This morning The Daily Telegraph splashed with a story that’s been political gossip for months: Barnaby Joyce’s ex-staffer and now-girlfriend is pregnant with his fifth child. This comes months after another story, which also ran on the front page, about the unspecified “personal crisis” that was spilling into the Deputy Prime Minister’s public life in the lead-up to the New England byelection.
The story has brought to the fore the age-old debate for political journalism: when is a politician’s personal life in the public interest? So we did a whip around of some interested observers on the ethics of publishing this story.
Chris Dore, editor, Daily Telegraph
How is it not in the public interest? Would it be in the public interest if we were talking about the prime minister or the opposition leader? He’s the Deputy Prime Minister. Of course it’s public interest. We ran it the very first day we were 100% sure of the facts. Until yesterday we could not categorically write the story.
Lots of journalists are suggesting everyone knew. Well did they? How? And are they really suggesting the leader of a major party and deputy prime minister living with a former adviser and expecting a child is not a story? What would they have done when he started pushing a pram around Lake Burley Griffin or Parliament House. Its an absurd argument.
Truth is it was merely a rumour until we confirmed it and had enough information to publish.
Bernard Keane, political editor, Crikey
I’m Barnaby Joyce’s harshest critic in the press gallery. But this story about him is shameful non-journalism and debases public life. There is zero public interest in Joyce’s personal life, despite the efforts of News Corp columnists like Caroline Overington, and left-wingers on social media, to confect one.
Because a politician has mentioned their family at some point in their career — which they all do — does not magically create a “family values hypocrite” justification for revealing their personal lives. Because some other public figure on your preferred side of politics has suffered the same fate does not justify it happening to a figure you dislike. Joyce has not used taxpayer resources inappropriately; he has not behaved in a way that opened him to the risk of security breaches, there is no allegation of misconduct.
What he does personally with a consenting adult is no concern of ours, let alone a matter for our judgement. Who among us has behaved perfectly in our personal lives? There certainly aren’t many journalists — a profession notoriously antithetical to domestic bliss — who are in a position to pass judgement about anyone, but this is what such a story amounts to.
Margaret Simons, associate journalism professor, Monash University
The test here is whether Barnaby Joyce’s personal life was relevant to his public responsibilities. That is, does his personal conduct expose him as a hypocrite, involve some compromise of public responsibilities, or suggest he is unfit for his post and so on.
It seems to me the only things that might bring this into the sphere of legitimate public interest are:
1. The suggestion that due to his Catholicism he has in some way been a hypocrite
2. The fact that the woman apparently bearing his child was a former staff member.
However, on 1, I would have thought the case was weak, and on 2, so far as I am aware there is no suggestion of harassment or coercion or improper favouritism or improper expenditure of public funds. (if any of this did emerge, then that would make the fact of the relationship of legitimate public interest).
On balance, and without knowing all the circumstances, I would have thought the relationship was nobody’s business but that of the people involved. I can see that there may be an argument on the other side, though. It’s a marginal case.
Mark Day, former media columnist, The Australian
Of course the media is entitled to report on Barnaby’s baby and the circumstances surrounding it.
The Canberra Press Gallery has a rule that declares the private life of politicians is off-limits, unless it becomes a matter of public interest. In my view there’s a lot of humbug and hypocrisy surrounding this rule, but even if we ignore that, the Barnaby Joyce case clearly is in the public interest.
He has been the subject of rumour and scuttlebutt before, during and after his citizenship by-election (including one of his family denouncing him by loud-hailer in the main street of Tamworth); he has confessed to a marriage breakdown in the parliament and he advocates strong family values as a politician, including opposing same-sex marriage. He is also Deputy Prime Minister and as such, what he does sends signals, wanted or not, to the electorate.
The media has a duty to tell it like it is. Barnaby could have avoided this by not taking the course he has. He has no option other than to let the cards fall where they may.
Julia Baird, journalist and presenter, The Drum
For my PhD on the history of female politicians and the Australian media, I tracked how the convention regarding not reporting on the personal lives of politicians was most spectacularly broken for women, from Margaret Guilfoyle to Cheryl Kernot.
If Joyce were female, and having an affair — let alone carrying the child of a staffer, it would have been huge news, justified on the grounds that it would have impacted her work, and also her capacity to work, as it was for Kernot. This is very rarely argued of male politicians who have frequently had public, well-known affairs that have gone without reporting.
Barnaby Joyce was taking a big risk with some of his rationale for SSM being based on healthy heterosexual marriages while he was breaking his own vows, so it is strange it did not become a bigger story.
Rob Stott, managing editor, Junkee
A politician’s private life should remain private until their public words don’t live up to their private actions. Given Joyce’s very vocal opposition to marriage equality and defence of the sanctity of marriage, I’d say his affair with a staffer fits that bill.
I’m generally not a fan of the media acting as gatekeepers and deciding when an “open secret” is ready to be made fully public. As news spreads more and more on social media, the time has long passed since the press gallery was able to hold back information that was being widely circulated in the community.
My only question is why now? If the story is newsworthy now, surely it was newsworthy months ago when the entire Canberra Press Gallery knew about it.
