The Seven Network’s extraordinary attempt to mainstream Nazi views by giving an uncritical platform to convicted criminal Blair Cottrell, leader of the far-right group United Patriots Front, has prompted concerns about the undermining of national security as intelligence agencies deal with the growing threat of neo-Nazi violence.
Seven’s “news” report on Sunday, in which Cottrell was allowed to freely opine about the alleged “African gangs” issue in Melbourne as a legitimate Neighbourhood Watch-style community group, prompted widespread condemnation and social media derision, with the hashtag #7summerofnazis trending heavily.
Cottrell, who also professes a range of misogynist and homophobic views, has been jailed for several violent offences including assault, damaging property and stalking, idolises Hitler and has proposed “execute the leftists” as a way to control media coverage. A member of UPF was separately charged in 2016 with preparing for a terrorist attack against left-wing groups.
Seven has a history of giving a platform to extremists: it gave Pauline Hanson extensive airtime on its morning breakfast program to advertise her brand of bigotry leading up to the 2016 election, at which her party won four seats. Its platform for Cottrell comes at a time of growing concern within Australia’s security agencies. Last year, the head of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, Duncan Lewis, warned about right-wing extremist violence, saying “to the extent that there is a possibility of violence, or there is indeed violence being offered, that is of interest to us. That is business for ASIO. It is a real problem and it is something that we’re very, very acutely aware of and I have people working that particular issue.”
Lewis’ remarks were directed at another neo-Nazi group, Reclaim Australia. But it is understood that UPF is on the radar police and intelligence agencies.
Victorian Labor MP Anthony Byrne savaged Seven for giving airtime to Cottrell and his band. Byrne, who is deputy chair of parliament’s intelligence and security committee, tweeted “I cannot believe what I’ve just watched. UPF is well known to authorities for all the wrong reasons yet you ask them for comment. What on earth do you think your doing channel 7, promoting criminals and right-wing hate groups who btw greatly concern our security services.”
Byrne’s electorate was where the Endeavour Hills attack occurred in 2014. Cottrell and his gang embarrassed themselves when they delivered a Christmas tree to a nearby Dandenong mosque in 2015 and their efforts to intimidate and humiliate were met with civility and good grace. Byrne told Crikey he loathes groups like UPF. “These are the losers who failed to get into the army, failed to get into the police force, so they bulk up and get into neo-Nazi ideology, misogyny, homophobia, anti-Semitism.”
Byrne’s fear is that the actions of Seven lend legitimacy to extremist views, creating a more accepting environment both for both groups disposed to violence and those who exacerbate community tensions, reducing the capacity of security agencies to gain the cooperation of communities to identify extremists.
The price of mainstreaming Nazism and giving a platform to extremist criminals for ratings may yet be paid in a more dangerous currency.
But think of 7 – in their quest for selling air time ads off the back of controversy.
They open this uncritical, incurious, unquestioning (as opposed to their querulous sceptical views on other matters) Pandor’a Box, that emboldens those of similar, if latent, mind that wouldn’t normally act out their dreams, to think such ideas are mainlining society, so they go ahead and “live the dream” :- 7 has another story?
Not their “fault”?
Irresponsible, imbalanced “journalism” (a term I use for the sake of convenience) that will do exactly as you say. That someone is given a platform to spout nonsense and untruths, in our current societal mentality, to many, equates to fact and then they do as you say and blindly follow. Too lazy to employ any critical thought and investigate any counter to this person’s flimsy rationales.
Well sadly the ABC is not so innocent either – I can’t believe how many times they replay video footage of the youth violence in Melbourne – that feeds into the community fear, and emboldens the armed militia mentality of those hateful “patriotic” groups.
Shame on our Auntie too, and they can’t use odious revenue raising as an excuse, only trying to keep Turnbull, Dutton and Fifield out of their annual funding.
Aunty is trying so hard to emulate Channels 7, 9 and 10. And according to many former Aunty followers they are getting more successful at alienating their former supporters. SBS anyone?
Yes but SBS has its own problems
And guess who are on the ABC’s board? The presenters and some of the journalists are there because they do the bidding of the right wingers on the board. The others, are gone, now. The LNP just love what they’ve done to our national broadcaster. Not always in the power of those at the coalface to dictate content.
I would have thought the usual principle here would have been to give Cottrell sufficient rope with which to hang himself. If the journalists (lolz) involved did not ask sufficiently probing questions, then it’s fair to state they failed to provide even a modicum of journalistic integrity.
Having not watched the segment, I hesitate to comment further, however consider the following: these people are out there. Is censoring or de-platforming their viewpoint going to eradicate it? I think not, and I would argue there is sufficient evidence to assert the opposite – that driving these views underground allows them to fester and propagate.
Having a sophisticated discussion about why such views are unacceptable, and by offering alternatives – both to their contributing factors and to viable solutions – is precisely the corrective that is necessary.
Shielding people from dangerous ideas does not make them “safer”; it enfeebles them. We need to be exposed to these ideas so that we can counter them forthrightly and effectively. Ideas are “mainstreamed” through a process of mass acceptance. Reckon Cottrell and his ilk have the capacity to convince Australians of the purity of their positions? Well, if the current level of political/media debate is anything to go by…
Agree that they should not be ignored and that, allowed to run off at the mouth, that inevitably they will piss off & alienate more people than they attract.
Oxygen is the best disinfectant.
Sunshine…but I take your point.
Perhaps I was too arch – litotes and all.
Let’s settle on exposure to ridicule.
A la Doug Piranha?
It’s interesting because I saw Cotterill on a panel that included 2 other more moderate versions of himself, 2 Muslim Australian women, and an Australian academic who had conducted research about multiculturalism. Cotterill constantly interrupted the other panelists (as they sometimes did to him) but he constantly complained about the interruption with his reciprocal behaviour’s irony apparently lost on him. He denied the facts offered from the methodologically sound, longitudinal research conducted by the academic and distorted facts about Islam when arguing with the 2 Muslim people. Yet, I watched this on a right wing Youtube channel that crowed about how he “destroys a panel of Muslims”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ-tGblAk74. So, it seems that the message is not getting through and many right wing thinkers are not thinking at all when it seemed (at least to me) that Cotterill presented as a domineering and dismissive figure, touting snapshots of Islam in order to serve his purpose but easily dismantled – if only he had not kept interrupting.
I agree. Give him the space to speak but have calm and reasonable opponents or his followers will feel their/his position is validated.
I didn’t see the news bulletin but I assume there were no opposing views?
After watching 7 news for your nightly dose of culture wars and puff pieces on neo-nazis stay tuned for a marathon of cop shows.