Sydney’s Nightlife Unlocked: An Analysis Of The Lock Out Laws
In an effort to compete with cities around the world with a bustling nightlife, Sydney’s controversial lock out laws have recently been dialed back to resuscitate the city’s weakened night-life and revive the city’s economy.
In this article we’ll explore the media coverage around Sydney’s lock out laws in the lead up to the recent changes.
About the lock out laws
Since the inception of the laws in 2014, many restaurants, pubs, nightclubs and bars in Kings Cross, Haymarket, Surry Hills, Cockle Bay and Darlinghurst have been required to abide by the laws of denying people entry after 1:30am and ceasing alcohol service at 3am.
The lock out laws will remain in Kings Cross however they will be abolished in the CBD.
Sydney is a global city, yet it’s also a city that turns into a ghost town once the sun goes down. It’s lacking nightlife has not reflected the status of a global city and as such a rev up has been ordered by the NSW Premier. The City of Sydney Council notes the nearly half a million people aged under 35 give Sydney a miss every year and as a result is hurting the economy.
A parliamentary inquiry was undertaken to examine the impact of the laws on nightlife and crime. With over 800 submissions, the committee were given insight into the restrictions having reduced crime in Kings Cross, yet it had also taken a toll on Sydney’s night-time economy and had taken a hit. The live music industry has been the main industry affected with more than 170 venues shutting down during the past five years.
The Keep Sydney Safe campaign- run by the Last Drinks coalition of emergency service workers, questions whether removing the restrictions is a good idea as their studies show the most effective way to reduce alcohol-fueled violence is by placing restrictions on the late-night sale of alcohol.
Lock out laws media mention analysis and key spokespeople
Mentions of lock out laws January 1 2019 – September 13 2019
Not surprisingly, we have seen a spike in conversations around the topic of “lock out laws” in September since the announcement of their abolition, with mentions reaching similar figures to those in May when it was first announced the laws would be reviewed.
It is notable that the top five spokespeople leading conversations about the lock out laws are split for and against removal.
We see in the graph below Gladys Berejiklian is leading the conversations across Print, Broadcast and Online with 41 percent and she discusses the need to balance the community safety alongside having a strong night time economy and it being time to revitalise the city’s nightlife.
Dr Tony Sara from the Last Drinks Campaign, who opposes revocation, makes up 21 percent of conversations, and he focuses on the laws have dramatically reduced alcohol-related assaults. Tyson Koh from Keep Sydney Open, who has been campaigning for the removal of the laws for the last five years and has recently started a campaign for pill testing at festivals, follows closely behind Dr Sara with 18 percent of conversations.
Other opponents of the reversal, including the NSW Nurses and Midwives Association and St Vincent’s Hospital, are calling on the State Government to retain the laws. They point out that laws have already saved half a million dollars in ambulance and medical costs at St Vincent’s Hospital alone by decreasing the number of fractures requiring surgery. They also warn the rollback could result in a rise in alcohol-fueled violence, putting the safety of the community at risk. Hospital emergency staff are disappointed in the decision as they treat most of the city’s emergency patients and see the results of violence first hand.
Although the government is set to lift the laws, the NSW Premier has stated they could be reintroduced quickly, if their removal does not make a positive impact on the city.
If you would like to learn more about this topic through the media lens or anything media intelligence related, get in touch with us today.
Loren is an experienced marketing professional who translates data and insights using Isentia solutions into trends and research, bringing clients closer to the benefits of audience intelligence. Loren thrives on introducing the groundbreaking ways in which data and insights can help a brand or organisation, enabling them to exceed their strategic objectives and goals.
What’s the Albanese government’s real game plan for its second term, and how will it play out in the media? Isentia recently brought together three of Australia's top political journalists to pull back the curtain: Peter Gearin, Editor in Chief atThe Mandarin, Jason Koutsoukis from The Saturday Paper, and acclaimed broadcaster Virginia Haussegger AM, for a panel with our partners CPRA at the Government Communications Forum, held at the National Press Club
For communications pros, the conversation was packed with clues about what to expect next from Canberra.