“Pork-barrel” takes on a whole new meaning for BJ… Let’s hope it doesn’t detract from the criticisms of his other recent fiascos.
what about the other allegations of drunken impropriety as told to tony windsor and reported in some independent online news publications, these are the complaints that should be investigated, if you hold others to certain standards then you should maintain the same standards yourself, imagine if this was the deputy leader of the opposition going into a by election, the murdoch media and the shock jocks would be screaming to the high heavens for the voters to throw them out, seems there`s 2 standards in Australian politics, its do as I say, not as I do on the conservative side, I feel for is his family, the victims, betrayed and abandoned through no fault of their own,I hope his wife Natalie takes him to the cleaners, financially, this behaviour must be the going thing in national party politics, a local state member has done a similar thing recently and it was hushed up too.
Barnaby is the Deputy PM, Leader of the National Party and a Minister of the Crown.
His wages are paid by the tax payer.
The taxpayer has every right to know what their employees are up to on the job.
I doubt that all this happened off the clock.
So your boss has the right to know your private affairs? Or are you the boss and are claiming the right to know all the private affairs of your employees?
If he was using our time & money for his frolic, yes.
Fine. Then by extension we should extend these standards to all Government employees right?
Small red herring.
I repeat how much was carried out on the clock ie while he or she were being paid by the taxpayer for their respective jobs including allowances?
mick, it wasn`t a private affair, its been out there for months, and yes, he should be held to the same standards as the coalition held labor `s julia Gilliard and the liberal peter slipper, there was no privacy for them, not to mention the jim cairns julie merossi`s affair, there was no consideration of their privacy, and there`s a lot more to come out of this sordid mess yet, there`s other allegations that must be investigated in the full glare of the public eye even more damaging, as ye so, so shall ye reap seems appropriate her.
Rob Stott nails it: “My only question is why now? If the story is newsworthy now, surely it was newsworthy months ago when the entire Canberra Press Gallery knew about it.” After the High Court sacked Barnaby Joyce and he became “just Barnaby” he stood as a candidate in the New England by-election, which he won, absent any competition from Tony Windsor, and absent any critical Press coverage. Rumours were rife in the electorate and in social media that his wife and children were disgusted with Mr Family Values, yet none of this was reported by the Press. Why? Because politicians lives are private? No matter how big the scandal? Really? Or is it the same old story, Good Old Boys ganging together to hide their sexual infidelities, while breath-taking double standards apply for women like Cheryl Kernot and Julia Gillard. And anyway, Joyce was not a politician then, he was a candidate. Does the Press protect candidates too? And why are his personal affairs only NOW public game for the Murdoch papers? Because they could “confirm the story” with a paparazzi shot of a pregnant woman? Are you kidding? no seriously, are you kidding? How about day two of the Jim Molan debacle and News Corp wants to get him off the front pages.. so splash the woman and shame her, not Barnaby. Another black day for the Oz Press.
Well said, Susan!
I wonder if this ‘news’ would have affected the vote in new England at the recent by-election? What a bloody hypocrite…with his position on SSM, and worse, his overwhelming support for the ‘sanctity’ of heterosexual marriage.
Then again…maybe the sheeples don’t care… if it is one of their own, that’s alright then!!
Bernard Keane…you are sooooo wrong!!!!!!
Here, here!
his new partner should have gone to spec savers is all I can say.
his new partner should have gone to spec savers is all I can say.
Where, where?
Hear hear…
As Arthur Daley said about being tapped for jury duty, “If he’s one of our own, then it’s a ‘not guilty’, innit. But if it’s a perv in the dock, then it’s into the shovel and plenty of porridge”. So the predator calling himself a deputy PM gets to bore us silly with how incredibly hurt he is about his predations being revealed.
Meanwhile, the harassment of Susan Lamb continues (and may soon increase), and the clown car that this rag has become, has joined the dead trees in hand-waving that rampant hypocrisy too.
Either she’s not “one of our own”, or it’s “you tell on me, I tell on you”.
Or both.
The Canberra Press gallery are part of a cosy political club. So, to keep with the “in” crowd, apparently live by inconsistent, hippocritical rules.. et tu Mr Keane?
There are issues of character – sincerity, integrity which are important to voters, and are inevitably evidenced in private as well as public life.
In the case of Joyce, his conduct here is just what we have come to expect from him. The “farmer’s friend”, who preferably cavorts with some of the worst white collar crims in this country, is apparently even prepared to “cook the books” to assist them (irrigators).
So in response to this story, like all the others, we get the “naiive country bumpkin, really didn’t mean no harm” bull crap that we always get from him. Expect that his estranged wife, rather than being a victim, could have a field day with this.. good riddance to him, and good luck to her!
Whoa!
wasn’t there a big hoo-ha about some bosses having it off with members of their staff?
The perpetually Outraged Mob was up in arms about it and carting on fit to bust.
Then was there not endless pontification on media including the Drum with untolled “experts” spouting off about “correct” behavior in the workplace. Many workplaces having a ban on any relationships between staff members. With sacking an appropriate action if discovered.
Now, Just because it’s barmy Barney or some pollie it should be kept quiet! Give us a break!
No surprises the Murdoch rag wasn’t prepared to devote the front page to the scandals surrounding Cousin Jethro’s ministry of the Murray-Darling water management. That would require no debate on whether it’s in the public interest.