Australian broadcaster bans phrase ‘equal marriage’ ahead of public vote

PinkNews logo on pink background with rainbow corners.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has told staff to stop using the phrase ā€˜marriage equalityā€™ ahead of a vote on whether to extend equal marriage rights to same-sex couples.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has vowed to push ahead with plans to put equal marriage to a public vote this week, despite the Senate blocking plans for a formal plebiscite.

In a bid to circumvent Parliament, Mr Turnbull has given the green light to an informal ā€˜postal voteā€™ of Australians, which will be advisory and non-binding in nature.

Ahead of the vote, an all-staff email at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Australiaā€™s government-owned national public broadcaster, warned staff not to publicly show support for equal marriage ā€“ or even use the term equal marriage.

ABCā€™s news editorial policy manager Mark Maley directed staff that ā€œlanguage is importantā€ during the campaign, adding: ā€œThe preferred terminology is same-sex marriage, rather than ā€˜marriage equalityā€™ or ā€˜gay marriageā€™.ā€

Australian broadcaster bans phrase ‘equal marriage’ ahead of public vote

He added: ā€œPlease remember that approximately 40 per cent of the population opposes the change and more importantly that the ABC does not have a position on the issue.

ā€œIt is very important that we are impartial and that all perspectives are given a fair hearing and treated with respect by the ABC.

ā€œIn this charged environment I would also urge everyone to be circumspect on social media ā€” advocating for one side or the other will make it more difficult for the ABC to be seen as impartial. The more high-profile you are the more important discretion is.ā€

The boss added that it was ā€œinevitableā€ that people would be offended by some of the statements made by campaigners in the vote, but insisted staff should not ā€œcensorā€ participants.

He wrote: ā€œSome people will inevitably be offended by arguments and statements made by both sides. That cannot be avoided and we should not censor any debate conducted in good faith.


ā€œHowever, the editorial policies also state that we should not offend our audiences without editorial justification and we should not be seen to condone or encourage prejudice and discrimination.

ā€œTo the greatest extent possible we should be facilitating a vigorous but also civil debate. If you think any content may cross the line donā€™t hesitate to seek advice from your manager or from me.ā€

As the postal vote is set to go ahead without Parliamentary approval, it will not be subject to the laws that govern elections ā€“ including those that restrict misleading campaign materials.

LGBT campaigners have warned that this means that the anti-gay marriage campaign will be essentially free to peddle outright mistruths and homophobic smears with little recourse when the vote goes ahead.

Campaign materials from the anti-LGBT Australian Marriage Forum already describes equal marriage as ā€œstealing childrenā€ from straight people.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten told the PM: ā€œI hold you responsible for every hurtful bit of filth that this debate will unleash ā€“ not because the Prime Minister has said it, not because he agrees to it, he clearly doesnā€™t. But because the Prime Minister has licensed this debate.ā€