A smart strategy or a wasted opportunity?
The panel honed in on the government’s positioning since its “monumental election victory” an “oddly quiet return to political normality.” It’s a question every political operator is asking: is this a calculated, smart and stable approach, or is the government squandering a chance to be “bold and progressive”?
Peter Gearin suggested the caution is deliberate and here to stay. His take? The government learned a huge lesson from the Voice referendum, when Labor bit off too much, meaning the Government now wants to occupy the political centre and won’t risk getting caught out like that again. Expect the cautious approach and the first-term playbook to continue.
What sits behind this posture is a desire to move beyond being a party in power to being seen as the party of government. While critics argue this looks like stagnation, supporters see a measured style that prioritises trust over spectacle.
What’s on the agenda? Policy and Parliament
So, what are the key issues the government needs to nail this term? The panel highlighted several areas to watch closely:
Economic messaging: The recent Economic Roundtable was seen as the government’s attempt to carefully make the case or test the waters for change. How this translates into actual policy will be a major test.
The public sector: The Mandarin’s editor pointed to the ongoing agenda for Australia’s public servants and the government’s plans for improving the sector. Katy Gallagher is driving a vision of “evolution, not revolution” with a focus on strengthening in-house capability and reducing reliance on consultants.
Parliamentary chess: With the new makeup of parliament, will the government keep trying to find consensus with the opposition, or will it work with the Greens to drive a more progressive agenda? This strategic choice will define the term. The Greens are repositioning to be more pragmatic at the federal level, while the Coalition remains fragmented. A weak opposition could make the government’s path smoother, but it also risks reducing contestability and scrutiny in the system.
Leadership and cabinet confidence
Much of the government’s steadiness comes from its internal team. Albanese is viewed as a strategic operator with deep Labor roots, and his confidence is backed by a cohesive cabinet. Ministers like Jim Chalmers and Katy Gallagher have emerged as key players, bolstering the sense of stability. This team-based strength underpins the government’s cautious but deliberate style.
Balancing foreign policy and national interest
While domestic policy dominates headlines, the government is also asserting national interest abroad. Stability in foreign policy has been part of its strategy to project maturity and avoid overreach. This layer of pragmatism adds to the perception of a government intent on consolidating itself as a long-term, steady hand.
From broadcasting to narrowcasting
For communicators, the real gold was the discussion on how to get a message across in today’s complex and vast media landscape.
The panel explored the government’s newer tactics, like the PM’s appearances on popular podcasts with influencers such as Abby Chatfield and Hannah Ferguson. This reflects a broader shift from broadcasting to narrowcasting, with messages tailored to segmented audiences rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. Success now depends on understanding fragmented channels and feeding high-quality, diverse content into the ecosystem.
But even as the playbook evolves, there’s an argument for getting the basics right. Gearin believes the media’s core job is to talk truth to power and explain how government decisions actually affect citizens, rather than just focusing on the politics or the optics. As news consumption habits change, especially among younger Australians, this balance between accountability and relevance is more important than ever.
We are watching a government playing a cautious long game, intent on cementing itself as the party of government while avoiding the risks of overreach. At the same time, the opposition’s weakness and media’s evolution raise questions about accountability and contestability. For communicators, understanding both the government’s measured strategy and the fast-changing media playbook is essential to navigating the term ahead.
Cautious, considered, or coasting? Decoding the Albanese government’s second term
What’s the Albanese government’s real game plan for its second term, and how will it play out in the media? Isentia recently brought together three of Australia’s top political journalists to pull back the curtain: Peter Gearin, Editor in Chief atThe Mandarin, Jason Koutsoukis from The Saturday Paper, and acclaimed broadcaster Virginia Haussegger AM, for […]
At Isentia’s Beyond the Barossa panel, industry leaders from tourism, higher education, government, defence, and media came together to discuss how South Australia is being positioned, both to its own people and to the world. The discussion highlighted shared challenges, opportunities, and the essential role of communications in shaping South Australia’s identity.
