- 6 hours ago
Category
📺
TVTranscript
00:01There's another large and important group of people who work in this building, a group
00:05largely unseen and unknown to the general public, a body of professional journalists
00:10known as the Federal Parliamentary Press Gallery.
00:14When the brand new Parliament of Australia opened for business in 1901, it was a cramped
00:19and ramshackle affair.
00:21Prime Minister Edmund Barton slept in the attic of the temporary Melbourne building.
00:28And offices were in short supply.
00:32But premium space was made for the 31 newspaper reporters who made up the press gallery.
00:38Why?
00:39They were the vital conduit of information about Australia's new democracy to its people.
00:45For the political journalist, friends in high places are essential, enemies in high places
00:50unavoidable.
00:51These pressmen breathed the same air as the politicians, and their stories, whether positive
00:56or negative, dominated Australia's understanding of politics when their newspapers came out
01:01every morning.
01:02As George Reid, our 4th PM, is said to have implored the pressmen in 1904.
01:07Praise me if you can, blame me if you must, but for heaven's sake, don't leave me alone.
01:13But this cosy arrangement was upended in 1939 by a disruptor, Warren Denning, appointed by
01:21the ABC to be the gallery's first ever radio reporter.
01:24Good afternoon, this is the ABC from Parliament House Canberra.
01:28The gentlemen at the press gallery were furious.
01:31Denning would be able to broadcast breaking news straight away, scooping the newspaper
01:35hats who were slowed down by the laborious process of typesetting, printing and delivering
01:41newspapers.
01:42The pressmen revolted, demanding that Prime Minister Robert Menzies do two briefings a
01:47day, one for all of them, one for Denning.
01:49I ought to begin by asking you whether the procedures that I've adopted in the past are
01:55satisfactory to you.
01:56And for six long weeks, Menzies obliged.
01:59Eventually, the pressmen twigged to the fact that they were handing their rival a daily exclusive
02:05with the PM, and sheepishly dropped their demands.
02:07But the episode shows you how powerful the gallery was, how protective of its patch, and keen
02:13to guard its exclusivity.
02:15And how anxious a PM was not to antagonise these men, his primary means of getting his
02:21words and plans out to the Australian people.
02:28It's pointless having a discussion about Australian democracy without considering how Australians
02:56find out about it.
02:57And there's no doubt that for much of our history, reporting politics has been a closed
03:03shop, full of complicated and, at times, mutually parasitic relationships.
03:11Like so many powerful elements of our democracy, this dynamic isn't covered by our Constitution,
03:18and neither is the major technological upheaval that, over the course of this young century,
03:26has blown up so many of the presumptions on which these relationships rested for so long.
03:34Everything's moving so fast that there's barely a second to take stock of just how much it's
03:41all changed.
03:42Can you start by just describing what the daily cycle of political journalism was like when
03:50you started out?
03:51There was a discernible news cycle.
03:53It began in the morning when the newspaper thumped onto the front lawn.
03:57If a political leader wanted to get a message out, they very much might put the story in
04:02the Daily Telegraph or put the story in the Australian newspaper.
04:05You opened it up, you unfurled it, you saw what the story was above the fold, what was
04:10important to that day.
04:11You still had, I think, a landscape you could describe as having centres of gravity.
04:18There were different outlets that were influential in slightly different ways, but there was a national
04:24conversation.
04:25Even if people had different political perspectives, everyone was sort of eating at the same table.
04:30So what does the political news cycle look like these days?
04:33And how does that affect the press gallery's role?
04:36The operating environment is so fractured now.
04:39And the idea of what constitutes political news is the constant refreshment of the story
04:46of the day.
04:47Everyone talks about the 24-hour media cycle.
04:50It's not even 24 hours.
04:52It's just now.
04:53Well, I certainly think that the 24-7 media cycle and the rise of social media coarsened our
05:01public discourse.
05:02When you have a look at Talkback, Talkback gave the average person the chance to get
05:07on the air and say what they think.
05:10Now everyone's able to do that through a million different apps.
05:12Each individual now can curate for themselves their intake.
05:18And what that means is that no one's curation will be the same as someone else's.
05:22It's made it harder and harder for clear, rational, principled voices to be heard.
05:29This thing is the audience now.
05:31It's so fragmented.
05:32There are so many different audiences.
05:35Politicians have to use every available medium to get their message out.
05:41Issues that you might have thought would command the broad focus of the nation can't really
05:48do that in the same way.
05:49What is a journalist's primary aim?
05:53What is a journalist's primary aim?
05:56To present the facts of any given situation as accurately and as responsible as he possibly
06:02can.
06:02To always remain an outsider.
06:04Never join the mob.
06:06It's a funny sort of relationship between pressmen and politicians.
06:08I suppose you'd say it's almost a classic example of the attraction repulsion of love-hate.
06:13Never distort news to please people, whether it's your boss, or the readers, or the listeners.
06:20The zookeepers rule is if you work in a zoo, don't try to be friendly with the animals.
06:24It's a tricky rule to follow when the zookeepers and animals mingle so freely together.
06:31Australia is the only Western democracy in which the press cohort has always shared quarters
06:38with MPs.
06:39Okay, so Nikki, you arrived in this chamber in 1974, yes?
06:44Mm-hmm.
06:44You weren't sitting here, obviously.
06:46Definitely not.
06:47It's such a squeezy little chamber, isn't it?
06:50And the press gallery is tiny.
06:52Well, it didn't seem so to me at the time, and it was filled almost every day.
07:00So Parliament was the centre of the universe, if you like.
07:04And what was the press gallery like when you arrived?
07:07It was still mostly male.
07:10There were only six women journalists in the press gallery, and I was probably the youngest,
07:18and there were very few ethnics around at that time.
