But trust doesn’t clock on and off. And if the speeches are no longer interesting enough to be deemed reportable, that proves that the event itself should no longer exist.
Because if you can only have fun, or feel like an insider by knowing things the public isn’t supposed to know, then what is the point of journalism? What possible gain is there in prioritising inside jokes about journalists and politicians above public trust? Do we in the press gallery truly believe that it doesn’t damage our reputation as a whole by holding an invite-only event filled with the people we are supposed to be holding to account, or speaking truth to, filled with private conversations and dance floor selfies of jolly lobbyists and politicians?
Defenders of the event point to the money raised for charity, but the charity has become the pretence for the event itself. Putting aside that no one in the room will have thought to have asked why charity is providing a service government should probably be funding, money can be raised for worthy causes without a love-in with powerful vested interest groups, who want to be in the room because of the conversations and access it can provide – not just with the politicians, but with the journalists directly.
The event also directly sells access to politicians including the prime minister – a chance to play tennis with the PM is always a target for lobbyists and vested interests willing to pay for a more casual chat with the leader, with no risk of being overheard.
It’s a bad look, an outdated practice and it is only hastening distrust within media at a time where it is a much-needed commodity.
Because if we can’t differentiate ourselves in the media from those events we cover – the behind-closed-doors fundraisers, the cash-for-access events, and everything else that becomes a scandal arising from declared (or undeclared) events on the interest register, then what is it we are saying to the public?
No matter what the political ideology, or masthead, the running theme among those who are made to attend the ball by employers or “because it’s what is done” is that they hope to never have to attend one again. Mostly because it’s the worst of an awards night, a work dinner and an extended family wedding, all rolled into one.
Those who enjoy it tend to share an institutionalised mindset, where being seen is as important as where you are seen. But the price – public trust – is not one worth sacrificing. Especially now.
If journalists want to hold a journalist event, fine. But to pretend the Midwinter Ball does nothing to public perceptions of how close we are to the people we are supposed to be arms length from is as delusional as Angus Taylor’s ambitions to be prime minister.
Amy Remeikis is a contributing editor for The New Daily and chief political analyst for The Australia Institute
This piece was first published in The New Daily. Read original here.