On the 5^th of September, 1972, at the Munich Olympics, eight members of the Palestinian militant group Black September executed a brutal terrorist attack.

September 5^th, a historical-drama-thriller currently in cinemas, chronicles the massacre from the perspective of the ABC Sports crew. The station’s live broadcast of the event became one of the most viewed live broadcasts in television history.

The film masterfully explores complex themes of journalistic ethics, narrative construction, and the tension between public spectacle and human tragedy. It also raises a profound question that resonates deeply with contemporary challenges: what happens when institutional image-making supersedes fundamental responsibilities?

…

How did, multiple characters ask in September 5^th, the terrorists get into the complex? Well, it apparently transpires, there was very little security presence in the Olympic Village. The reason for this? The German government was keen to not replicate images from their relatively recent Nazism. No fences with barbed wire, no armed guards, and no proper checks of identification. Even basic security measures like ID verification and visitor logs were deliberately minimized to maintain the desired aesthetics.

In showing their nation off to the world, having spent 2.1 billion Deutsche Marks on the Olympics, they wanted to propagate an image of peace, of openness, of freedom. All nations were welcome, and all nations were free to come and go as they pleased. On one level, we can understand this impulse to forge a new image.

On every other level, however, it was an egregious failing in understanding responsibility. In hosting the Olympics, the foremost concern regarding Village security should have been the safety of the athletes and their coaches. Security experts had raised concerns months before the Games, presenting detailed threat assessments that were largely ignored in favour of maintaining the desired optics

Ironically, if indeed the foremost priority was reshaping a positive global image, they could not have fallen further short of the task. Their misguided decision-making led to a majority of the Israeli team, all Jewish, being slaughtered in Munich, with all the world watching. The inverse reputational harm could hardly have been worse.

There is, of course, glaring sunlight between the German’s responsibility in 1945 and 1972. Gross negligence is a crime of a different nature than genocide. But both crimes necessitate responsibility and accountability to be apportioned.

This historical tragedy offers important lessons for contemporary institutional decision-making, particularly in the realm of public safety and organisational reform. Regrettably, unavoidable parallels are visible between such failings and the myriad image-oriented DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) policies.

…

It is true that the U.S. and the UK too, must acknowledge that legally enshrined discriminatory practices have meant minority groups are systemically disadvantaged. The data is clear: historical barriers have created persistent gaps in representation across many fields, particularly in leadership positions. Huge work ought to be in levelling this playing field.

However, the solution must balance two crucial factors: addressing systemic inequities while maintaining unwavering standards of excellence. Quota-based approaches, themselves ironically discriminatory, are not the way to achieve this.

In selecting people for positions of responsibility, whose decisions often mean the difference between life and death, the sole metric that matters is competence. When calling emergency services or boarding an aircraft,  I do not care what the race, gender, or socioeconomic background of those who take on the responsibility to protect. What I care about, is that they are the best at what they do.

…

The goals of creating equitable opportunities and removing systemic barriers are vital. However, the methods chosen to achieve these aims require careful consideration. The challenge lies in developing approaches that expand opportunity while maintaining unwavering professional standards.

Some organizations have successfully increased diversity while maintaining high standards through merit-based recruitment expansion and targeted mentorship programs. These institutions focus on widening their candidate pools and providing preparation resources, while keeping qualification requirements consistent and rigorous.

Someday, a woman will become the first to ascend into and occupy the highest office in the U.S. Extant challenges are faced by women in this struggle that men do not. Indeed, I wrote my undergraduate dissertation on how Clinton’s femininity was negatively framed in the run up to the 2016 Presidential election.

But when this final glass ceiling is shattered, when a woman does ultimately occupy the Oval Office, it cannot be for reasons of optics. It must be because she is the most accomplished and competent person for the job.

…

The recent Los Angeles wildfires provide a sobering case study in the potential consequences of prioritizing image over capability. A particularly cringe-inducing and maddeningly embarrassing epitome of this emerged in the wake of the recent L.A fires. A clip has done the rounds of a senior L.A fire department employee expressing some misguided views, around gender, service, identitarianism, and quota-based hiring.

While diversity in emergency services can indeed enhance community trust and communication, such considerations must never supersede the paramount goal of protecting life and property. Studies have consistently shown that departments maintaining rigorous physical and technical standards, regardless of demographic composition, achieve the best outcomes in emergency response scenarios.

Prioritising the optical representation of ideological commitments is invariably misguided. I do not know whether such thinking, in this instance, did directly contribute to the tragic loss of life and property in L.A. Perhaps the salience has been exaggerated, and she is indeed great at her job.

But it does indicate that powerful public servants, occupying positions of significant responsibility, were thinking about and prioritising the wrong things. Again, like with the1972 Munich Olympics, this unfortunate vignette suggests that optics represented far too great a proportion of the decision-makers mental bandwidth.

…

The challenge extends across the political spectrum. This is just the same on the right as well as the left. Political appointments to crucial positions often prioritize ideological alignment over demonstrated expertise. Is Pete Hegseth really the best qualified person to preside over the world’s most important armed forces? Would his military experience alone qualify him for such a role without his political alignment?

Essential departments must be depoliticised. Merit, competence, and duty of care must be the North Star guiding all institutional decisions. Only by remaining steadfastly focused on these fundamentals can we build systems that truly serve and protect all members of society.