Sunday, with Election 2010 barely twenty four hours old, the first heavy hitting advertisements of the campaign hit our screens and appeared in our Sunday newspapers.  They had surprisingly high production values for election ads but in my view they went straight to the heart of what this election is all about – the fight over which political journalist will win the most viewers.

We’ve heard that Channel 7 will go “Beyond the spin”, a new ABC TV Channel is competing with Sky News, Sky News is still great and Channel 9 still has Laurie Oakes. 

After two days of the campaign we’ve seen more advertising by news organisations for their election coverage than we have from the major political parties.

But that’s okay, because if media coverage of election campaigns is about one thing it is the ability of the media to talk about itself, set the agenda and then analyse it’s agenda while ending up disappointed with politicians for not talking about the media’s agenda. And, this election we will have not one but two 24 hour TV stations featuring journalists talking to other journalists about what third journalists have written or said. 

The question for those of us who’d like politicians to be a bit bolder, engage in more reform and set out a more exciting policy agenda is, how much could the media improve things if it tried?

Quite a lot actually, if it decided to concentrate on the substance of debate rather than the sizzle. 

Depressingly, most coverage in election campaigns covers a tried and tested formula of cliché, recycled storylines and inaccurate prognostications.  Thank god for something like The Punch which is one of the few places that actively tries to encourage debate of substance and a diverse range of views from more than the usual suspects.

But, already this election campaign we’ve had a couple of old standards jumping out of the box first up. 

The interminably inane statement that “the election will be won and lost in the marginal seats” has already been used over a dozen times by journalists on my count.  Like, duh.  .  Look forward to, “it’s not going to be a uniform swing” coming soon from a pundit near you.

We’ve had almost as many ridiculous prognostications saying it will be won in Queensland and New South Wales – take that the rest of the country with its 22 seats officially classified as marginal.  Your issues (mining tax anyone?) don’t really matter.

And I look forward to these perennial staples of cliché in weeks to come.

The badly behaved candidate scandal will be right up there.  A candidate (usually some no hoper in a safe seat of the other party) will express a genuine opinion or may slightly stray off the party office issued talking points and the media will overreact in such a way, blowing it all out of proportion, that will result in the main political parties choosing ever more robotic candidates next time. 

And then we’ll have the thousands of column inches that will be written about the worm, which may or may not relate to who won the debate but will certainly have absolutely no bearing on who wins the election.

The spend-o-meters, are also up and running, a mindless calculation of what each side has promised, devoid of all analysis, telling us nothing about the actual promises – certainly not whether the proposed spending will benefit Australia or not

Stories about campaign events will almost certainly overwhelm by a large margin stories about each party’s policies.  But, if more column inches and air time were spent discussing the policy announcements and their impact on Australians’ lives wouldn’t the quality of our political debate be improved?

Most commentators ignored Julia Gillard’s announcement of a $200 million program to help build affordable homes in our major cities yesterday.  Imagine if the media had focussed on who and how such a policy would benefit, where it would make a real difference or indeed the flaws or missteps in making such an announcement.  Would Australian’s be more interested in the election?  It’s possible.

Given the way the media covers elections in such glib terms, it is hard to believe that it is all the fault of our politicians for dumbing down their messages. The reality is that many political journalists are obsessed by the processes of politics rather than the substance of policy and while ever this remains the case there is little reason for political parties to change their tunes. 

It’s okay for journalists to find the arcane manoeuvres of politics more interesting than the policies, but not to then criticise political parties for also playing that game by providing a major story of the day with appropriate pictures and putting all their effort into creating TV ads.

For those who despair about the level of political debate in this country – elections unfortunately offer no respite.  So far, this election is true to form with the press less concerned with the contest between Gillard and Abbott and more concerned with the contest over their own egos. 

So, moving forward what can we expect from this election campaign? More of the same I’m afraid – August 21 can’t come soon enough.