07:23How did it work?
07:24Because it was quite a closed shop back then, right?
07:26You had to have an office in the building if you were going to be a political correspondent.
07:31But because this is such a small place, there was nowhere for the politicians to hide.
07:39So you got to build up relationships, and you mixed so often and so freely.
07:48You could just go down to the prime minister's office and say,
07:51I've got this story that's going to kill you.
07:53What do you say about it?
07:54In that era, what did politicians and journalists or media organisations rely on each other for?
08:04Well, one could not survive without the other.
08:08They needed us as much as we needed them.
08:11If they wanted to get their stories out, they had to deal with us.
08:16And we needed stories.
08:18If a prime minister or a minister wants to get a story out, they'll make sure it has exclusivity.
08:24They'll give it to a particular journalist in a particular newspaper or a particular television station
08:30or a particular radio station for a particular reason.
08:33They know it'll start a cycle, the news cycle, and that people will necessarily talk about it through the day.
08:38I think politicians use radio hosts, and radio hosts use politicians.
08:43It's a very equal kind of relationship in that regard.
08:46But Tony Abbott has come on my show many times to talk about things that Tony Abbott wants to talk about.
08:51So the cold drop comes to you without much work done at all.
08:55You can sit back with hands behind the head and try, there's a good story,
09:00and then smash it out and away it goes.
09:02But equally, there have been times when Tony Abbott doesn't want to talk about something,
09:06and I've used that association to force him to talk about it.
09:09The better way is getting the story they don't want out.
09:12That's the good story.
09:13Let's not overlook that quid pro quos could go on.
09:19And the problem when the quid pro quo involves information and the releasing of information
09:23is you open the door really to political manipulation.
09:27I'll give you this, you'll bury that.
09:29Well, gentlemen of the press, I understand you have a predilection for press conferences,
09:34and now for the next 30 minutes I'm in your hands while we have one.
09:38Like any high-stakes codependent relationship, this one can pan out in a variety of ways.
09:45Sometimes, careful negotiation yields a mutually beneficial outcome.
09:50How long does it go for?
09:52Oh, two or three minutes.
09:53And all.
09:54But look, we will be doing the something on the dam, for God's sake.
09:59Yes, yes, certainly.
10:00Sometimes, there's a period of no speakies.
10:04Laurie Oaks, network 10, Prime Minister.
10:06I'm tempted to ask the same question again for the third time because we still haven't got an answer.
10:10Clearly, there is a capacity for a political leader, particularly, you know, a Prime Minister
10:15or an opposition leader to ice a journalist, right?
10:20Just put them on ice.
10:21They get nothing.
10:23And sometimes, there's no option but open combat.
10:27Mr Hawke, could I ask you whether you feel a little embarrassed tonight at the blood that's on your hands?
10:31It's a ridiculous question.
10:32You know, it's ridiculous.
10:33I have no blood on my hands.
10:35Politics is a combative business, and obviously, if you're a journalist,
10:40sometimes you have to ask tricky questions, and sometimes that can really get under politicians' skins.
10:47Now, sometimes it's justified.
10:49Yeah, maybe sometimes it's not justified.
10:51But, you know, there is nothing more fascinating in finding out what actually makes a politician
10:56completely fly off the handle.
10:58Bullshit comes from the press gallery.
11:01Do you have any favourite kind of journo v politician moments?
11:07Look, I did very much enjoy the Mark Reilly, Tony Abbott stare-off.
11:13That was absolutely sensational.
11:16Mark Reilly wanted to talk about my visit, my recent visit to Afghanistan.
11:22Hello.
11:22G'day, Tony.
11:23And he wanted to create a gotcha moment.
11:25It's over here.
11:27Tony's next to me.
11:28It was no ambush.
11:31I had Tony's press secretary in my office for 20 minutes showing them the vision.
11:35Right.
11:36He was being told about an operation that went horribly wrong and cost the life of an Australian
11:43soldier.
11:44The commander was explaining where things had gone wrong.
11:47And this was Tony Abbott's response.
11:49Now, what Mark Reilly tried to do was to take out of context that expression shit happens
12:00and present me as somehow making light of the death of Lance Corporal Jared McKinney.
12:08Honestly, it was a contemptible thing to do.
12:10Imagine if Julia Gillard had said that.
12:13This is what I thought of.
12:14Imagine if Kevin Rudd had said that.
12:16It took me quite a while to work out exactly what he was driving at.
12:22Well.
12:24Mm-hmm.
12:25Well, that's about the day that Jared McKinney was killed.
12:28My question to Tony was, well, that was it.
12:31Yeah, look, you've taken this out of context.
12:34You weren't there.
12:36I would never seek to make light of the death of an Australian soldier.
12:41Okay.
12:41Well, tell me, what's the context?
12:42And if it's out of context, what is the context?
12:44You're not saying anything, Tony.
12:53I was just bemused.
12:55I mean, I think you can see it in my face.
12:57You've arranged the time for this interview.
12:59You know what I was going to ask you about, and you don't have any response.
13:02And I thought, what do I do here?
13:04What the hell?
13:05Is he going to thump you?
13:06I tell him to get stuffed.
13:08I get up and walk out.
13:10I hit him.
13:12I just thought he was buffering.
13:14Tony was thinking of punching him.
13:15He was thinking of punching Mark Riley.
13:19Slog him in the head.
13:20And all he could think was, don't punch him.
13:24So if you're wondering what was going on in Tony Abbott's head,
13:27I mean to tell you, that's what he was thinking about.
13:29So I thought silence was the best response.
13:32Closed mouth gathers no foot.
13:35Nothing else to say, Tony?
13:39Okay.
