Spotlight on: Sarah Dingle
“What we’re seeing is that community attitudes need to shift, and are shifting at every level, but not fast enough,” says the 2019 Our Watch Award-winner.
Our Watch Award
Sarah Dingle and the Background Briefing Team, Radio National, ABC, “Australia On Trial”
Sarah Dingle was the reporter for Background Briefing on “Australia on Trial”, a package of three stories that won the 2019 Our Watch Award: Carers Who Kill, Slavery in the Suburbs and Murder on Trial.
The judges said: “Sarah Dingle’s portfolio paints a picture of an Australia riven by a crisis of violence against the most vulnerable. Each report would have been a worthy entry but together, her programs on dowry abuse and sexual slavery; on the flaws in our legal processes which led to the conviction of a Sudanese-Australian woman; and the devastating revelation that one person with a disability is murdered by their carer every three months reveal the threads which are the drivers of violence in this country. Most heartbreakingly, Dingle reveals what she describes as a national epidemic of the justification of domestic violence by carers. Among other impacts, the story about dowry abuse precipitated a Parliamentary Committee report; and her program ‘Carers Who Kill’ highlighted the need for the Disability Royal Commission to include abuse in the community, not just in institutions. That is now included in the commission’s terms of reference.”
We chatted with Sarah about how the stories came about, and the intensive editorial process at Background Briefing, and the best Aussie podcast you should be listening to.
How did you find these three stories?
In three different ways!
The “Carers who Kill” story came about immediately in the aftermath of the Margaret River shooting. My editor and I were watching the news roll in of this horrific incident thinking, ‘we need to do something on this which will still be relevant in six weeks’ time’, because that was our production schedule at that particular time. What could we do that would go beyond the news and be something that people need to listen to?
I started looking into it, and I realised that the family weren’t hugely well known in Margaret River, because they were relatively new arrivals. But there was autism in the family. And then I realised that as that became known, the way people spoke about these deaths changed. In online forums, people were speaking differently. At first, it was all like, pure tragedy, and then it became more along the lines of “oh, you can understand why he did it”.
The man who was believed to be the killer was being described in glowing terms, as a wonderful, family-oriented guy. And it bothered me and I know it bothered other sections of the media. We saw some really great op-eds published in the days that followed on how, where domestic violence, including fatal domestic violence takes place, we try to excuse the usually male perpetrator by describing him as a wonderful family man, which has terrible irony to it. And so those pieces were published, that was good, but there was no one also looking at the intersecting elements of ableism which were going on.
The more I looked at it the more I thought, I’m sure this has happened before. So I started digging into past newspaper accounts of people with disabilities who had been killed by their carers, usually their family members in this country. And there was a pattern of excusing what had happened by saying it was a mercy killing. Or that the killer was driven to do it. That this person with a disability was such a burden that there was a logical and understandable response.
There hasn’t been a great awareness of the way we think and speak about these things in Australia, but there has been a little bit of work done in the States. So I uncovered a research paper put together by a father of a child with disabilities in the States, who is in the interesting position of both being part of the world of people with disabilities, but also the carer world.
He found that one person with disabilities was killed I think every week in the States by a carer. And it was routinely excused in the way people discussed it in the media, in the language used by authority figures.
From that we decided to make our own statistics. Because Australia doesn’t even collect any national statistics on violence toward people with disabilities, let alone drill down in to those numbers to discover what violence is committed by carers, in what scenarios, there’s none of that.
We decided to look at the last 15 or so years. We’re not a police department, we’re a bunch of journalists, we had the time we had.
But we looked at the last 15 years, and from that we were able to say from our research that a person with disabilities was killed by their carer — so not a paid person, but a family member or a friend — almost every three months in Australia. That was just absolutely appalling.
For “Slavery in the Suburbs”: dowry abuse was just something that I had been interested in as a topic for a while, and then I realised that there were a few things happening. At a federal level, there was the inquiry that was due to report soon, and there had been a recent law change in Victoria. I wanted to know what gaps were occurring in federal policy that would allow this to happen and broaden that out beyond Victoria, where most of the reporting had taken place.
So from there I got in touch with various people including in Queensland, Jatinder Kaur who does a lot of work with victims of dowry abuse up there. It was a real issue in Brisbane. She had set up a DV refuge specifically for women from a South Continental background, because it had to be a culture-specific DV refuge which is actually quite important. And it was already full. And that there was a police unit specifically looking at these issues within Brisbane Police.
Finally, the Boronika story. [“Murder on Trial”]. There was a piece in The Age about the court case, Boronika’s murder trial, which first got us onto that story. We realised there was more research that could be done. The court case itself was fascinating. Just reading through the transcripts of the committal hearing, and then the trial, you didn’t really understand why she had been convicted of murder in the first place. Because the evidence just didn’t seem to push it over the line beyond reasonable doubt. In some cases fell far short of that.
We were also able to dig up a whole bunch of stuff that hadn’t been heard in court. We uncovered, for instance, a subsequent conviction by Boronika’s ex-boyfriend for an extremely violent assault, which had some of the same hallmarks as the murder. We were able to talk about Boronika’s relationship with her ex-boyfriend, which was violent, and interview a woman who was witness to an extremely violent episode of domestic assault and made a statement to the police at the time.
We also got in touch with the family of the victim to see if they would be happy to be involved in the storey. And ultimately, they came down on the side of no, which I absolutely respect that decision. But I wanted to also talk a bit more about Boronika’s relationship with the victim, because all accounts they were actually very good friends, the best of friends.
