Albanese is fighting an election in the attention economy. The deciding votes will come from those least engaged
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
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
42 minutes ago
- Reuters
Air Canada to resume flights after directive ending strike
Aug 17 (Reuters) - Air Canada ( opens new tab said it planned to resume flights on Sunday after the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) acted on a directive from Canada's Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu to end the strike resulting in the suspension of more than 700 flights. The CIRB directed Air Canada to resume airline operations and for all Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge flight attendants to resume their duties by 2 p.m. ET (1800 GMT), the airline said. Thousands of Air Canada flight attendants walked off the job for the first time since 1985, after months of negotiations over a new contract.
The Guardian
14 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘Dump it, or we'll dump you': secretive consultancy group sends Liberal MPs barrage of emails over net zero policy
Liberal MPs have been sent a barrage of emails demanding they drop net zero targets or 'risk losing our support' by a group connected to conservative right-wing lobby group Advance. The mass emails, seen by Guardian Australia, have been sent to multiple Liberals by Whitestone Strategic, a secretive political consultancy group and come as the Coalition reviews its energy policy. Coalition MPs began receiving the emails – which one described as looking as if they were sent by AI bots – on Monday night. Some MPs received more than 100 within 48 hours from the same address. Sign up: AU Breaking News email One of the emails reads: 'A message to the Liberal Party and Nationals: Net Zero is causing irreversible damage to our nation. Our economic health is declining … immediate action is required. Dump Net Zero policies now, or we will stop supporting your agenda.' Another reads: 'Net Zero is a dangerous joke. It's time to dump it, or we'll dump you.' The email sender appears to be Whitestone Strategic but the email address is listed as CiviClick – a US-based platform that describes itself as AI-Powered grassroots advocacy software, that allows users to 'reach elected officials with powerful policy messages'. A Guardian Australia investigation in October revealed Whitestone Strategic's close ties to Advance, the rightwing advocacy group behind the main organisation promoting a no vote in the Indigenous voice referendum, Fair Australia. A separate investigation also found Whitestone Strategic billed taxpayers almost $135,000 over two years for work providing media messaging for conservative politicians during the voice to parliament campaign. Whitestone Strategic's work for Coalition members has extended beyond the voice campaign. None of the emails, sent since Monday, are addressed directly to the politician, or signed off by a member of the public. Many of the dozens of emails received by MPs contain the same message and some contain what appears to be coding left in unintentionally. Advance announced on 8 August it would launch a campaign targeting 'weakling' Liberals, by pressuring them to drop their support for net zero by 2050. On 15 August, it said its supporters had sent 19,897 emails to coalition MPs and senators. Several members who received the emails expressed frustration over the tactic. One Liberal, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said they received at least 50 emails in 24 hours, none directly addressed to them. 'The policy review process is important, we must take the time to do it right,' they said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'We cannot be distracted by external groups with their own agendas.' Another Liberal, who asked not to be named, derided the emails and said they looked like they had been sent by 'AI bots', due to multiple of the same message being sent. This MP, who said they were previously supportive of Whitestone's work, said 'Why can't Whitestone get this stuff right?'. Liberal Senator for South Australia, Andrew McLachlan, a vocal supporter of net zero and climate action, confirmed he'd received dozens of emails from Whitestone Strategic over the last 48 hours. He said maintaining emissions reduction targets is critical and said he would continue to advocate for the target. 'It is not 'weakness' to support targets to reduce pollution. You are not a 'weakling' to be committed to exploring every possible solution to respond to our changing climate,' he said. The Liberal party is reviewing its energy policies, led by the shadow energy minister, Dan Tehan. The opposition leader, Sussan Ley, hasn't committed to keeping net zero, but some vocal members of the Coalition – including Barnaby Joyce, Michael McCormack, Matt Canavan and Tony Pasin – have been publicly and privately lobbying against the target. In response to questions from Guardian Australia, Advance said they wouldn't comment on individual emails from supporters, but that 'it is no secret that we are campaigning against net zero and have asked our supporters to contact MPs to voice their opposition'.
The Guardian
14 hours ago
- The Guardian
As the economy slows and productivity flatlines, is Australia having another banana republic moment?
When Paul Keating stepped into a noisy kitchen in a Melbourne function centre for an interview with John Laws, he didn't mince his words. It was 14 May 1986 when the then Labor treasurer told Laws that without some serious changes, a collapse in export prices meant our trade-dependent country was living beyond its means and fast on its way to becoming 'a banana republic'. 'If this government cannot get the adjustment, get manufacturing going again and keep moderate wage outcomes and a sensible economic policy, then Australia is basically done for,' Keating told Laws. Sign up: AU Breaking News email It was that sense of urgency – the threat of a 'banana republic' – that helped blow away the cobwebs of complacency and drive the massive reforms of the 1980s and 1990s. Australia in the decades since has prospered. Yet once again we are having similar conversations. The economy doesn't seem to be functioning as it should, and may only be capable of growing at a fraction of the rate it used to. The budget is in structural deficit. The population is ageing, and our demand for government services grows and grows, even as our capacity to fund that extra spending goes the other way. Younger Australians are increasingly resentful about their lot, homes are too expensive and the world outside our shores looks more dangerous than it has in decades. Used to being a standout on the global stage, we are being relegated to the back of the pack. Living standards across the rich world climbed by an average of 22% over the past decade. In comparison, our living standards are up just 1.5%, according to analysis by Chris Richardson, an independent economist. Analysts place a lot of the blame for this on a slowdown on one thing: productivity growth. They point to the fact that our economy is no more productive now than it was in 2016. Over the longer term, productivity growth is the ingredient that delivers higher real wages, generates better-quality goods and helps pay for government services. Technological change can explain a lot of productivity growth over the decades. The promise of artificial intelligence is that it ignites an explosion of new growth as AI embeds itself deeper into the economy and our lives. With so much apparently at stake, Chalmers in a recent interview was asked if flatlining national productivity was a 'crisis'. 'No,' the treasurer said, 'but it's a big challenge'. Australia and Australians have a lot of 'big challenges', and some are regularly referred to as 'crises'. Yet not all are worthy of a three-day economic reform roundtable with 900 submissions and 40 ministerial mini-roundtables leading up to it. At the National Press Club on 18 June, Chalmers declared that the government has 'a responsibility to rebuild confidence in liberal democratic politics and economic institutions – by lifting living standards for working people in particular'. Days out from the start of the roundtable, Chalmers has been at pains to play down the very reform fervour that he fanned. Anthony Albanese appears to have little appetite for spending political capital in pushing through tough economic reforms. The PM has made it clear that there will be – read his lips – no new taxes this term. The treasurer has obediently narrowed the scope of the potential 'deliverables' to regulatory reform to get more homes built, with a side promise of some progress on longstanding policy ideas, like a road user charge. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The lack of a 'crisis' in productivity may make it hard to understand why we have spent nearly six weeks leading up to this talkfest in Canberra. But it does help explain the apparent lack of urgency to solve the issue. So what do economists reckon: do we have a productivity crisis? The answer, Richardson quips, 'depends whether you like rising living standards or not'. Are we a commodity price collapse away from becoming a 21st-century version of Keating's 'banana republic'? Saul Eslake, another independent economist, says no – the economy now is totally transformed. Rather than crisis, Eslake volunteers the word 'malaise'. 'I don't think it would help the debate to call it a productivity crisis,' he adds – that could lead to rushed and short-term measures that might just goose the economy for a year or two. 'There are no magic bullets, no short-term solutions. Nothing that can be done, even with the greatest amount of political will, to lift productivity growth in 12 months' time,' Eslake says. John Hawkins, an economics professor at the University of Canberra, says productivity is not a crisis because it's 'not something that is making people worse off'. Instead: 'It's a lost opportunity to make us better off'. 'We got used to the idea that incomes go up over time. Over the long run most of that increase has come from productivity,' Hawkins says. 'More recently we got away with low productivity growth because commodities were strong, but we need to do something if we want real income growth going forward.' Shadows of the 1980s, then, from which we can expect echoes of that era's reforms.