13:42Just turn the cameras off.
13:43Now you know.
13:46That's a scoop for you.
13:48I don't think our relationship was ever quite the same after that.
13:51At the end of the day, look, if you're going to give it, you're going to get it.
13:57And if you're going to give it, you can't be upset about occasionally getting it back.
14:01And if you are that sort of person, well, you're not in the right place, Toto.
14:05Sometimes the tension between politicians and political journalists arises from their mutual
14:11conviction that they could do each other's job better.
14:15Lose wire.
14:15And there is, in Australia's early history, one utterly spectacular example of this exact phenomenon.
14:23For the first 13 years of the Australian Federation, readers of the Morning Post in London enjoyed
14:29a spicy, anonymous weekly column summarising the events of the Antipodean Parliament.
14:36Given that the nation splashed through 10 Prime Ministerships in that time, it was action-packed.
14:41The writer was coyly badged as our own correspondent, but was incredibly well-informed and articulate, and could be harsh.
14:50Mr Deakin may well view the position before him with rueful solicitude.
14:54Harumphed the correspondent in 1903, after Prime Minister Alfred Deakin came perilously close to losing the federal election of that year.
15:04His own party in his own state, in spite of his appeals, flung away half a dozen seats and imperiled as many more.
15:13Ouch. Poor old Deakin. He must have flinched to read such words.
15:17Actually, he probably didn't, because in fact, Deakin wrote those words.
15:23That's right. In Australia, our own correspondent was better known as our second Prime Minister, Alfred Deakin.
15:31Lawyer, vegan, seance fanatic, moonlighting as a commentator on his own parliament for the handsome salary of £500 a year.
15:41More than he was paid as Prime Minister.
15:43Mr Prime Minister, could you elaborate on what Mr Berry has said?
15:47For all of the accusations over the years of political journalists and Prime Ministers being in each other's pockets,
15:54this is the only case where it's because they're the same person.
15:59But in 2025, political journalism is facing a more profound disruption than the odd Prime Minister in disguise.
16:09Cheers, Prime Minister, for coming to the pub.
16:11Welcome to It's A Lot podcast, Prime Minister.
16:14Great to be here, Abby.
16:15People listen to my podcast, for example.
16:18I do maths recaps.
16:19I do blowjob tips.
16:21I interview the Prime Minister.
16:23You know, it's a spectrum.
16:24Politicians these days realise that now, to get in front of people, particularly the people who aren't already politically engaged,
16:30the ones who you've got to win over if you want to win an election, you need to go to them.
16:35This budget is all about helping with the cost of living, strengthening Medicare and building Australia's future.
16:41We're legit pulling up a parliament house and we have no idea what we're getting ourselves into today.
16:47For the first time, influencers were invited to this year's budget.
16:50So I was invited to the budget lock-up as an influencer, as a podcaster.
16:55I didn't go because my theory was I can read it on the internet.
17:00Why would I go there?
17:01I'm not driving to Canberra.
17:03I have things to do.
17:05Yes, that's what we need more of in hard-nosed budget analysis is social media influencers.
17:10Today I'm interviewing the Prime Minister and so we will get ready together.
17:13Many of these creators don't necessarily come from traditional journalistic backgrounds
17:17and so people have criticised them for not applying scrutiny to what the government is necessarily putting out.
17:23You know, people might derisively call them cheerleaders.
17:26The Labour Party just announced $1 billion for mental health.
17:31What's the problem having people there that maybe you don't see as qualified,
17:34but they have the ability to translate their budget into terms that people can understand?
17:39I mean, what is an influencer going to do in the lock-up?
17:44What, pour through the impairment on assets on government warships? I don't know.
17:49It feels quite elitist to be so in shock and horrified
17:54that influencers would be allowed anywhere near Parliament House
17:58as though influencers aren't citizens of this country.
18:01There are always going to be things that political journalists know more about
18:06in terms of getting information or fact-checking or things like that,
18:10but I don't...it doesn't bother me in the slightest.
18:15It's not that.
18:16It's that the vocation is different.
18:19It's that the task is different.
18:22I know that there were some people, probably mainstream media people,
18:25who were like,
18:25This is our domain!
18:28No, it's not yours.
18:29You don't own it.
18:30We live in a democracy and influencers have become players in that political game.
18:38Politicians have fanned out across social media platforms
18:41in search of voters who aren't looking for them.
18:45On YouTube, the most watched election interview with Anthony Albanese
18:49was one he sought out with cult video artist Aussie Man Reviews.
18:54Good shit. Thank you, Albo.
18:56Thanks, mate.
18:56It is a fundamentally different thing to sit down for an interview on 7.30
19:03and be interrogated in that way
19:06than it is to sit down with someone
19:08who is cheerleading for a particular side of politics
19:12or a particular party or a particular outcome.
19:14When you start to blur those things,
19:17that's a net loss for democracy
19:20and we have started seeing that in America.
19:22In America,
19:43the disruption of the press corps
19:45is more explicitly orchestrated.
19:47For more than a century,
19:51the pecking order of journalists
19:52in the world-famous White House briefing room
19:55has been managed
19:57by the White House Correspondents Association.
20:00But President Trump, in his second term,
20:03has asserted control.
20:05He banned the veteran Associated Press Organisation
20:09because it refused to rebrand
20:11the Gulf of Mexico
20:12to the Gulf of America
20:14as per the presidential decree.
20:16We are going to be changing the name
20:19of the Gulf of Mexico
20:21to the Gulf of America.
20:24He's also opened up the press room
20:26to influencers and partisan campaign groups
20:29who now jostle for access
20:32with legacy media outlets.
20:35Here's where all of the anchors are going to air.
20:38Yep, we've got your Fox News here.
