Alan Sunderland

The ABC has quietly released a review into “analysis and opinion” — five months after a piece by economics correspondent Emma Alberici was pulled for not meeting editorial standards.

The review, from editorial director Alan Sunderland, was prompted by Alberici’s analysis of corporate tax, which management said immediately had breached impartiality standards, and which was confirmed by an investigation by the complaints division.

The ABC produces several pieces of analysis and opinion each day, clearly marked and often linked to on the ABC News homepage.

“Written analysis is a growing area of output for the ABC, as we respond to audience needs by offering content on new platforms and in news ways,” Sunderland wrote in the review.

As part of the review, Sunderland looked at 10 pieces of opinion or analysis published in recent months, and measured whether they met key editorial requirements: based on evidence, assists with understanding an issue, considers an appropriate range of perspectives; and the tone is explanatory and reasoned.

Sunderland didn’t find any of the pieces he considered to have breached the ABC’s editorial policies, but he did have some issues with pieces that were too “judgemental” in tone. One piece from Paul Kennedy about the response of the Catholic Church to child sexual abuse claims had used language and a tone that were too judgemental, Sunderland said:

In many of the cases highlighted … the judgemental adjective (merciless, ruthless, outrageous) could have been omitted or the way of describing an institution or event modified (the tactic rather than the intimidation, the assets rather than the cities of riches) to ensure the focus remained on the power of the information being presented rather than any sense that the author was prosecuting a particular view.

The tone and language used in a piece by Ian Verrender — the editor who had reviewed Alberici’s original piece for before it was published — was also mildly criticised in the review. Writing about the need for a Royal Commission into banking shortly before it was announced, Verrender outlined why it might be necessary. Sunderland found that while it met editorial standards, it was “littered with highly judgemental language”:

The strong tone and excessive language of this piece does entail some perception problems and would have been better without it, but at its heart the piece relies on a fair analysis of the overwhelming weight of evidence in order to perform its primary function, which is to remind readers of the history leading up to and justifying what would turn out to be an inevitable Royal Commission.

Managing director Michelle Guthrie contributed a comment to the review, saying it was essential that analysis was “impartial and in line with the ABC’s integrity and independence”.

“This is an important and timely review in view of recent discussions about whether ABC journalists should be providing opinions (and I clearly agree with Alan’s conclusion that they should not) and what is analysis and how do we ensure if doesn’t stray into the perception that it is opinion,” she said.

The ABC regularly conducts content reviews, which look at how what the ABC is producing measures up to the editorial standards.