‘Inaccurate’: ACMA raps Four Corners over cotton fire coverage

Nathan Jolly

March 30, 2026 11:23

‘Inaccurate’: ACMA raps Four Corners over cotton fire coverage

Four Corners reporter Angus Grigg presented the offending program

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has found an episode of Four Corners has fallen foul of the ABC’s code of practice.

The Four Corners episode Water Grab was aired in August 2024, and was found to have breached the “accuracy and impartiality provisions” in the code.

ACMA said the program, which examined the role of the Northern Territory government in facilitating water licenses for the growing of cotton, “inaccurately conveyed” that the operators of Claravale pastoral station illegally used fire to clear land for cotton production without approval.

The watchdog found the ABC did not have evidence to “make this assertion and did not make reasonable efforts to verify it”.

ACMA Chair Nerida O’Loughlin said in the ruling the ABC “should have stopped to consider whether it had sufficient supporting evidence to include the statement about the fire”.

“This type of assertion can have a significant adverse effect on the reputations of those involved, so reasonable efforts must be made to ensure any claims are accurate and presented in context.”

The ABC’s submission to ACMA claims it “phoned and sought email responses from the manager and owners of Claravale but did not receive a reply”, and this constitutes reasonable efforts to verify. It also cited “the history of cotton growing on the property, the application to clear land and the lack of any plausible alternative explanation” as factors that led to “the conclusion that the fire was likely related to preparation for agriculture”.

O’Loughlin said: “Australians expect rigorous, fair and factual reporting on complex and contested public issues. Our view is that parts of the program did not meet the ABC’s own standards for accuracy and impartiality.”

In a statement published to the ABC website, the broadcaster wrote: “The ABC accepts that the statement should have been qualified but does not accept that the statement has been shown to be inaccurate.”

ACMA also found the episode breached the ABC’s obligations to present a range of viewpoints by favouring the perspectives of two environmental scientists, and its “omissions of credible, alternative scientific perspectives [which] limited the audience’s ability to weigh competing evidence”.

The ABC has promised to increase its accuracy and impartiality training for news journalists, and will develop advanced training for managers of investigations.