South Australia’s brand: confidence and complexity
Chris Burford (South Australian Tourism Commission) outlined the dual challenge of building national and international awareness while fostering local pride. While South Australia currently ranks sixth of eight states on “appeal and consideration” as a tourist destination, it leads the nation in state pride. Events like Liv Golf and Gather Round have helped South Australians feel more confident about their state, and post-COVID reflections have driven a greater appreciation for the quality of life.
The SATC’s Celebrate the Simple Pleasures campaign reflects a move toward “place branding,” focusing less on iconic landmarks and more on the lived experience of being in South Australia. The research underpinning the campaign revealed a consistent theme: South Australians want the state to “grow but not change” embracing progress while retaining its distinct character.
Education and global perceptions
Djurdjica Arslanagic (Adelaide University) noted that Adelaide’s perception internationally has shifted from being seen as a regional city to a globally attractive destination for students. South Australia’s reputation as welcoming, safe, and supportive resonates strongly with international families making education choices. With the upcoming merger of Adelaide’s universities, communication is focused on tailoring messages to varied stakeholders, from students to alumni to government, ensuring consistency while meeting different needs.
Defence, industry and the workforce challenge
Sasha Meldrum (Nova Systems) discussed the enormous communications challenge posed by AUKUS and the scale of defence industry growth. With tens of thousands of workers required, from shipbuilders to nuclear scientists, attracting talent locally and globally will demand new policy approaches and fresh messaging. Meldrum emphasised that communicators must also help shift perceptions of defence, reframing it as not only about warfare but also about peacekeeping, security, and technological advancement.
Media fragmentation and targeted storytelling
Verity Edwards (Hughes PR) reflected on the contraction of South Australian newsrooms and the rise of alternative platforms. Traditional prestige outlets like The Advertiser still hold influence, but strategies now require targeting the right audience with the right medium. For some clients, industry publications or regional media can have far greater impact than mainstream outlets. Edwards highlighted the need for nuanced communication strategies that prioritise outcomes over exposure, and lateral thinking to match stories with audiences.
The climate story
A key challenge raised during the Q&A was South Australia’s ongoing algal bloom crisis. Burford noted its severe impact on coastal communities and tourism, with uncertainty around long-term recovery. He stressed the importance of communication grounded in science and transparency to maintain public trust, comparing the challenge to COVID in its unpredictability. The discussion highlighted how crucial clear, proactive communication is, both in explaining what’s happening and in shaping the narrative around next steps.
Key Takeaways:
Confidence in identity – South Australians are more assured in their story, but lifting national and international visibility remains a priority.
Nuanced storytelling – Different audiences, from universities to defence to tourism, require tailored approaches that balance authenticity with strategy.
Collaboration – Industry, government, and academia must align communications to tackle workforce, economic, and reputational challenges.
Think laterally – Success isn’t always about “big hits”; smaller, targeted placements often deliver the most impact.
Beyond the Barossa: Communicating South Australia’s evolving story
At Isentia’s Beyond the Barossa panel, industry leaders from tourism, higher education, government, defence, and media came together to discuss how South Australia is being positioned, both to its own people and to the world. The discussion highlighted shared challenges, opportunities, and the essential role of communications in shaping South Australia’s identity. South Australia’s brand: […]
A critical blind spot has emerged in Australia's housing debate. An analysis of news coverage compared to social discussion reveals that the conversation happening in the news media, a calm, 'top-down' discussion of financial strategy for existing homeowners, is dangerously disconnected from the raw, emotional reality unfolding on social media.
While news outlets focus on interest rates and mortgage advice, the public conversation is a volatile, 'bottom-up' outcry over the lived experience of unaffordability and political frustration. This gap between the financial narrative and the public's emotional reality represents a significant strategic risk for any organisation communicating in this space.
