Albanese is fighting an election in the attention economy. The deciding votes will come from those least engaged

The Guardian

04-03-2025

Beyond the electoral contests of party, policy and personality lies a more primal battle: the fight for our attention in an era when democratic deliberation is, in the words of MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes, 'like trying to meditate in a strip club'.
Candidates mount the stage for their poll dance, performing before an electorate for whom information is infinite and ubiquitous, but whose attention is both limited and contested.
As Hayes writes in his compelling new book The Sirens' Call, politics plays in 'a country full of megaphones, a crushing wall of sound, the swirling lights of a 24/7 casino blinking at us, all part of a system minutely engineered to take our attention away from us for profit'.
This deafening white noise presents a material challenge for the incumbent Labor government as it seeks a second term.
Results of the last Essential Report highlight their quandary with voters struggling to recall Labor policy achievements, even when prompted, yet ready to accept they were important initiatives once they paid attention.
Watching the way two of the core planks for the ALP case for re-election landed over the past fortnight – the Reserve Bank's decision to reduce interest rates and the Medicare bulk-billing announcement – reinforces the government's attention-deficit challenge.
Labor has seized on the first reduction in interest rates since the Reserve Bank began tightening monetary policy as proof that its strategy to reduce inflation without driving the nation into recession had been successful.
But findings in our latest report show how quick voters are to dismiss the interest rate cuts. Apart from those who are directly impacted by mortgages, the Reserve Bank decision does not appear to have cut through as something that will benefit voters personally.
On the economic level, falling interest rates, low unemployment and the halving of inflation is a great story. But, like the Harvey Norman ad promises, the current public response is 'no interest'.
The inherent challenge for the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, is that a soft landing, by definition, means there is no body count. 'Plane lands without casualties' is just not news.
Labor might point to the surge in unemployment in New Zealand, where a new conservative government has introduced the sorts of job cut policies that Peter Dutton is championing, but whoever paid attention to what is happening over the ditch?
Labor is desperate for our attention, the opposition not so much. With very limited policies and a leader who only a mother could love, the Coalition are running small target to convince us that things just need to get 'back on track'.
A tell of the Coalition's desperation to minimise our attention came in last weekend's remarkable decision to match Labor's Medicare rebate announcement before the PM's speech was even over.
Recognising the Coalition's brand weakness on health (Peter Dutton was voted by doctors as the worst health minister in 35 years), the decision to match Labor was calculated to minimise the attention placed on the issue.
A second question shows why 'funding Medicare' is not the hill Dutton wants to die on.
This entire table should offer some succour to Labor supporters disheartened by opinion polls suggesting the Coalition is 'ahead' in the horse race (our poll has the two ponies pretty much even).
On the core areas of Labor brand strength – health, wages and climate – Labor is more trusted. On the Coalition traditional ground of economic management and international relations it's line ball. On cost of living, Labor is modestly ahead. The challenge for both parties is that mass of voters who see 'no difference'.
Which brings us to Hayes' colourful description of politics in the age of attention capitalism – Big Tech's business model that exploits our engagement with the world and turns it into a tradable commodity.
Trump dominates our newsfeeds but even where local issues cut through, antisemitism, thwarted terror attacks and China panics are much more clickable than urgent care clinics, cheaper childcare and aged care reform.
'Without a formal set of institutions to force public attention on a topic, no basic rules for who will speak when and who will listen, the need for attention becomes exclusive; it swallows debate, it swallows persuasion, it swallows discourse whole,' Hayes argues.
A final table illustrates this point elegantly. More than half the voters say they are paying little or no attention to the upcoming election. Those paying the least attention are those who are least likely to have settled on their vote.
To spell it out: the election will be decided by the people paying the least attention and with the lowest commitment to their ultimate choice. They will cast their ballot while viewing politics out of the corner of their eye.
This is what Scott Morrison instinctively mastered in 2019. There wasn't even an attempt to win any debate, just a series of photo ops and memes. Then that attention became a negative and he effectively voiced the Labor campaign against him in 2022.
This time around Anthony Albanese wants, needs, voters to focus on policy which requires deeper attention before they can make an informed choice. While people say they will weigh up the parties before they vote, will they be able to find the headspace to do so?
In contrast, Dutton just wants our instinctive reactions. Do we feel better off than three years ago? Does Albanese seem weak when he balances nuance? Does nuclear look like a plan if you don't check the numbers?
It is here, amid the lights and the shouting and the mass of writhing bodies that the 2025 federal election will be fully revealed.
Peter Lewis is an executive director of Essential, a progressive strategic communications and research company. He is a Per Capita board member