20:40Uh-huh.
20:41CNN has two tents.
20:43Yeah, you've got your ABC, your Newsmax, your NBC.
20:45Monica Page Baldwin
20:47is the White House Correspondent
20:49for the pro-Trump youth activist group
20:51Turning Point USA.
20:54From the White House four front lines
20:55with Turning Point, I'm Monica Page.
20:57Which has been credited
20:58with boosting Donald Trump's youth vote
21:00at the 2024 election
21:02by as much as 10%.
21:04So, welcome to Pebble Beach.
21:08Pebble Beach? Is that what it's called?
21:10Yes.
21:10I believe there were pebbles at one point,
21:12but now I don't think that there's any pebbles here.
21:14It's all just mulch.
21:15But, yeah, this is where everyone works out of.
21:16You're working in the heat, the freezing cold,
21:19rainstorms, thunderstorms, lightning, you name it,
21:22you're working out of these tents for the most part.
21:24But, yeah, this is the West Wing
21:26of the White House sort of deal.
21:27So, how did Turning Point come to have a spot
21:30in the White House Media Corp?
21:32So, you have your CNN, your Fox, your MSNBC,
21:34they're all in there,
21:35but there was never a spot for new media.
21:37And now, with this current administration,
21:39they've kind of said,
21:40we're going to add a new media spot
21:41in the press briefing room,
21:43and we recently got access
21:44to be in that new media section,
21:46which has been incredible.
21:47Part of the new media seed is
21:48so that everyday Americans across the country
21:51have a voice in this room.
21:52Is it hostile in there
21:53when all of these new media Arabists
21:56turn up and start demanding space?
21:59Yeah, so, the dynamic is OK.
22:02You can kind of feel a little bit of tension in there,
22:04especially within the first couple of press briefings
22:07when this administration returned.
22:09Monica.
22:10So, what are some of the other new media organisations
22:12that have got a place here now at the White House
22:15that didn't have five years ago?
22:18There's a number of people with podcasts
22:20or radio shows or streaming.
22:23Outlets, you've got your Lindell TV,
22:26which is Mike Lindell of MyPillow.
22:28Oh, that's the pillow guy.
22:29I'm bringing you exciting new products,
22:31overstock specials,
22:33and close-out deals you won't find anywhere else.
22:36Got his own TV crew here and reporters here.
22:38Right.
22:39But we have a president right now
22:40who I truly believe is doing his best
22:43to unify the country
22:43and make sure that everybody has a voice.
22:47But, see, you sound like a campaigner now.
22:48I saw yesterday when you were delivering questions
22:51to President Trump.
22:52So, I love that question.
22:54On the southern border,
22:55you've had record low numbers for the month of May.
22:57What do you attribute that success to?
22:59I like you.
23:00Who are you with?
23:01Turning Point USA, sir.
23:02Well, they're very good.
23:03Turning Point.
23:04The journalist in me goes,
23:05oh, my God, that's a disaster
23:07because I don't want a politician ever
23:09to love a question that I ask them.
23:11So, how does that work as a journalist?
23:13For you?
23:14Well, I mean, of course,
23:15with every administration,
23:16there's something that I will disagree on,
23:17including this one.
23:18So, it's not like I'm just reporting
23:19on all the glorious things that are happening.
23:21I think it is important to acknowledge
23:23what people find negative in this administration
23:25and still giving light to that
23:26as much as I am giving some of the positive.
23:29So, when you looked at, as an outsider,
23:32the press corps as it functioned
23:35under the previous administration,
23:36did you think of it as a neutral kind of body of people?
23:41Well, yes and no,
23:43because there were a lot of times
23:45when I was in the press briefing room
23:47and some of the questions
23:48that the reporters would ask
23:49would be very, I don't know,
23:51not really in tune
23:52with what everyday Americans are feeling.
23:54And it was kind of disheartening to hear questions,
23:57what's Joe Biden's favourite ice cream flavour?
23:59What's he doing this weekend?
24:00So, it makes you furious
24:01to listen to left-wing journalists
24:04ask about President Biden's taste in ice cream,
24:07and then you get criticised
24:09for asking soft questions
24:10or inviting Donald Trump
24:12to reflect on his own brilliance.
24:14I mean, is this just...
24:15It's the name of the game.
24:16Right?
24:16It seems like that's the name of the game.
24:19People are just...
24:20They listen to a question
24:21or listen to a report
24:22and they immediately place somebody in a box.
24:24They're like, okay,
24:25that sounds like a more left-wing question.
24:27You are left-wing media.
24:28I'm not going to consume your information or your media.
24:30Okay, you're more right-wing.
24:31Nope, I'm not going to listen to that.
24:33And to me, I'm like,
24:34will there ever be a moment that can unify us
24:36not only as a nation,
24:37but also in the media?
24:39Ten weeks later,
24:40the argument about who gets to ask questions where
24:43is overtaken by a ghastly act of political violence.
24:49Monica's boss, Charlie Kirk,
24:52is shot dead while speaking at a university in Utah.
24:56Charlie Kirk has been credited
24:57with mobilising young people to vote for Donald Trump
24:59in the 2024 election.
25:01We are the media now.
25:03Not them.
25:04Their power is fading and waning.
25:07No-one reads their stuff.
25:09Their subscriptions are going down.
25:11In a split second,
25:13the 31-year-old father of two
25:15goes from online disruptor
25:17to conservative martyr.
25:20Kirk's death is a violent escalation
25:22of polarisation in America
25:25where the political extremes
25:26don't just disagree with each other.
25:29They don't even gather in the same places.
25:33When social media started,
25:34it felt like it was going to be
25:35the democratisation of news
25:37and it was going to be these sort of,
25:38in a sense,
25:39online town halls
25:40that we could debate things.
