental. Monopolising media attention could well be a strategy, not an accident.

Instead of headlines that read ‘Transwoman paedophile in women’s prison’ or ‘ Ex-Greens members tell voters to put party last’. We have headlines with the keywords ‘violence’, ‘clash’, ‘pepper spray’, ‘chaos’, ‘mayhem’ and ‘brawl’.

Journalist Julie Szego, who spoke at the rally, put her fellow journalists on notice in the following tweet, calling out the Herald Sun in particular for falsely calling the women “far right”.

“Let me put the media and political class on notice: call those of us with legitimate criticisms about sex denialism "far right" or "Nazi-adjacent" again and you can expect a class action. That caper ends here.” - Julie Szego

Szego also filed a complaint with channel 10 for their misinformation.

Victorian MP David Limbrick, who attended the Women’s rally, made the following statement on X to counter the media misreporting:

Speaker at the rally Janet Inglis, also provided some clarity:

Angie Jones, who was defamed after the Let Women Speak event in 2023, took to social media to explain the impact that false reporting continues to have on her family:

Other women who attended the event said they received texts, calls and messages from friends and family who were worried about their safety, after seeing inaccurate news reports. Are you ok??? the frantic messages asked.

Women’s Voices Australia has sought legal advice regarding potentially defamatory statements that the organisation is a “far right” group. Complaints to the Press Council are expected to be filed by WVA and other women who attended the rally.

A cyber abuse complaint has also been filed with eSafety Australia, against a prominent Melbourne trans activist who claims that event organiser, Jasmine Sussex, is supported by Nazis. The accusation could harm her future job prospects “it could certainly make me unemployable with anyone who believes these absurd lies.”

So, let’s address the misnomer that women who campaign for sex-based rights are right wing extremists. I’m talking to you Herald Sun, The Australian, and 10 News.

As Journalist Julie Szego recently noted, the overwhelming majority of women who attend these rallies are disaffected leftists. Many are ex-Green and Labor members, who are mortified by the way their parties have bullied and silenced women who dare to speak up and say: transwomen are male, women and transwomen are different.

In a previous post I briefly discussed my own left history and the disgruntled left-leaning women I’ve collaborated with. To label us “far right” or “right wing” is simply not true. We are a mixed bunch and non-partisan. Women’s rights is not a fringe or partisan matter. We work together on this single issue. The overwhelming majority come from the left or centre-left, with histories in feminist and LGB activism.

Many of us have the same concerns about housing, the environment, and healthcare that we had before. We didn’t “switch sides” and become “right wing”, we just don’t agree that sex is changeable, that male sex offenders should be put in women’s prisons, or that the very normal period of gender-related distress in adolescence should be treated with puberty blockers and hormones. By all means, explore gender expression, just don’t medicalise it with unethical experimental treatments.

Rally organiser, Jasmine Sussex, expresses her “extreme far right” view that a convicted male paedophile who identifies as a woman should be removed from a Victorian women’s prison.

If there are some far right-wing women hanging around the edges of this movement, I haven’t come across them. Conservative centrists, yes, but right-wing? Perhaps I am showing my own left bias here, but I doubt such women would be keen to hang out with a bunch of ole tree huggers, social workers, and staunch AF lesbians.

What does left and right wing even mean anymore, anyway? As far as many of us women are concerned, the current political landscape is completely arse backwards.

The arguably more important issue, than smearing women as “far right”, is ignoring the unfolding travesty in Australia’s gender clinics, which is one of the key reasons why they gathered to protest in the first place.

Former columnist for The Age (and reluctant rally speaker) Julie Szego told the crowd that "Journalism has been hijacked by activists across several areas of reporting". She went on to say that if gender affirming care is proven to be a medical scandal:

“It would have never have got this far, if it wasn't for journalists and their journalistic malpractice in not reporting this area properly”.

“Even as the UK, and Sweden and Finland started to move away from gender affirming care, because the evidence just didn't stack up, the ABC was still telling people that the science is settled”.

“Too many journalists no longer see their job as writing the first draft of history, they see it in terms of barracking for what they see as the right side of history. On this occasion I think they've got it wrong. We have to get back to basics”.

Women who attended the rally implore journalists to listen to your seasoned colleague, listen to your better journalistic instincts, and do your bloody job.

If you appreciate my work and would like to support it, you can do so by buying me a coffee☕

• Pro-trans, women’s rights groups tipped to clash at rally at Parliament House | Herald Sun (archive)

• Police invoke powers to unmask disruptors as women’s rights rally returns to scene of neo-Nazi stunt | The Age (archive) ✅

• Women’s rights activists, pro-trans supporters face off in wild protest at Parliament House | Herald Sun (archive) ❌

• Chaos as protesters clash in Melbourne’s CBD | The Australian

• Melbourne protests over women’s, trans rights erupt in violence; two arrested | The Australian

• Violent clashes in Melbourne after protesters descend on women’s rights rally | The Age ✅

• Dozens of police deployed across Melbourne following chaotic anti-vilification law protests | ABC News

• Police pepper spray crowd as CBD protests decend [sic] into chaos | 10 News ❌

• Protest Mayhem | 7News Tweet ❌

• Violent protests erupt in Melbourne | 9 News Australia

• Protesters clash with police and splinter groups in a city showdown over women's rights | 7NEWS

• Wild scenes as women's rights protesters and pro-trans activists start a street brawl | Daily Mail

• Chaos as protesters clash in Melbourne’s CBD | News.com.au

• Chaos in city as police pepper-spray activists | Sunday Herald Sun print ed. ❌

• ABC News Victoria 7pm Sunday Bulletin (timestamp: 11:23) ✅

• Nina / Rebella Smith (Musician and Women’s Rights Activist)

• Krystle Mitchell (Ex-cop and Libertarian)

• Carol Anne (Lesbian Action Group)

• Julie Szego (Freelance Journalist)

• Sophia Moermond (Outgoing WA Parliamentarian)

• Emma (Concerned Parent)

• Janet Inglis (Women’s Rights Activist)

• Helen Lewers (Ex-Green Party Member)

• Jasmine Sussex (Founder, Women’s Voices Australia)