Journalists have a responsibility to report fairly and accurately on all news. The conspiracy surrounding what really happened to the five Australian reporters killed in Balibo, East Timor on October 16 1965 is still unresolved.
With the release of the new film by Robert Connolly, "Balibo", news articles about whether the film will be able to depict the truth have popped up and even an Australian Story episode has brought this 30 year old discussion back into the journalistic spotlight.

What I want to discuss is, can we ever really know the truth when there are so many different perspectives on the matter, and so many dead ends in evidence? What do journalists think about the the release of the film and how well it portrays reality? When it comes down to a war crime like Balibo, and then the death of Roger East while he was trying to uncover the truth about the Balibo Five, can the truth become a compilation of many different perspectives, and can we accept that it remains impossible to always be objective when you report on a story like this.
Does anyone think that the truth, in the case of this news story, has always suffered an incredible bias? (i.e australian journalists reporting on the murder of their colleagues)

KD<<<..can we ever really know the truth when there are so many different perspectives on the matter,..and so many dead ends in evidence?>>..its not about knowing[or not knowing...but that it wasnt reported properly in the first place...its clear govt knew...and the media didnt jump on it

<<..can the truth become a compilation of many different perspectives,>>>the facts are witnessed by plenty...reporters trying to find them have been few...the silence is deafening...what was their discovery/witness that murder...and a coverup at the highest levels occured/was let be hushed up

<<can we accept that it remains impossible to always be objective when you report on a story like this.>>.reporters report the facts...if they dont report facts they are entertainers/commentators

<<the truth,..in the case of this news story,..suffered an incredible bias?>>.i call it more a cover-over attempt/rather than a cover-up...simply speaking govt had to be involved...indonesias special purpose was for the javanese to continue what the japenese began

this goes into us influence over aussie...sadly we wont know the info these valiant few attempted to simply report...but isnt it funny how now we can talk about this...yet not the many reporters killed in iraq/afganastan...whats it up to now..[over 20?]

May I invite the threads author to tell us about him/her self?
Not unmask just tell us who we are talking to.
Forgive me if I am wrong, truly I mean it.
But I see bias in your post.
Do you for a second doubt Indonesian troops killed these men?
Do you have any doubt my party the ALP did not want the whole truth out in the open then?
Can it be you did not see the results of mass brutal murder of unarmed protesters in that cemetery by Indonesian troops?
And are you truly prepared to go public saying you believe what you saw in the movie?
I had thought you would not get a reply, that you had a wheel barrow to push and would be avoided.
But no you are up and running so here are my true views.
Australian governments, both sides, have caved into Indonesia, from the day we wrongly gave land not ours to give away, the Dutch colony's west Papua.
It was us who crawled to them via the united nations and gave others country away.
At the time of this invasion and 100,s of brutal murders including the ruthless ones you mention, we caved in again.
We went on to send troops to many other country for far less.
Today we have much better ties to Indonesia, friendship even, but we bought it , paid for it.
By the blood of many by crawling on our knees and my question is this.
Is the end worth it?
I think it can be, may be, but remain unsure.