25:41We think the new landscape
25:42is a billion tweets
25:44and it's the democratisation of politics
25:47or the democratisation of the public square.
25:50But now we're beginning to get savvy
25:53to the fact that there are algorithms
25:55and all sorts of things
25:57and a lot of what gets out
25:58and a lot of what gets shared
25:59and all this sort of stuff is manipulated.
26:02They're not neutral town halls.
26:04They are profit-driven ecosystems
26:06to make a lot of money
26:08for the people who own them
26:09and they know that the way
26:10to make the most money
26:11is to get people engaged
26:14and outraged.
26:16If you looked at a busload of people,
26:18everyone on their phone,
26:19scrolling through the same platform,
26:21they'd all be seeing
26:22completely different things.
26:24They funnel.
26:25So we are being funneled into biases.
26:29These silos are biased.
26:31Both sides think the other
26:33is more extreme than it actually is
26:35because they're only hearing
26:37from the most extreme on both sides.
26:39There are people who...
26:41Their whole world is shaped
26:45by what the algorithm is serving them.
26:48The more content they can put in front of people,
26:50that gets them angry,
26:52the more money they make
26:54because the more people engage with it,
26:56the more they can charge advertisers to be there.
26:59And what that does is it distorts
27:00the public discourse.
27:02What has the disruption
27:04of reporting around politics in particular
27:08done to your ability
27:09to project and whiten political arguments?
27:15It's made change harder
27:16and it's made constructing the case for change harder
27:22and it's made bringing people together harder
27:28because the nature of the fragmentation of the media
27:33and what we've seen
27:37in terms of different channels of discussion
27:42means that we often, as a society,
27:48are not actually talking to one another
27:51and we're certainly insufficiently listening to one another.
27:54If you feel like everyone's a little bit angrier today,
27:58it's because they legitimately are.
28:00The temptation is to go for highly charged issues,
28:04particularly in a country like the United States
28:07where religion plays a big role,
28:09things that people feel deeply and passionately about
28:12and we'll get them to the ballot box.
28:14I think one thing in Australia
28:15that is so important is compulsory voting.
28:20So in America,
28:21where that kind of new media works particularly well
28:25is when you have to get people out to vote.
28:28If you can get your whole base out to vote,
28:30you win.
28:30And the way to get people out to vote
28:32is to get them really, really mad.
28:34Could you explain what effect you think
28:36compulsory voting has on the tenor of political debate?
28:41I think it encourages more likely
28:43the forces of moderation
28:44and therefore consensus building
28:47within the democracy writ large.
28:49It disadvantages the zealots.
28:51It means that elections are not won or lost at the extremes
28:54but are won or lost in the centre.
28:56I'll tell you what,
28:57I've got friends from all walks of life.
29:00Some of them have got no interest in politics whatsoever
29:04and that is their right.
29:06Do we really want them to vote?
29:08Really?
29:09And again, I'm not 100% sold on my view on this
29:12because I understand that there is an advantage
29:14in getting everyone in there
29:16and I've got American friends who say,
29:18I wish it was the way in our country like it is in yours
29:20but I don't know.
29:22I guess it's not a perfect system.
29:24Nothing is.
29:25I've sort of come to the conclusion
29:27that we are saved in this country
29:30by the politically disengaged
29:32who are forced to engage at moments.
29:37Globally, compulsory voting is rare
29:39and our adventures with it began in Queensland
29:42which in 1915 staged the first election
29:45in the English-speaking world
29:47at which voter attendance was mandatory.
29:50A bold democratic experiment?
29:53No, think more desperate self-preservation tactic
29:57by a man who was in mortal fear of losing power.
30:00Now, you're in the way.
30:01That man was Liberal Queensland Premier Digby Denham.
30:06Businessman, butter entrepreneur,
30:09scourge of the union movement.
30:11As the state election approached, Denham had issues.
30:15He was deeply worried about the mobilisation power
30:18of the Queensland trade union movement.
30:21Brisbane was paralysed by striking workers
30:23and Denham tried everything to break the unions.
30:27He banned protests, armed police with bayonets
30:30and even tried to borrow troops
30:33from a visiting German warship to help him out.
30:37None of it worked, so he came up with a new plan.
30:40A cunning one.
30:41He made voting compulsory.
30:44If the more moderately inclined were forced to vote,
30:47Denham figured, he might stand a chance.
30:51The good news?
30:52Turnout was strong, nearly 90%.
30:54The bad news?
30:57Denham got smashed.
30:59Not only were the parliamentary ranks of his party halved,
31:02but the Premier lost his own seat
31:04and there wouldn't be another Liberal government for 42 years.
31:10The great thing about, you know, cunning plans
31:13in Australian politics when political leaders go,
31:17ha-ha, I have a cunning plan, like Digby Denham,
31:19is that they often end up as an exploding cigar.
31:22Denham's gambit didn't work out as planned.
31:25But the system stayed put,
31:27and in 1924, compulsory voting was adopted nationally.
31:33Ever since then, Australian politicians
31:35have had a very particular obligation
31:38to pursue and convince every single voter,
31:42even the ones who aren't interested.
31:43It's triggered a constant cycle of disruption.
31:48Right, OK.
31:49Every time a new form of media emerges,
31:52politicians are obliged to learn how to use it.
31:56A century ago,
31:58it was all about the ability to yell at crowds
32:00whilst balanced on a stump or the back of a truck.
32:03Mr Hawkins is the one to represent you.
32:06He is fit to represent you in every possible way.
32:08People attended in mass numbers public meetings.
32:12So if you look back, say, at Andrew Fisher,
32:14Prime Minister, on three occasions,
32:16when he went to a town like Gympie to campaign,
32:19you'd have mass crowds of more than 10,000 people.
