AVROTROS has broken ties with podcast maker Rebecca van der Weijde, becauseshe made a critical podcast series about a broadcast of Oplichting!, a programof AVROTROS. Her employer Podworkz also received no more assignments afterthat. Van der Weijde accuses AVROTROS of abuse of power. “A good workingrelationship of ten years has been completely destroyed,” she explains toVillamedia.
Last modified: December 28, 2022, 12:20 PM
The podcast series, which was commissioned by Kosmos publishers, delved intothe misty world of stray dog foundations in Curaçao and also included thecontroversial broadcast of Scammed! (November 26, 2019).
In this broadcast, television personality Rossana Kluivert was accused ofraising donations for a dog shelter in Curaçao under false pretenses. Thefoundation would not file annual accounts and would have left ambiguitiesabout the existence of the asylum center.
Immediately after the broadcast, there was a fuss about the suggestive tone ofthe broadcast. Peter R. de Vries and John van den Heuvel, among others, stoodup for Rossana Kluivert. mr. Royce de Vries filed a case against AVROTROS onbehalf of Kluivert. De Vries junior demanded, among other things, that thebroadcast be taken offline. The judge did not agree with that request.
” The Kluiverts have nothing to do with that” Nevertheless, Van der Weijde, who also made several podcasts for AVROTROS,once again delved into the dog shelter issue in a six-part series on behalf ofKosmos: DogMob. For completeness; Kosmos and the Kluivert family have workedtogether in the past. The publisher published a cookbook by son ShaneKluivert.
‘It was our initiative to make the series, the Kluiverts have nothing to dowith that,’ says Melanie Zwartjes, publisher at Kosmos.
Van der Weijde says she was given complete freedom to conduct her research.She traveled to Curaçao and came up with evidence that Kluivert had not doneso much wrong.
She was given access to documents that showed that the most critical source inthe Scammed! broadcast had transferred donations to her own private account.
In addition, Van der Weijde found invoices for vaccinations and payments forthe construction of a shelter. So that dogs were indeed saved.
AVROTROS: Insufficient rebuttal Van der Weijde asked whether Scammed! had been wrong-footed by a resentful ex-business partner.
AVROTROS did not agree with this approach. The broadcaster claimed thatinsufficient rebuttal had been committed after the first four episodes hadappeared online. The broadcaster also doubted Van der Weijde’s independence,as she was paid by Kosmos.
Van der Weijde then talked to media director Bart Barnas, responsible for thecontroversial broadcast at AVROTROS.
The director of broadcasting demanded that the first four episodes be takenoffline, as he felt that the side of Scammed! was missing and there would befactual inaccuracies in the series.
Barnas, who had not listened to the episodes himself, stated in a response toVillamedia that he was surprised at Van der Weijde’s working method.
‘She worked at the AVRO in a place where she sat fifty meters next to thecreators of Scammed. So she knew the makers well. She could have easilyredressed, but she didn’t say anything during production,” Barnas claims.
‘ Unjournalism’ Van der Weijde disputes that she did not want to hear the other side, butwanted to record AVROTROS’s reaction in episodes five and six. AVROTROSthought this was ‘unjournalistic’ and did not agree with this ‘narrative set-up’.
The broadcaster then called in lawyer Bertil van Kaam to force adjustments.The maker then decided to return the project to the client.
Then the argument escalated. Publisher Kosmos hired law firm Brandeis todefend itself. In consultation with the law firm, Kosmos took the first fourepisodes offline to consider the sequel.
‘ Enormous impact’ The collision with Barnas had immediate consequences for Van der Weijde andher employer. AVROTROS stopped working with Van der Weijde and Podworkz, thecompany that made the podcast for Kosmos. Podworkz, which had also been makingpodcasts for AVROTROS for many years, saw a substantial part of the incomedisappear.
‘The Dogmob project has completely destroyed the bond with my former employerAVROTROS. This has had a huge impact on me, both professionally andprivately’, Van der Weijde looks back.
“I am shocked that this kind of practice takes place in the media world andthat this has happened in such a harsh way, despite my good past (at AVROTROS,ed.) and the amount of work I have done for them,” Van der Weijde says toVillamedia. .
The podcast maker felt an “intimidating and annoying pressure” during contactwith Barnas. Van der Weijde has since been declared persona non grata at thebroadcaster, she says.
‘I am no longer welcome at AVROTROS. Internally, former colleagues and peoplewith whom I made successful podcast projects are no longer allowed to workwith me. That’s his (Barnas, ed.) decision.’
‘ We have not banned anything’ Barnas ordered Van der Weijde to remove all her references on social media toAVRO/TROS. He believes he is right.
‘We doubt if they wanted to hear back. That only came after we pointed it outto Rebecca. Moreover, there were so many factual inaccuracies in the firstfour episodes. We have not banned anything, but we have said: know that we donot agree with factual inaccuracies.’
Kosmos publishers are fighting this reading. ‘The fact that we didn’t want toask the other side is nonsense’, says publisher Melanie Zwartjes. There wasalso ‘certainly no question of a large number of factual inaccuracies’, saysZwartjes.
The six-part podcast, with three textual adjustments, went online unchanged atthe end of November. Episodes five and six were ultimately voiced by Zwartjeshimself, based on material collected by Van der Weijde.
‘AVROTROS has not heard anything more. Rebecca and Kosmos have offeredAVROTROS a chance to hear each other several times.’
‘ Put under pressure’ The publisher does not have a good word for the behavior of AVROTROS.According to her, it was a form of ‘abuse of power by the public broadcaster’to ‘put pressure on’ a freelancer.
“What struck us most was the fierce response right from the start and theenormous commitment of resources. Rebecca’s requests for a conversation wereignored, while their side insisted on hearing both sides. We sent AVROTROS alarge list of questions for both sides and also gave them extra time for aresponse. Here, too, they failed to hear back.’
AVROTROS is considering next steps, says Barnas.
“I haven’t heard the new episodes yet. We will do that first and then we cansee whether our request to correct factual inaccuracies has been compliedwith,’ he says.
He finds it defensible that the relationship with Podworkz has ended: ‘Nothinghas been stopped from the work that is going on. But we do not accept newwork. We cannot do business with a company that operates in a questionablemanner. We can’t run that risk.’
The broadcaster does not want to say how many hours lawyers have spent on thecase.
Kosmos publisher Zwartjes finds AVROTROS’ attitude unsavory: ‘Rebecca andPodworkz have worked for AVROTROS for more than 10 years to their completesatisfaction. We have been able to refute the objections they had. Thisattitude cannot be explained to us and, above all, cannot be justified.’