Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article examines the tensions between ‘publicness’ and ‘privacy’ in national commissions of inquiry. Through the insights of those who worked deep inside Australia's landmark Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (RCIRCSA, 2013–2017), and the evidence provided in its final report, we explore the organisational and media logics of the Commission's highly publicised public hearings, and the ‘quiet’ institutional listening practices of its private sessions and engagement with marginalised communities. Royal Commissions are an important mechanism for raising awareness of past crimes on the public agenda. Our research finds that while the revelatory outcomes of the RCIRCSA have been well documented, its private sessions, engagement and research are less well understood. We argue ‘publicness’ is a relatively unchallenged good that is enacted through news media and the royal commission process, but media logics can limit their capacity to address the ongoing causes and impacts of child sexual abuse against the most impacted children. Participants reflected on the media logics that drove strategic decisions to ‘make public’ some cases and institutions, while others remained in the Commission's private realm. The article concludes that the confidential sharing of evidence has been undervalued in inquiry media studies that often centre the journalists’ role in uncovering and publicly revealing previously unheard stories. Drawing on international comparisons we find that while quiet listening risks negating the opportunity to amplify experience, it may also counter the potential silencing effects of unwanted public media scrutiny and protect potential witnesses from further harm.
McCallum et al. (Tue,) studied this question.