32:23I don't think anyone would have been at home.
32:25Everyone went.
32:25So once Parliament was being reported on,
32:29the incentives for the people in the business of politics
32:32to deliver a terrific speech
32:34that could be read in a newspaper
32:37and could be re-read and re-quoted
32:40becomes part of the language of politics,
32:43part of the presentation of politics,
32:46part of the representation of politics.
32:49Once you hear the voice, which is radio,
32:53you get almost a different idea of politics
32:57from the elector's perspective as well.
32:59My opponents in Parliament have done their very best
33:03and only narrowly failed.
33:06So R.G. Menzies, good radio voice,
33:09Ben Chifley, old-style Labor bloke,
33:12looks terrific on the stump,
33:14is really, really good in a smoke-filled caucus room,
33:17but does not persuade you on radio.
33:20Hello, citizens.
33:22The war is over.
33:24Then along comes television.
33:26By the time you get to Gough,
33:27he's kind of got a bit of the Menzies in him
33:28because he's obviously been raised in that era
33:30and he could also preen for the camera.
33:33We see the allegation that Bill Hayden
33:36had stolen some Treasury documents.
33:40Oh!
33:41Like Graham Kennedy, in a way.
33:43You know, grew up on the stage
33:44and as soon as they pointed a camera at him,
33:46everything worked at the same time.
33:48And then you've got Bob Hawke watching,
33:50Whitlam from the sideline, saying,
33:51eh, I can make the camera work for me.
33:53For generations,
33:55even as the technology gently evolved
33:57from notebooks to microphones to cameras...
34:01Smile.
34:01Have you got your photograph?
34:02Australian elections were fought in essentially the same way.
34:06One aspiring Prime Minister from the Labor Party,
34:09one from the Liberal Party,
34:10both pitching their visions to the nation
34:12via an accompanying rabble of print, radio and TV reporters,
34:18themselves employed by media proprietors
34:21whose canny decision to purchase
34:23vast, clanking printing presses
34:25or broadcast TV networks
34:28harvested them not only handsome profits
34:31but intense political power.
34:34Could you compare the old style of media mogul,
34:38you know, your Murdochs and Packers,
34:40with the tech super moguls of today?
34:43Look, I think the moguls of the past in the media,
34:45whether it was, you know, Rupert Murdoch or Kerry Packer or...
34:49You know, they had a big influence on Australian media
34:52and Australian politics,
34:53and obviously Murdoch still does.
34:56But they don't have the influence they used to have.
34:58They still have influence.
34:59They can certainly help shape the agenda.
35:02They can certainly shape how people see what's happening today.
35:06But I think the moguls of, you know,
35:08the Elon Musk and Twitter, for example,
35:11are really quite a different and, I think, more alarming beast.
35:17So what you have is everyone pursuing a profit,
35:21concentrations of power in the hands of relatively few people.
35:25One at least is held accountable to some extent
35:28by an ethic, by a code.
35:31The other thumbs its nodes at all codes
35:35and doesn't really have one to begin with.
35:38If you just look at the dais for Trump's inauguration,
35:43it was the masters of the attentional universe, right,
35:47sitting on the dais.
35:48It was Sundar Pashay of Google.
35:50It was Zuckerberg.
35:52You know, it was Bezos.
35:53It was Musk.
35:54And Trump understands that these platforms control
35:58and shape what people think.
36:01So it's a mutually beneficial relationship.
36:04The only ethic, the only ethos that guides this really, it seems,
36:10is whatever services the profit motive.
36:12The net result for Australia?
36:15After a century of awkward codependence
36:18between politicians and political journalists,
36:21both now gamble for wins and losses
36:23with moguls they struggle to regulate
36:25according to algorithms they cannot see.
36:29I now don't have to have a conversation
36:32with a senior journalist.
36:34I have my own social media platforms
36:36and say what I need to say,
36:39whack it up online,
36:40and the community knows instantly
36:42that it's happened and we're in a conversation.
36:46Well, a classic example is this.
36:48In my last media piece,
36:51Facebook has 280,000 views.
36:54There's another one, if I go back,
36:57800,000.
36:59Man, that beats a paper for dead.
37:02That beats ABC for dead.
37:05Man, that's gold.
37:06Gold.
37:07For the community independent movement,
37:09social media and social media platforms
37:12have been a really effective way
37:13of getting a message out
37:15and finding your community.
37:17And we're not reliant on legacy media
37:20to talk to our communities.
37:22For the two major parties,
37:24disruption means the advance of independence
37:27into parts of their empires
37:29they once took for granted.
37:31As an independent, I answer to you,
37:33not to a party.
37:34We deserve better representation.
37:35The major parties have failed to deliver.
37:38And we need community independence
37:39standing up to vested interests
37:40and holding the major parties to account.
37:43Put one on Dai Li here
37:44and then number all the boxes.
37:48Political parties have two real tools
37:49when it comes to social media.
37:50The first one is the normal, organic posting,
37:53which is the versions of posting
37:54like any of us have.
37:55You know, you post an image of yourself
37:56doing something.
37:57Go back a bit.
38:01Yeah!
38:03The other tool that they have
38:05is paid advertising.
38:07And this is where political parties
38:09are able to cash in
38:10on the huge amount of information
38:12that all the social media companies
38:14have on each of us.
38:15Versus putto la couto.
38:17Fight!
38:17But the real revolution
38:18for political advertising in 2025
38:21isn't in the message or execution deal.
38:24It's in the targeting.