In stark contrast, social media is having a "bottom-up" conversation, focusing on the personal pain points of cost, blame, and political frustration. It speaks from within the economy. At its heart, this conversation is driven by the raw, personal impact of an unaffordable market; users aren't debating abstract forecasts, they're lamenting the "exorbitant" cost of "multimillion dollar postage stamp sized tenancies." This personal frustration then quickly seeks a target, splintering into direct political blame over specific tax policies and a deep-seated criticism of the planning bureaucracy, which is seen as a fundamental roadblock.
The core theme is the lived experience of exorbitant real estate prices, with users directly linking high property values to the unaffordability of everyday life and business. There is a strong undercurrent of blame directed at planners, councils, and perceived bureaucratic inefficiency as a primary driver of the housing shortage. The housing discussion is frequently and explicitly politicised, with users tying the crisis to taxation or economic policies.
Analysis shows a public belief that the government is prioritising private developers over vulnerable citizens. The revelation of stakeholder meetings behind closed doors to discuss 'investment models' for public housing towers for example has solidified a narrative of privatisation by stealth. The call for public housing is a direct demand for the government to re-assert its role as a protector of citizens, not a facilitator for private profit. Underpinning all of these solutions is a palpable sense of moral urgency, driven by the visible 'human cost' of the crisis. But this frustration is not passive. With calls for street resistance and construction unions to refuse demolition work, the message is clear: if these concrete actions are not taken, the conversation will move from online forums to the streets and worksites.
Monitoring and identifying these distinct ideological fault lines is crucial. It allows a communications team to understand the specific arguments and trigger words of each camp. Any government announcement will not be received by a single public, but will land on this fractured community and be interpreted through these pre-existing lenses.
A critical blind spot has emerged in Australia’s housing debate. An analysis of news coverage compared to social discussion reveals that the conversation happening in the news media, a calm, ‘top-down’ discussion of financial strategy for existing homeowners, is dangerously disconnected from the raw, emotional reality unfolding on social media. While news outlets focus on […]
Across the communications landscape, teams are being asked to do more with less, while staying aligned, responsive and compliant in the face of complex and often shifting stakeholder demands. In that environment, how we track, report and manage our relationships really matters.
In too many organisations, relationship management is still built around tools designed for customer sales. CRM systems, built for structured pipelines and linear user journeys, have long been the default for managing contact databases. They work well for sales and customer service functions. But for communications professionals managing journalists, political offices, internal leaders and external advocates, these tools often fall short.
Stakeholder relationships don’t follow a straight line. They change depending on context, shaped by policy shifts, public sentiment, media narratives or crisis response. A stakeholder may be supportive one week and critical the next. They often hold more than one role, and their influence doesn’t fit neatly into a funnel or metric.
Managing these relationships requires more than contact management. It requires context. The ability to see not just who you spoke to, but why, and what happened next. Communications teams need shared visibility across issues and departments. As reporting expectations grow, that information must be searchable, secure and aligned with wider organisational goals.
What’s often missing is infrastructure. Without the right systems, strategic relationship management becomes fragmented or reactive. Sometimes it becomes invisible altogether.
This is where Stakeholder Relationship Management (SRM) enters the conversation. Not as a new acronym, but as a different way of thinking about influence.
At Isentia, we’ve seen how a purpose-built SRM platform can help communications teams navigate complexity more confidently. Ours offers a secure, centralised space to log and track every interaction, whether it’s a media enquiry, a ministerial meeting, or a community update, and link it to your team’s broader communications activity.
The aim isn’t to automate relationships. It’s to make them easier to manage, measure and maintain. It’s about creating internal coordination before the external message goes out.
Because in today’s communications environment, stakeholder engagement is not just a support function. It is a strategic capability.
Across the communications landscape, teams are being asked to do more with less, while staying aligned, responsive and compliant in the face of complex and often shifting stakeholder demands. In that environment, how we track, report and manage our relationships really matters. In too many organisations, relationship management is still built around tools designed for […]
