ABC caught editing Trump, then declares it didn't - Judge for yourself!

It looks like what began as a simple piece of media criticism has now morphed into a full-blown feud. Chris Kenny from Sky News has been on the ABC’s radar for years, but this latest episode has the distinct flavour of something personal. And judging by the ABC’s response, they aren’t backing down. In fact, they seem determined to dig in deeper.

The spark this time came from overseas.
Two BBC employees were fired after it was discovered that they had doctored Donald Trump’s comments during the Capitol events — selectively editing his speech to make it appear as though he was inciting violence. The BBC acted swiftly and decisively, recognising that once trust is lost, a news organisation has little left to stand on.

Chris Kenny reported on this and, quite reasonably, pointed out that the ABC had done something strikingly similar with Trump’s remarks during its own coverage in 2021. Their edit removed his explicit call for protesters to remain peaceful, subtly but significantly reframing his speech to fit the “incitement” narrative. The ABC’s clip, once uploaded, was widely shared, further entrenching the misrepresentation.

Yet, unlike the BBC, the ABC took no corrective action.
No staff suspended, no internal review announced, no apology issued.
Instead, they doubled down.

The ABC’s official line?
That their edit was “contextually appropriate” and did not mislead viewers.

In other words: Nothing to see here, move along.

Kenny, unsurprisingly, didn’t let that go. And here’s where the feud flares into the open. As soon as he highlighted the ABC’s inconsistency — and compared it to the BBC’s willingness to clean house — the ABC responded not with introspection, but with hostility. Kenny was accused of “attacking journalists”, “undermining trust in public broadcasting”, and of course, the familiar fallback: “right-wing outrage”.

But the core issue is not left vs right.
It’s not even Kenny vs the ABC.

It is accountability.

The BBC recognised that editing a politician’s speech in a way that alters its meaning is not journalism — it’s activism. And activism masquerading as news corrodes trust faster than any partisan commentator ever could.

The ABC, however, seems determined to cling to the belief that because it is the ABC — taxpayer-funded, self-anointed, institutionally righteous — it cannot possibly be guilty of the same sins it routinely condemns in others. This reflexive defensiveness reveals something deeper: the national broadcaster has become unable to admit error, even when the evidence is plain.

And that, ironically, proves Kenny’s point better than any Sky News segment ever could.

The ABC’s feud with Kenny is no longer about Trump, or an edited clip, or even a matter of professional standards. It has become a test — a mirror held up to the ABC’s claim of impartiality. And instead of facing what it sees, the ABC is choosing to attack the person holding the mirror.

If the BBC can sack staff for misleading editing, why can’t the ABC even acknowledge it happened?
Why is media accountability applauded when imposed on foreign broadcasters, but treated as an attack when applied at home?

These are uncomfortable questions for Aunty — and perhaps that’s why she’s so eager to shoot the messenger.

In the end, this story isn’t about Chris Kenny at all.
It’s about an institution that has grown so insulated, so convinced of its own virtue, that criticism no longer prompts reflection — only retaliation.

And that, sadly, is far more alarming than any Trump clip could ever be.