Untitled attachment

Notices where this attachment appears

1. Embed this notice
   lucie digitální (luciedigitalni@aus.social)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Mar-2026 12:00:48 JST lucie digitální

   https://www.crikey.com.au/2026/03/31/israel-ambassador-speech-hillel-newman-national-press-club/

   Cancelling Israel ambassador Hillel Newman’s speech isn’t the answer

   The instinct to cancel is a pervasive one. But that doesn’t make it right.

   Michael Bradley 31 March 2026

   Today, the National Press Club is hosting Hillel Newman, the recently installed ambassador to Australia from Israel, as its special guest. His speech will be broadcast by the ABC.

   On social media, there have been widespread expressions of outrage and calls for Newman to be cancelled. The NPC’s board has been told it should resign. Some of these calls have come from journalists I admire greatly and with whom I would be surprised to find myself disagreeing, but on this point I do.

   In fairness, here’s the case against the NPC. It has three parts. First, Israel has been targeting and killing journalists in Gaza and now Lebanon since 2023, with the death toll now well over 250. As Nick Feik put it in an open letter to the NPC, “What sort of a press club welcomes murderers of journalists?”

   Second, there is Newman’s position as representative of a state that has flagrantly committed international crimes, is engaged in illegal invasions of Iran and Lebanon while continuing to ramp up its settlements program in the West Bank, and just overnight passed a new law that targets Palestinians alone for judicial execution. Why, as Greg Jericho posted, is the NPC “giving a voice to this murderous regime?”

   Finally, Newman himself has made controversial statements that downplay or deny the reality of Israel’s actions and assert that the United Nations has no legitimacy, the argument being that he does not deserve to be platformed as he is a propagandist.

   I posted a counter-argument: that Newman should be allowed to speak, but that he should be asked extremely awkward questions about his own words and the actions of the state he represents, and that he is not entitled to politeness. Part of the response I received was: sure, good in theory, but our media won’t ask him hard questions because they’re all captive to the pro-Israel lobby and terrified of being Segaled.

   These are all valid arguments, but I have a different view.

   The instinct to cancel is a pervasive one. It derives from a sense of powerlessness, that the deck is stacked. Two complicating factors deserve unpacking here. One is that it’s true: the deck is stacked; the public space is overwhelmed by voices who — consciously or unconsciously — say words Israel would like to hear. This imbalance is by design. It’s critical that we recognise that and don’t reflexively fall into the trap it sets.

   1/2 #AusPol