Skip to content
Home » Updated correspondence with the Australian Press Council: Concerns over the Sydney Morning Herald’s journalism standards Re: APC 2024/0971 – final

Updated correspondence with the Australian Press Council: Concerns over the Sydney Morning Herald’s journalism standards Re: APC 2024/0971 – final

Previous correspondence 1, 2, 3, 4

Dear Mr Nangle,

I never said what Ms Daniella White’s “correction” claims.

Here is what I really said.

The refusal of the Sydney Morning Herald to publish a proper correction assists the current University of Sydney management in their attempts to cover up but the public deserves to know the facts.

The most important falsehood Ms Daniella White has published appears to go back to the report of a hired consultant which represents a prime example of circumlocution in my view. Our professorial Council had previously rejected this consultant.

Therefore, what the Sydney Morning Herald should have prioritised in their reporting is the fact that I have been targeted for whistleblowing on alleged management criminality, i.e., that I have acted in the public’s interest and in my democratically elected role as USAP President. How else would the public know?

The public is currently being misled, including by the Sydney Morning Herald’s reporting, and your Council’s inaction is indirectly supporting that. The attempt to silence me as a witness by making me lose my income and my job is the ultimate attempt of management to cover up.

You can see from the report that It has been confirmed that money changed hands but the reasons are kept secret by management and a massive cover-up involving four consulting firms was organised. Can you imagine the waste of taxpayers’ and students’ money, and can you imagine why this was done?

It is the duty of professors to stand up and state the truth. That’s where the title name comes from. Thus, our professoriate organisations will continue to expose the failures of our broken higher education system until it is fixed. Currently, managers without relevant backgrounds are allowed to dictate academic policies and politicians are looking away because they don’t care or because they benefit from the situation. But no business or institution can sustain itself under such inverted leadership.

To rectify this situation, there needs to be a correction of the Universities Accord, prioritising academic values and principles. This is crucial for society’s sake, particularly in addressing pressing issues like A.I. Time is of the essence.

I am aware that your organisation is considered to have no real means to rectify a commercial publishers’ reporting so I still thank you for your effort.

The factual truth matters; opinions are secondary.

Kind regards,

Manuel

Professor Manuel B. Graeber MD PhD FRCPath
President, University of Sydney Association of Professors (USAP)
Vice-President, Australian Association of University Professor (AAUP)

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 07:37:10 you wrote:

> Dear Mr Graeber,

>

> Re: Sydney Morning Herald article “Whistleblower professor accused of

> ‘serious misconduct’ sues Sydney Uni”, (Online) 17 April 2024

>

> We refer to your complaint received on 6 May 2024 and subsequent

> correspondence concerning the above article.

>

> After further consideration of your complaint, it has been decided not to

> proceed further. As previously noted, the article is based on a report of

> Court proceedings and in our view, the publication has taken reasonable

> steps to accurately and fairly reflect those proceedings. In relation to

> this, we note that the article reports that you “rejected all the

> allegations of serious misconduct made by the university in its defence”.

> We also note that the article has been amended and now reports:

>

> Professor Manuel Graeber, a leading neuropathologist who was the

> university’s Barnet-Cropper chair of brain tumour research, says he was

> sacked because he made serious allegations about university management on

> behalf of a colleague.

>

> We also note that in addition to the above amendment, the publication added

> the following clarification to the article:

>

> CLARIFICATION – This story has been updated to make it clear Professor

> Graeber’s complaint was on behalf of a colleague.

>

> We consider the publication’s amendment to the article and the associated

> clarification is a sufficient remedy. As your complaint will not be

> referred to the Council’s Adjudication Panel for any further consideration,

> this file will be closed.

>

> Kind regards,

>

>

> Paul Nangle

> Director of Complaints

>

> [cid:image001.png@01DAD6DD.CF15CD80]

>

> Australian Press Council Inc

> PO Box 1014, North Sydney 2059

> T 02 9261 1930

> www.presscouncil.org.au<http://www.presscouncil.org.au/>