38:27We saw the Australian political parties
38:29use political advertising
38:30on social media more than ever before
38:33because you can incredibly target
38:36individual voters based on things
38:38like demographics,
38:39your occupation,
38:41even your interests
38:42because they think
38:44that they can reach you
38:45at the right time
38:46with the right message
38:47to win your vote.
38:48If you're watching
38:49you're married at first sight,
38:51you know,
38:51on Nine Now,
38:52you're watching it in a local sort of,
38:55it's fed to you locally
38:56so it means that you can target
38:58by postcode,
39:00you can target by electorate
39:02and you can pay
39:05a lot less than you used to.
39:07A political campaign
39:08can create an ad
39:09and say,
39:10OK,
39:10I want to reach women
39:11ages 25 to 35
39:13who live in Sydney
39:15and have these characteristics
39:16and then Facebook
39:17using the data
39:18that it has in people
39:20will then show that ad
39:21to those people
39:22with those characteristics.
39:24So,
39:25in this hectic new world
39:26where anyone can be
39:28a political reporter
39:29and political parties
39:30can swarm your device
39:32with cheap ads,
39:33what are the rules?
39:35You can kiss goodbye
39:35to the dream of homeownership.
39:37In this wild west
39:38of information,
39:40is there a sheriff
39:41to be seen?
39:42With five weeks to go
39:45before the election,
39:47Electoral Commissioner Jeff
39:48is requested
39:49by a Senate committee
39:50to look into
39:51the curious case
39:53of the people
39:54versus Abbey Chatfield.
39:56There's a new element
39:57of electoral matter
39:58and I just want to understand
40:00how the AEC
40:00is engaging it
40:01and that's through
40:02influencers
40:03and collaborators.
40:05This is something
40:05that we haven't really seen
40:06before this election.
40:08For example,
40:09I know that the Prime Minister
40:10put up three separate
40:11collaborative reels
40:12on Instagram
40:12with Abbey Chatfield
40:14where they both
40:15explicitly promoted
40:17the Labour Party
40:17and opposed the Liberal Party.
40:19So,
40:20electoral matter.
40:21Jeff Pope
40:22is very used
40:23to being asked
40:24by senators
40:25to look into stuff.
40:26We'll have a look
40:27at the ones you've highlighted
40:28and we'll consider
40:29if there's anything
40:31that we might need
40:32to adjust.
40:32We'll have a think about that.
40:34Abbey Chatfield,
40:35podcaster of
40:36maths recaps,
40:38intimate coaching
40:38and the odd
40:39prime ministerial interview
40:40is very much
40:42not used
40:43to being investigated
40:45by the AEC.
40:46There was an accusation
40:48from Jane Hume
40:48that I was being
40:50a little bit,
40:52you know,
40:53secretive
40:54or I'd broken
40:54a rule of some kind.
40:56I was being
40:56a little bit
40:57duplicitous maybe.
40:59Because there's
40:59another element
41:00to it too.
41:01Obviously,
41:02there are some
41:03influences
41:04that are
41:05potentially being
41:06paid to produce
41:07political social media.
41:10And if I was paid,
41:12then I needed
41:13to put an authorisation
41:14from the Labor Party
41:15or from the Greens Party.
41:16That little thing
41:17at the end of an ad
41:18that's like,
41:18authorised by the Australian
41:19building on the camera.
41:20One of those things.
41:21And listen,
41:22I would have loved
41:22to have been paid
41:23by the Labor Party.
41:24I would have loved
41:24to have been paid
41:25by the Greens Party.
41:26What are you talking about?
41:27I would have declared that.
41:28But I wasn't.
41:29I wasn't in their budget.
41:31And then there was
41:31an official investigation,
41:33I think they called it,
41:34and that was just
41:36so stressful.
41:37I mean,
41:37there's a two-part test
41:38as to whether
41:39political advertising
41:40needs to be authorised.
41:42Stressful
41:43as all hell.
41:45The first part
41:45is actually
41:46whether
41:46the communication
41:48has the dominant
41:49purpose of influencing
41:50how a person
41:51is going to cast their vote.
41:53And the media
41:53made out all day
41:54like if I had done
41:55something wrong
41:55and it was found
41:56to be wrong
41:56by the AEC
41:57that I would be
41:58fucking clink, clink,
41:59fucking 20 years in prison,
42:00lose my account,
42:01$100,000 fine.
42:02Like,
42:02they made out
42:03like it was
42:03some huge big deal,
42:04right,
42:05and it was going
42:05to ruin my life
42:06and, oh, my God,
42:06she's being investigated.
42:08I'm being investigated.
42:09And the second part test
42:11is,
42:11is it paid political advertising
42:13or is it being
42:14distributed by
42:16or on behalf of
42:17a disclosure entity,
42:20which in this case
42:21would be
42:22the Prime Minister
42:23or the Labor Party?
42:24The amount
42:25of media coverage
42:26on this
42:27was as though
42:27I had been caught
42:29on CCTV
42:29murdering someone.
42:31So when you look
42:32at that two-part test,
42:34we didn't see
42:36that what was
42:37in that podcast
42:37met the threshold
42:39of that two-part test.
42:41And then it turns out
42:42that the AEC,
42:45even if I had been
42:46found guilty,
42:46which I wasn't,
42:47I was found innocent,
42:48okay,
42:49then all they would do
42:51is tell me
42:52to not do it again.
42:54Is it journalism
42:55or an ad?
42:56If it's a paid ad,
42:58it needs to bear
42:59an authorisation.
43:00Those garbled postscripts
43:02that have kept
43:03Australia's small
43:04but distinguished industry
43:05of high-speed
43:06voiceover artists
43:07in work
43:08since time immemorial.
43:09Authorised by
43:10A-Horse Liberal Canberra.
43:11Authorised by
43:11A-Rob for the Liberal Party
43:12Canberra.
