They cannot be reformed, they must be abandoned

On 4 January, the US bombed and invaded Venezuela, massacring Venezuelan and Cuban people, abducting Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores from their bedroom while killing their security staff, all with the clearly stated objectives of resource theft and imperialist expansion, in alignment with a fascist (and of course Zionist) oligarchy.

This was reported as:

‘A daring raid’ —ABC

‘A stunning military operation’ —SMH

‘An extraordinary military operation’ —SBS

‘Extraordinary capture of Venezuela’s president’ ... ‘the audacious US raid’ ... ‘that could have come from a blockbuster movie’ —The Guardian

In the wake of every western imperialist depravity, a narrow palette of approved language is standardised and replicated across state and corporate media platforms. Its role is to disinform and soothe a liberal readership, while maintaining the flimsiest facade of ‘reportage’.

For example, this week’s ‘blockbuster’ framing from The Guardian echoes the numerous ‘James Bond’ and ‘spy thriller’ headlines used by western ‘news’ outlets to glamorise the Zionist pager attack on Lebanon in September 2024. The ABC, meanwhile, described that massacre and mass-disabling atrocity as ‘audacious and meticulous’, praising the Zionist entity as ‘sophisticated’ and ‘formidable’.

We might also remember the Flour Massacre of February 2024: a horrific, broad-daylight slaughter, committed by a clearly identifiable perpetrator; a perpetrator with a name and an explicit annihilatory objective.

In the days following that massacre, a supposedly broad ‘spectrum’ of western media organisations homogenised their messaging in a collective shrug:

‘Killed in chaos’; ‘died in aid convoy chaos’; ‘chaotic incident’; ‘Deadly chaos at Gaza aid convoy’; ‘an aid convoy turned to deadly chaos’; ‘Deadly Chaos Unfolds’; ‘catastrophe near aid trucks’; ‘catastrophe befell an aid convoy’; ‘killed in aid convoy violence’; ‘food-aid related deaths’.

Flour massacres in Gaza then became so routine that western media stopped reporting on them altogether. This, of course, is the logical next step for an apparatus tasked with obscuring, trivialising, and normalising imperialist violence.

When we describe the Australian media response to the Chabad shooting as a cynical and calculated performance of ‘grief’, it’s because we understand these newsrooms have no general objection to violence.

Their role is only to uphold the linguistic front of western imperialism; dehumanising its victims while exceptionalising its beneficiaries and perpetrators.

To consider the topic of enemy media more broadly:

If we’re standing on stolen Aboriginal Land, abiding by the words of Basil al-Araj1 and refusing on principle to cite or amplify Israeli mouthpieces like Hayom or Haaretz, it makes no sense that we would then credulously cite or amplify the ABC, SBS, SMH, The Guardian et al. (much less sustain them with our labour). Their colonial positionality is equivalent.

Yes, we should absolutely be enraged about Adelaide Writers Festival’s cancellation of Randa Abdel-Fattah. Yes, we should express that rage forcefully, uphold picket lines, and support boycotts of this kind.

And let’s do this while acknowledging a now-familiar cycle:

Again and again, we align ourselves with colonial events, institutions, and systems of reward. Again and again, we express shock and outrage when, with mind-numbing predictability, these systems behave colonially.

Let’s also take this opportunity to honestly examine the parameters of our engagement. Adelaide Writers Festival (AWF) was already compromised by a number of relationships and partnerships.

For example, a ‘presenting partner’ of the festival is The Australian — a deeply violent Zionist-colonial media organisation that has relentlessly attacked the livelihood and safety of Abdel-Fattah and many others over the course of years, while openly cheerleading the genocide of Palestinians.

Another example: Lockheed Martin’s Amanda Vanstone is an Adelaide Festival board member (a fact raised by Omar Sakr as early as 2024). And so on.

What made this festival acceptable in the first place? What exactly are the contours of our ethical red line?

Let’s also acknowledge the ways in which the AWF boycott indulged Australian colonial exceptionalism. As with the Khaled Sabsabi crisis of 2025 — which was overwhelmingly framed as a betrayal of Australian values™ — statements about AWF decry foreign influence upon a proud Australian arts industry.

Australian racism is far from dependent upon Zionist lobbyism. Australia and Israel are comorbid and mutually parasitic, but Australia is a bastion of imperialism in its own right, maintaining its own regime of suppression and supremacism: a violence that long predates the Zionist entity and will likely outlive its collapse.

Finally, let’s acknowledge the ways in which cultural boycotts are used to launder reputations. Many of the individuals and organisations now ‘speaking out’ against AWF do not support the liberation of Palestine.

On Sunday, for example, Australian publisher Hardie Grant released a statement ‘condemning the decision of the Adelaide Festival Board’.

Hardie Grant has never condemned the genocide or dispossession of Palestinians. Indeed, they continue to platform and publish Zionists. Their red line is not Palestine, their red line is ‘freedom of expression’.

This red line is low risk, low stakes, and can even be calculated as good marketing.

In much the same way, Zadie Smith, author of insufferable liberal Zionist apologia, announced her withdrawal from the festival. In May 2024, Smith used 2,000 words in The New Yorker to scold campus anti-genocide protestors while refusing to state a position on the genocide herself.

Another AWF withdrawer, the ABC’s David Marr, recently attempted to defend the IOF stenography of western media in an aggressive interview with veteran journalist Chris Hedges. Following this excruciating Radio National segment, Hedges correctly identified Marr as a ‘piece of shit’.

A number of genocide-abetting poseurs like Smith and Marr were then included on lists of ‘principled’ withdrawers, whose sacrifice is to be lauded and whose careers must be protected.

This is precisely the creeping liberalism that can be expected when the bar is set at ‘freedom of expression’ rather than liberation.

I’ve been involved in cultural boycott campaigns for many years, and have believed in their efficacy. But, as the Zionist and western imperialist death machine continues to escalate, our analysis, aspirations, and code of conduct need to evolve.

Over the past 826 days, so much of our time and organising capacity has been monopolised by this endless waltz of compromise and outrage and compromise and outrage; of credulous participation, furious non-participation, and credulous re-engagement.

At the bare minimum, we must perform this waltz with the larger goal of abandoning these colonial events, organisations, and systems of reward entirely.

Like enemy media, Australian arts institutions cannot be reformed, they must be abandoned.

We need to build genuinely healthy, liberatory, and steadfast counter-spaces.

Thanks for reading Matt Chun’s Newsletter.

I’m an independent artist, writer, and picture book creator. To support my practice, visit my online store or consider becoming a paid subscriber to this newsletter.

I’m also a founding and current co-editor of revolutionary print periodical The Sunday Paper, an imprint of Slingshot Books.

To share information with me about censorship, ownership, funding, infiltration, or influence, please use my secure submission form. I’m happy to archive receipts from any industry or community. However, I’m more likely to follow up and write about a subject that falls within my areas of experience: primarily visual arts, the Australian/Euro-American publishing industry, and news media in the Australian colony.

AI policy: I never use AI to generate, edit, or refine any part of my image-making, research, writing, or publishing process. When I make art, I use traditional materials: pencil, watercolour, and ink on paper. If you consume my work you can be sure that the labour, creativity, language, and materiality is my own.