Australia’s Minister for Women, Katy Gallagher, has condemned an ABC segment that depicted graphic violence against mining executive Gina Rinehart, saying threats of violence against women should never be presented as entertainment.

The comments mark the strongest criticism yet from a senior federal minister specifically addressing the gendered nature of the controversy surrounding the national broadcaster’s Race Around The World series.

The dispute centres on a four-minute film created by activist and filmmaker Kate McGuinness that aired as part of the ABC program. The satirical piece concluded with graphic language describing violence directed at Gina Rinehart, prompting widespread criticism from politicians, media commentators and Hancock Prospecting, the company chaired by Rinehart.

Speaking on Monday, Senator Gallagher welcomed the ABC’s decision to refer complaints about the broadcast to its independent Ombudsman but made clear she did not believe threats of violence against women should ever be treated as entertainment.

“I welcome the ABC’s decision to refer this to the Ombudsman,” Ms Gallagher said.

“It is never appropriate to use threats of violence against women as entertainment.”

Her intervention adds another senior government voice to the growing debate over the broadcast, although Labor ministers have adopted differing approaches when responding to calls for the ABC to apologise or remove the segment.

Communications Minister Anika Wells has repeatedly described the material as personally unacceptable but has declined to direct the national broadcaster to apologise or remove the film, citing the ABC’s statutory editorial independence.

Ms Wells said she respected the broadcaster’s internal complaints process and noted that the matter was now before the ABC Ombudsman.

“As the Minister for Communications, I take their editorial independence really seriously and I respect their processes,” she said.

“It is now with the Ombudsman.”

The ABC Ombudsman operates independently of editorial management and reports directly to the ABC Board. The review will assess complaints received about the July broadcast under the broadcaster’s Editorial Policies and complaints-handling procedures.

The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has indicated it will generally await the outcome of the ABC’s internal process before deciding whether any further regulatory action is warranted.

The controversy intensified after Hancock Prospecting formally demanded that the ABC remove the segment, publish an apology and investigate how the material came to be approved for broadcast.

When those requests were not met, the company sent legal correspondence to ABC Chair Kim Williams, Deputy Chair Lisa Caffery and Managing Director Hugh Marks alleging serious civil and criminal legal concerns arising from the publication and continued availability of the segment.

The ABC has confirmed it received the correspondence and has said it will respond through the appropriate legal processes.

The broadcaster initially defended the film as “editorially justifiable” before later referring audience complaints to the Ombudsman as criticism continued to grow.

Kate McGuinness subsequently issued a public apology through the ABC, saying her work was intended as exaggerated satire rather than an encouragement of violence.

She said her writing was “cartoonish” and that it had never been her intention to promote violence, while acknowledging that the joke had offended viewers.

Pressure on the ABC has not been limited to opposition politicians.

Health Minister Mark Butler also criticised the broadcast, describing it as “pretty revolting” and questioning why Australians should be exposed to such material on television.

However, like Ms Gallagher and Ms Wells, he stopped short of calling for the ABC to remove the segment or issue a formal apology, instead leaving the matter to the broadcaster’s established review processes.

Mr Butler said the material should never have appeared on television, regardless of who the target was.

Labor MP Jerome Laxale has gone further than other government figures by publicly arguing that the ABC should remove the four-minute film from its digital platforms.

He said that while he welcomed the filmmaker’s apology, he believed the broadcaster itself should also take action by withdrawing the content.

The segment remains available on some ABC digital platforms while the Ombudsman’s review continues.

Opposition MPs have continued to criticise the government’s response, arguing senior ministers should have demanded a direct apology from the national broadcaster.

Liberal MP Aaron Violi has been among those questioning why stronger condemnation had not come sooner, saying the ABC should apologise and remove the material rather than relying solely on internal review mechanisms.

The issue has also attracted criticism from public figures outside politics, including Olympic swimming legend Dawn Fraser, who criticised the federal government’s handling of the controversy.

The broader debate has focused on the balance between artistic expression, satire and editorial independence on one hand, and concerns about depictions of violence directed at identifiable individuals on the other.

Supporters of the ABC’s editorial independence argue complaints should be assessed through the broadcaster’s established governance framework rather than by political direction.

Critics contend that the content crossed an unacceptable line regardless of whether it was intended as satire, particularly given Australia’s ongoing public discussion about violence against women.

The ABC has said it will not comment further while the Ombudsman’s independent review remains underway.

No findings have yet been released, and the outcome of that investigation could determine whether any editorial standards were breached and whether further action is recommended.

Separately, Hancock Prospecting’s legal action remains ongoing, with the company continuing to seek removal of the material, a formal apology and accountability for the editorial decisions that led to the broadcast.

For now, the controversy continues to generate debate over the responsibilities of Australia’s publicly funded broadcaster, the limits of satire involving real individuals and how gendered threats of violence should be treated within publicly funded media.