43:13Authorised by
43:14Authorised by
43:14Authorised by
43:14The North Australian
43:16Party Brisbane.
43:16Can you explain
43:17the level of control
43:19that you have
43:20over the truth
43:22or otherwise
43:23of campaign advertising?
43:24Well, when it comes
43:25to campaign advertising
43:26and political advertising
43:27parties and candidates
43:29can say whatever they want
43:30and we have no
43:32regulatory authority
43:33with respect to that.
43:35The parliament's
43:35growing band
43:36of independents
43:37and third parties
43:38are pushing for
43:39truth in political
43:40advertising laws
43:42to give the AEC
43:43more powers.
43:45When you're buying
43:45a product or a service,
43:47we have consumer laws
43:48that protect us
43:49so that we don't get
43:50scammed out of our money
43:52to make sure
43:52that what we buy
43:53is actually fit for purpose.
43:55But when it comes
43:56to our voting rights,
43:57we have no such protection.
43:59So basically,
44:00advertising in the
44:01political context
44:02can be misleading
44:03and can be deceptive.
44:05Who's deciding
44:06what's true?
44:08The Liberals would say,
44:08oh, Liberals are better
44:09money managers
44:10than Labor
44:11and Labor would say,
44:11actually,
44:12you've left us
44:12with a trillion dollars
44:13of debt
44:14and nothing to show for it.
44:15So you could make
44:17arguments on both
44:17those things
44:18and you should be able to.
44:19So who's going to decide
44:20whether one of those
44:21is true or not?
44:23This is my concern.
44:24Coalition voters,
44:25Labor voters,
44:26Greens,
44:26One Nation
44:26all overwhelmingly support
44:29truth in political advertising
44:30and I keep pushing,
44:32knocking on the door
44:33for the government
44:33to do it.
44:34Would some sort of
44:35truth in political advertising
44:37laws make things
44:38easier for the AEC?
44:40No.
44:42Seems very definite.
44:44Why not?
44:45We're not the truth police
44:46and I don't think
44:48we should be.
44:49If the AEC
44:49was given that responsibility,
44:51my view
44:52is it would ruin
44:53the AEC's reputation
44:54for neutrality.
44:56And our impartiality
44:57is just so critical.
45:00We need to preserve
45:01that at all costs.
45:02It's up to the voter
45:03and it always has been
45:04and it always will be
45:07up to the voter
45:08to navigate their way
45:10through what they're seeing
45:11and hearing
45:12and to make up
45:13their own mind.
45:14At last,
45:17we find our way
45:18to the Australian voter.
45:21Around 18 million of us
45:23obliged by law
45:24to take a ballot paper
45:25each election
45:26free to complete
45:27or deface it
45:28as we see fit.
45:30Five-week federal election campaign
45:32is about to reach
45:33its climax.
45:34There are not many places
45:35in the world
45:36where you see
45:38what we see
45:38on our election day.
45:40Australians turning up
45:41to cast their vote
45:42or write on the ballot paper
45:43that they don't like any of us
45:44which is their democratic right
45:45expressing different
45:46political views
45:47but doing so peacefully
45:49and respectfully.
45:50We should be really proud of that.
45:52Of all the entities
45:53that the wholesale upheaval
45:55of the media universe
45:56has disrupted this century,
45:59perhaps the least charted
46:01are the human building blocks
46:03of our democracy.
46:04You and how you cast your vote.
46:08And so,
46:09the counting begins.
46:11Given we all got
46:11different values,
46:13different opinions,
46:14it's always been that way,
46:16always will be that way.
46:17But underpinning all of that,
46:19there should be
46:19a common factual basis.
46:21The AEC has started
46:22what will be a long night for them.
46:24Fragmented, scattered,
46:26stripped of old certainties,
46:29we're voting in a way
46:30that's transforming
46:31our parliament.
46:32The social media revolution
46:33and the fact
46:34there's no longer
46:35a common platform
46:36for discourse
46:37is slowly contributing
46:38to the fracturing
46:39of the vote.
46:41The number of independents
46:42that have been returned
46:43to the crossbench,
46:44we've got Fowler,
46:45Curtin,
46:45Kuyong,
46:46McKellar,
46:47Goldstein,
46:47Wentworth,
46:48Indy,
46:48Warringah,
46:49Mayo,
46:50Clarke,
46:50and then we've got Bradfield.
46:52New technology,
46:53new ways to access information
46:54has radically changed
46:56the way people look at
46:58how their political system
46:59is working.
47:00And with their votes,
47:01the people have spoken.
47:03Peter Dutton's lost his seat.
47:04The duopoly of the major parties
47:06is breaking down.
47:07The media concentration
47:09of the press gallery
47:10is being broken as well.
47:13This could be a big win
47:15for Labor.
47:16It is certainly a win.
47:20That beats ABC for dead.
47:23Mate, that's gold.
47:25Gold!
47:26So you don't need
47:27journalists anymore?
47:29No, I need journalists
47:30because if you don't have journalists,
47:31if you don't have the fourth estate,
47:33you haven't got a democracy.
47:34This is our question time.
47:38The things Australians
47:39think are normal
47:40really aren't.
47:42It could never happen
47:42in the Danish parliament.
47:44You don't argue
47:44with the speaker.
47:46Period.
47:47Dismantling the two-party system
47:49that's dominated our history.
47:51It would not at all
47:52surprise me
47:52if we end up
47:53in an environment
47:54of just perpetual
47:55minority governments.
47:56And a tiny community
47:57that changed
47:59the course of our nation.
48:00It was a fight.
48:02Fight for land rights.
48:03Next on Civic Duty.
48:04Next on Civic Duty.
Be the first to comment