An attack piece in the SMH and AGE against David Koch is misleading and biased.
You can watch the McKnight Tonight editorial on this subject in the video player below:
The former host of Sunrise, David Koch, has thrown the Logies into turmoil after ranting on social media about his former show not receiving any nominations.
Next to a screenshot of the nominations for ‘The Ray Martin Award for Most Popular News or Public Presenter, Kochie noted that both the hosts of the Today show were nominated, but not the high-rating hosts of the Channel 7 breakfast show.
Kochie then laid it out, saying:
A couple of facts you may have missed;
. Sunrise has won every single day this year.
. Sunrise is averaging 424,000 viewers daily (+4% you*) while Today is averaging 308,000 (-3% yoy).
*he meant yoy (year on year)
This has been going on for years.
If you ever complain you’re seen as a bad sport.
But now I’m out of it I can say @tvweeklogiesawards @tvweekmag honestly WTF?
Seems like a good point to me – but Nine Newspapers were having none of it with an opinion piece in the SMH and Age by Louise Rugendyke calling out Kochie and Seven – telling them to get their facts straight.
And the hypocrisy here is wonderful.
Rugendyke writes:
The Logies are a popularity contest. Ratings have very little to do with nominations, as they were removed as part of the voting requirement this year in an attempt to create a fairer playing field for the broadcasters with a smaller audience and for streamers who were unable or unwilling to supply audience data.
Judges, who are made up of industry experts, were instead asked to consider the nominees on selection criteria and “audience engagement”, which is not based on data, more of a vibe.
There’s just one problem.
In the news category, ratings data IS supplied and is a factor when giving your score.
I should know – I was a judge.
Then comes this pearler:
That change has worked, as across the “best” categories, there is now a broader selection of shows and new faces nominated across all streamers and broadcasters. SBS, which traditionally has the smallest free-to-air audience, saw its nominations increase, from two in 2025, to eight this year.
So, just because Sunrise is winning the ratings, doesn’t mean it’s considered the “best”. Sure, people are watching, but are they invested enough to vote? Are the presenters just doing their job, or do they have a broader story to tell that will engage viewers and voters?
Ummm, this shortlist of nominations has nothing to do with a public vote.
The networks put forward their people and the judges award points, which ultimately gives us the final nominees that go to the public vote.
And let’s be clear, for all of her talking about the ‘best’ category and the justification, Kochie wasn’t talking about a ‘best’ category.
His post specifically included a shot of a category labelled MOST POPULAR.
So, there goes that argument.
But this next part is possibly the part that needs the biggest fact check of all:
If we were using Today hosts Karl Stefanovic and Sarah Abo – who were also nominated in the categories Koch complained about – as an example, you have two hosts with a story to tell. Stefanovic’s problematic shift to the right, and his presence across TV, radio and podcasts, has obviously engaged a new audience; while Abo’s fertility struggles and pregnancy announcement earlier this year is a feel-good story that resonates.
None of that applies here.
The submissions from the networks don’t include all that guff – they put in submissions showcasing their presenters.
And let me tell you – the submissions from the Today Show in this category were terrible.
There was no focus on the person being submitted, just a montage of the Bondi massacre episode.
I have no idea who the other judges were, but I just can’t believe they actually watched the submissions. I think they skimmed through and just chose people they liked.
All those things the journalist talks about might be why the public chooses to vote the way they vote, but it had nothing to do with the final nomination process.
I usually don’t go down the conspiracy theory side that someone employed by Nine is out to discredit Sevens complaints, but with the amount of inaccuracies in this story, it’s hard to think otherwise.