11 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Old Clive says:

      08:24am | 22/07/10

      You’ve got them pegged brother,  good on you, forget about this democratic stuff, just give us a board of political commentators who know every thing there is to know, they would give us the utopia that we all dream about.

    • Nathan says:

      08:45am | 22/07/10

      Thats a pretty spot on analysis of this election coverage. I was talking the other day about how disapointing this election coverage really is. With the introduction of ABC News 24, i was hoping that between Sky and ABC, we would get a real battle with real analysis taking place. Only time will tell with ABC News 24 coming online tonight. But nothing against David Speers from Sky, but talking about performance of the politicion is not what i want to hear, we can see the visual things as much as you, but ask the hard questions about the policy, How will it be implemented, when, Who will it effect, how will it effect the budget bottom line?

      I wish i knew how to get into this political comentator scene because very rarely in Australian politics, the hard questions are asked, especially on an even handed approach.

    • Bitten says:

      09:03am | 22/07/10

      Hurrah! Finally someone articulating all that I find to ring true during the election campaign period. When an election is announced, I sadly prescribe turning off the TV, the radio and limiting your internet exposure to select sites (usually shopping, what can I say, girl knows what she likes!). Go into survival mode and hope to come out with no media stupid splashed on you.

    • stephen says:

      09:06am | 22/07/10

      yep, its lazy reporting.  After all, why do policy analysis (its so dull!!) when its much easier to treat everything as a soap opera.

    • ibast says:

      09:52am | 22/07/10

      I just completely filter the commercial channels when it comes to Political journalism (High Riminton may be the exception).  It’s pretty obvious where core beliefs of the print journalists lay, so a grain of salt goes a long way there.  There are a couple of extreme examples there, so I don’t even bother reading their tripe.

    • Beagle says:

      11:38am | 22/07/10

      Problem for the simple minded is that they believe what those print journalists you mention write. They don’t understand the difference between analyzing something in a fair and balanced way and opinion writing masquerading as news.

    • Elphaba says:

      01:44pm | 22/07/10

      I’ll be watching Yes We Canberra!

      Poor journalism or not, I find every election fascinating.  I’m a junkie for it.

      Oh dear… I’m so lame. raspberry

    • DD Ball says:

      02:26pm | 22/07/10

      The election coverage appears to be one eyed in support of the ALP’s fortunes. This makes for boring coverage. So that Gillard does no wrong in not saying what her policy is on any issue, and the conservatives are misconstrued in their presentation of issues. As with ‘07, the continuous lies has an effect on voters, and it makes it appear as if politics is all about the negative. But, in fact, it is about our future.

    • ibast says:

      02:53pm | 22/07/10

      A couple of things are going on here DD.  Firstly Abbott got a free ride with the media up until he was polling within reach of Rudd.  It was only a couple of weeks before Rudd’s ousting that I started to see any critical stories on Abbott.  Up to that point he made good copy, so the media was slack in doing their job of being critical.  As for the first week of the campaign, it has been dominated by Abbott making himself look bad.  So Abbott is getting a fair go.  It’s just he isn’t making the most of it.

    • DD Ball says:

      09:39pm | 22/07/10

      ibast, are you proud of that spin? Can you think of a policy of Gillard that hasn’t been opposed by her in the past? Can you name a policy of Mr Abbott that is bad, without misrepresenting it?

    • Nat Sam says:

      07:08pm | 23/07/10

      There really isn’t even that much sizzle!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Greece makes the final and Ireland gets in on a golden ticket. How awkward and embarrassing. Love it. #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Every single #eurovision band is roxette #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

The weird thing about #eurovision is you've got this massive collection of dorks in a room and no one is wearing Spock ears #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Europe has the large hadron collider which is light years ahead of its time and #eurovision, where the eighties never die

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

This concern for Thomson won’t change the script

This concern for Thomson won’t change the script

Under pressure himself over his crusade against Craig Thomson, Tony Abbott has moved to present a softer…

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

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

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter