by 
I’ve just been reading an article posted to the Sydney Morning Herald website today which I have reproduced below. It focuses on the ABC Childcare forum which has been created as part of the company’s efforts to resurect its image after its recent trials and tribulations.
It’s worth visiting the site for a look, click here to visit the forum, it is well set out and easy to use. Let’s have a look at how the SMH chose to report what might have been a good news story. ‘Child Care provider opens up to listen to users?’ ‘ABC determined to give its parents a say?’ No, the headline they chose was ‘ABC Learning forum draws parent anger’. Looking at the headline I assumed that this was an article about parents being angry that there is a forum – perhaps there were child protection issues I wondered? Wrong again. The article is headed in this way because apparently the site has been ‘swamped with complaints from parents’.
I went to the site to see this swamping with complaints. Since being set up, I think in February judging by the dates of comments on the site, the forum has had 54 comments. Hardly a deluge! Of these comments most seemed to be overwhelmingly positive (in fact I have a sneaking suspicion that the PR department might have had a hand in a few which is alluded to at the end of the article and might have made a real story). There are some complaints about fee structures but nothing to justify this article or its headline.
Why take this angle? Perhaps it’s just that conflict makes a story. It’s sad really. We have seen this before. When Newcastle Council exhibited their management plan with us the local paper ran an article that failed to give readers encouragement to express their views, didn’t tell people where to go to have a say but took 3 comments criticising Council and made a story out of the criticism.
This sort of criticism can be read in the chat areas of any of these newspapers own websites on a daily basis and that’s apparently not a story. It can be picked up in the letters page of any paper – also not a story, or reporters can talk to real people who will have criticisms – not a story.
BUT when an organisation invites criticism and comment as part of improving their service the media somehow sees this as something to attack and to discourage.
Maybe there’s more to this? Could it be that online engagement is a threat to the newspapers? Do they so value their role as the filter through which we express our views that they want to actively discourage direct online engagement? Great conspiray theory! Or is this just lazy journalism? Generally I like the work of Kerry-Anne Walsh so this was disappointing to say the least. There is actually a very real story here about businesses and government starting to engage the community directly using new technology.
I’d be interested in people’s views.
ABC Learning forum draws parent anger
Kerry-Anne Walsh Political Correspondent
April 19, 2009A NEW website launched by the embattled child-care provider ABC Learning to help restore its battered image has been swamped with complaints from parents.
When the site opened for business on Friday, a string of unfavourable comments about fee structures at the child-care centres dominated the early posts.
“Why should I be paying for a public holiday … since the centre is not open on the day, the staff are not there, there are no expenses in as far as meals, cleaning, etc.,” wrote one dissatisfied customer.
A sacked worker used the forum to air her grievances. “The director never told me I have no work. She just never rang me any more.”
ABC Learning, which is behind the biggest collapse of child-care centres in Australia, launched the’Childcare Chat website to open a dialogue about its services, the group’s national operations manager, Nikki Miers, said. “You can consider this forum the first step in opening our doors and sharing an honest conversation with you.”
The ABC group, formerly owned by disgraced businessman Eddie Groves, went into receivership in November with debts of $1.5 billion. The Government’s $58 million intervention in the failed group has resulted in 77 closures, with eight centres still under review.
Education Minister Julia Gillard announced the final round of closures last week, with 19 centres across NSW, Victoria and Western Australia winding up next month.
Buyers have been found for 210 of the 214 unviable centres. More than 700 centres remain in business while they are prepared for sale.
In a video on the Childcare Chat website, Ms Miers said any suggestions, videos or ideas posted on the site would be “uninfluenced” by the company.
Two videos posted on Friday were full of praise for ABC Learning. In one, a South Australian woman called Natalie referred to notes she clutched in one hand.
This work by Bang the Table Pty Ltd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License.
Hi Matt
You are spot on here. I am part of the team at DP Dialogue who worked with ABC to develop the site. We believe this article was way out of line. Not only were ABC given no right of reply, the insinuation that ABC told forum members to write positive reviews is incorrect. We did approach some parents who we have had previous contact with to start the conversation about their childcare experiences (the good and the bad). However, in no way did we tell them what to say or how to say it. We are keeping this forum open and honest (as you can no doubt already tell with a diverse range of opinions). All this could have been clarified with a call to ABC’s PR representative for a more balanced and informed article. Good work on questioning it.
Regards,
Nathan
Great article, good coverage.
SMH are trying beat up a new angle on an story that’s seen many cycles. It’s great to see ABC airing out its laundry.
my kids at an ABC center. The people are great. Social Media is not the place for pro or con. It’s a monumental balls-up, and most of the parents are already in a network (or at work). Silly SMH.