When the Commonwealth Bank posted a $10.9 billion annual profit, the reaction on the ABC news was predictably hostile. On this Garage edition of the Court of Public Opinion, Jeremy Cordeaux watched people being invited to condemn the result, and asked the question he felt nobody at the national broadcaster had thought through: what, exactly, do you want instead?
The Profit And The Outrage
The figure was certainly large. The Commonwealth Bank, Jeremy noted, reported a profit of $10.9 billion for the year. Watching the ABC’s coverage, he saw people wheeled out to criticise it, the profit treated as scandalous in itself.
Jeremy’s reaction was disbelief. What, he asked, do people really want? The question was not rhetorical. He genuinely wanted to know what the critics imagined the alternative to a profitable bank looked like.
The Alternative Is A Meltdown
Because the alternative, Jeremy argued, is a disaster. Do you want banks losing money? he asked. You want profitable banks. If you have banks losing money, you have an economic meltdown. A banking system in the red is not a win for the little guy; it is the start of a financial crisis that hurts everyone.
The logic, to Jeremy, was elementary. Banks cannot lend money if they do not make money, and lending is what keeps households buying homes and businesses employing people. Presumably, he added, the more they make, the more they have to lend. A strong, profitable bank is a feature of a healthy economy, not a flaw.
The ABC Gets It Wrong
What frustrated Jeremy was that the national broadcaster, in his view, lacked the smarts to work this out. Rather than explain why bank profitability matters to ordinary people, the coverage simply stoked outrage, standing people in the street to complain about a number stripped of any context.
He offered a better question for those same vox pops: do you want banks to lose money? Put that way, he argued, most people would grasp the point at once. The framing the ABC chose, in his telling, generated heat without light, feeding resentment rather than understanding.
Understanding Beats Outrage
For Jeremy, the episode was a small case study in how the media can mislead simply by choosing the wrong angle. A bank profit can be cast as greed, or explained as the sign of a functioning financial system. The facts are identical; the framing is everything.
His argument was not that banks are beyond criticism, but that criticism should be informed. A profitable banking sector, he insisted, is something to want, not to resent, and a broadcaster funded by the public ought to be capable of explaining why, rather than simply fanning the anger.
Listen To The Full Episode
Catch the complete Garage edition of The Court of Public Opinion, recorded live around the dining room table.
Watch The Full Episode
The Court of Public Opinion streams live every Friday from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. (ACST), right here at jeremycordeaux.com. Download the podcast anytime on your favourite podcast app, and join the conversation with your calls and comments.
