An independent review has exonerated Sarah Schwartz, the Human Rights Law Centre’s legal director and the Jewish Council of Australia executive officer, from allegations of antisemitism. These accusations were propagated by News Corp as part of a smear campaign dubbed “Dutton’s Jew” earlier this year. The review not only clears Schwartz but also points a critical finger at News Corp for its role in the controversy.
The controversy erupted last summer when Schwartz participated in a comedy debate on racism at a Queensland University of Technology (QUT) symposium. During her presentation, Schwartz discussed the historical exploitation of Jewish identity by powerful elites, using the example of Australian Jews being portrayed as unwavering supporters of Israel’s actions in Gaza. This portrayal was linked to then-opposition leader Peter Dutton’s rhetoric.
News Corp’s Role in the Controversy
News Corp seized upon Schwartz’s reference to “Dutton’s Jew” in her presentation, alleging antisemitism. This was a surprising accusation, given Schwartz’s history of being targeted by far-right antisemitic groups for her activism. The Australian and other Murdoch-owned outlets published numerous articles and opinion pieces, perpetuating the controversy and giving a platform to antisemitic tropes against Schwartz.
In response to the backlash, QUT Vice-Chancellor Margaret Sheil issued an apology for any “hurt and offence” caused, while federal Education Minister Jason Clare criticized QUT’s handling of the situation. However, the independent review has since dismantled these claims.
The Independent Review’s Findings
In February, QUT commissioned John Middleton, a former Federal Court judge and Australian Law Reform commissioner, to review the events surrounding the symposium. His findings, released recently, span 60 pages and focus on QUT’s role and policies. However, they also provide a scathing critique of News Corp’s actions.
“It was found the slides, when considered with the accompanying spoken words, were not antisemitic in nature nor were they offensive to those actually present at the debate. The intent of the presentations remained aligned with the university’s standards and the purpose of the debate.”
Middleton’s report further clarifies that News Corp took Schwartz’s presentation out of context. He notes that the slide in question was photographed and disseminated by News Corp without context, leading to misinterpretations.
“Ms Schwartz’s depiction of ‘Dutton’s Jew’ was not critical of Jewish people themselves, but of the way in which political figures may typecast Jewish identity to serve particular narratives.”
Implications and Reactions
The review highlights how media reports, particularly those by News Corp, fueled the controversy without providing the necessary context. This case is emblematic of what some describe as News Corp’s “holy wars,” where individuals challenging the company’s preferred narratives face intense scrutiny and criticism.
Rarely has such a campaign been so thoroughly dismantled by an independent review. While Middleton’s primary focus was on QUT’s actions, his findings underscore the fundamental flaws in the campaign against Schwartz. Notably, The Australian’s coverage of the review conspicuously omits any mention of News Corp’s role in the controversy.
This case serves as a reminder of the power dynamics at play in media narratives and the importance of context in public discourse. As the dust settles, the focus may now shift to how media outlets report on sensitive topics and the responsibility they bear in shaping public perception.