What did it take to get this story up?
BB works to a reasonably tight schedule. Six weeks doesn’t sound tight, but you have to deliver something to fill 40 minutes; you can’t just make that up on the spot. It’s led by the reporter up until the final two production weeks, when everyone really pitches in and it goes through this incredibly intensive editorial process. There are three different run-throughs. You really hone what you want to say and, particularly in my case, you slash and burn, because I tend to overwrite.
In terms of risks, it’s good to get the lawyers involved as early as possible, before you go out, so that you can know what issues you’re dealing with and manage them. We always bring the lawyers in in those final two production weeks as well. Because talking to them before you go out is very different to what you actually want to say in the wash up.
Can you tell us about the team at Background Briefing and what they brought to the stories?
In terms of editorial leadership, BB’s executive producer is Alice Brennan who’s very, very energetic and very clear in what she wants from a story. She calls them her macros, her overall direction. Her offsider Ali Russell is also extremely involved in the editorial process. And she’s the one who will go through with you line by line and really push you on every single word you want to use and say “is this a problem legally? Is that really what you mean? Can we phrase this differently?”
So between them you go through this extremely intense process. It’s sort of like being in a car wash for two weeks.
Four Corners does a similar, highly intensive series of run throughs. It really pushes you to your limits as a journalist.
Our technical producer is Leila Shunnar, she’s wonderful. She does the fine mixing, the scene setting, selection of audio, she works extremely hard. She just makes it sing. There’s such a tangible difference between something that’s been made for BB. The quality of sound, it’s so crystal clear, it’s beautiful.
Our researchers also really get put through their paces in last two weeks. We no longer have a digital producer, but when we did they’d also get involved in the last two weeks in creating any online extras.
What impact did the story have?
In terms of impact, I thought what I was doing was important, but I didn’t realise that “Carers Who Kill” would touch such a nerve. There was a really, really strong response from both people who have disabilities and people who are not from that community. A day after it was aired there was a Q&A special on disability, and my story was quoted line for line.
And then after years of lobbying the federal government finally agreed to hold a royal commission into violence, abuse and neglect towards people with disabilities. The [Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse] did not explicitly did not do this, but they included in instances of violence, abuse, neglect, etc in the community. Which is a really big deal, because if people are dying in the community, and a lot of this is being perpetrated in the community, it really sends a message if you say that only the stuff that happened in institutions perpetrated by paid workers matters.
I think what we’re seeing is that community attitudes need to shift, and are shifting at every level, but not fast enough.
What made you want to be a journalist?
To be honest I always wanted to write a book, and then around about my mid teens I thought that would be too much effort!
I just liked it. I wrote for the school paper, and I liked the process, and writing things and the satisfaction, the hit of people reading it and going “I really like that”, or “that was interesting”. The feedback you get when you’re a journalist is so wonderful. Usually. I just always had an inclination, I guess.
What are you most proud of about the stories you’ve told?
There’s not one thing. I guess I’m proud of the fact that people listen to them. Which sounds like a low bar but really, when you’re a journalist, a lot of the time it’s just 99% perspiration 1% fun. You feel like you’re slogging away. And to know people actually consume your work and it helps inform them or change their minds on something, or tells them about things that are important to them, that’s very rewarding.
What’s your message to Australians about why quality journalism needs their support?
Because journalism connects us. And without it we’re just a bunch of isolated individuals and groups.
It really connects us across all levels of society and that is hugely important, not just to inform us, but to keep us together as a society. We need to have a sense of who we are as human beings, as Australians. What’s happening in our country, where we want to take things.
Anything else you’d like to add?
Just to say that the BB team is really great. They put in a lot of hours and it doesn’t always get recognised but they really drive that program. And in fact Background Briefing won a lot at the Mid-Year Celebration, and that 100% is the result of the team and the editorial leadership.
Alice has really pushed the narrative voice since she arrived. She’s tried to get us away from the whole “voice of god” style and I think it’s had a massive impact
I think people don’t realise often that Background Briefing is the Four Corners of radio. When people my age ask “What new podcast should I listen to?”, they’ve listened to This American Life and Serial… Oh, my God. There is this amazing Australian-made, Australian-focused, cutting edge show. And every single week, they put out a new 40 minute investigation. You need to make room for it!
Sarah Dingle is a dual Walkley Award-winning investigative reporter and presenter with the ABC, working across radio and TV current affairs. She considers herself an unapologetic generalist, conducting investigations on everything from indigenous affairs and human rights to defence and sport. Her work has also won UN Media Peace Prizes, Amnesty Media Prizes, the Voiceless Media Prize, and the Australian College of Educators Media prize. Her radio documentaries for the ABC’s Background Briefing have been recognised by the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Australian Sports Commission Awards and the National Press Club. In 2010 she was the ABC’s Andrew Olle Scholar.
Follow Sarah on Twitter: @sarahdingle_
Follow Background Briefing on Twitter: @BackgroundBrief
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault, family or domestic violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit www.1800RESPECT.org.au. In an emergency, call 000/
ABOUT OUR WATCH
Our Watch leads Australia’s work to stop violence against women and their children before it starts. The organisation was created to drive nation-wide change in the practices, norms and structures that lead to violence against women and children.
To access guides for reporting about violence against women and their children, visit: www.mediamakingchange.org.au
The Our Watch Award is supported by The Australian Department of Communications and the Arts.
