If the Leaders’ Debate on Sunday night was meant to be an early rehearsal of the battle for the minds of Australian voters, it left online spectators mostly disappointed and divided over the result.
While Channels Nine and Seven relied on their respective squiggly lines to give an instant reaction to the two leaders and journalists passed judgment afterwards, the real debate as to who won or lost the battle for voters’ minds was played out in the flood of comments in cyberspace, particularly to news sites.
Both Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott failed to inspire a large proportion of commenters in what many thought was a lacklustre rehearsal for election day.
On balance, Jack of St Marys, NSW, thought Abbott was more convincing than the Prime Minister, writing on SBS Online: “Julia Gillard lost the debate massively. She simply parroted rehearsed slogans. There was nothing from the heart, no passion, no belief, no philosophy. Abbott didn’t necessarily win. He was nervous, but at least he showed what he stood for and managed to talk policy and belief.”
But Ken Jobling of Geelong disagreed: “Tony Abbott was too negative and was unable to give any detail on something as simple as bread and grocery prices. All he could promise was very general aims without any idea of how he would achieve it. It was as though he could not trust himself to give detailed unscripted answers.”
Commenting on Yahoo7, Dwayne thought the debate’s viewers were the biggest losers: “This was no debate. It was a chance for both to keep up the spin that they both keep putting forward. We are the losers.”
John Michael added on news.com.au: “The leaders’ debate was a farce … Not only were the scripted responses laughable, both leaders seemed disingenuous and unenthusiastic. It seems that neither party is trying to actually engage with the Australian voter.”
If there was fairly solid agreement about anything on the night, it was on the “worm”.
Channel Nine’s opinion meter, gauging a selected group’s reaction to every word uttered, has long been controversial and a major feature of the debate. But in the absence of any earth-shattering revelations from the two leaders, it stole even more attention.
Thommo commented on news.com.au: “I turned the debate off after 10 minutes as I kept looking at the worm. That was distracting me rather than listening and analysing what was being said.”
Another reader, Karl, added: “How can that worm possibly act with such speed? Someone please step on it.”
Faith did not think it mattered what the worm showed: “Why do most people need these silly worms to tell them who won the debate? I find it quite insulting and annoying. I am quite capable of making up my own mind.”
For the first time, Channel Nine’s worm and Seven’s rival polliegraph had a split personality along gender lines. Commenters were just as divided in their interpretation of whether this showed women preferred Gillard over Abbott.
Man of Wisdom of Kogarah posted on the Daily Telegraph site: “The only thing to come out of the debate for me (thanks to Channel Seven’s Polliegraph) is that women prefer Labor and men prefer Liberal ... It just goes to prove to me at least that women really must not like budgie smugglers these days and would prefer another back-stabbing Labor puppet in government.”
But Lucy of Melbourne dismissed the gender debate on WA Today: “The suggestion that the candidates’ popularity follows only gender lines seems narrow-minded to me. I watched the worm go up for Abbott as much as Gillard (on Channel Nine at least). And last time I checked I’m female and have every intention of voting for Abbott.”
So will the Leaders’ Debate swing votes on August 21? The impression from most comments is that the two leaders failed to reveal anything new about their policies.
As W. Adams said on the Herald Sun site: “If you were undecided on who to vote for and were looking for policies on major concerns you would be still waiting and no better informed than before the debate.”
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
RT @gregprichard: The Victorian Sports Minister has just sent the New Zealand Prime Minister a commiserative email. #stateoforigin
@VanillathunderV fair comeback. But seriously, if that was a try then I'll book my skiing in Queensland this year
@BrettS69 the loveliest thing about post-origin is the sledges from gloating qlders #ratherbeagoodloserthanapoorwinner
That is the video referee howler to end all howlers to end all howlers to end all howlers to end all howlers #stateoforigin
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Animal experiments won’t cure me from cancer
Lying on a cold table in an unfamiliar place and undergoing a core biopsy was probably one of the most…
If you want to get promoted, laugh at the boss’s jokes
Red alert, ladies. Making jokes about your ability at work is not funny particularly at board level.…
Need someone to do your dirty work? Try God.
Punishing the baddies is only fun in the movies. In real life it’s messy, expensive, and fraught…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
Michael S says:
"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone
Change Up! says:
I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]Gentle jabs to the ribs
They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more
Most commented