Media and social highlights from the election campaign 2025
This was not an election won or lost on policy alone. While political parties released detailed plans around cost-of-living relief, energy, healthcare and education, the battle for attention played out across a different terrain. One shaped by identity, digital influencers and polarised media narratives.
1. Policy set the agenda, but didn’t hold it
At the start of the campaign, traditional media focused on familiar priorities. The Labor government’s May budget led with cost-of-living relief, fuel excise changes and increased rental support. The Liberals responded with proposals for nuclear energy and a plan to cut 40,000 public service jobs. While these issues framed the early weeks, they were quickly overtaken in online discussions by stories with more cultural weight.
On social media, a video comparing Peter Dutton to Donald Trump circulated widely, while Anthony Albanese’s “delulu with no solulu” moment during a Happy Hour podcast interview was picked up by national outlets and widely shared on social platforms. Personality often generated more interest than policy.
2. Messaging strategy went beyond the platforms
Both major parties tried to engage younger voters where they spend their time. Albanese’s appearance on podcasts and his interviews with influencers like Abbie Chatfield reflected a values-driven approach. Dutton’s appearance on Sam Fricker’s podcast targeted young men through a more casual, conversational format.
Mainstream media covered these appearances but often through the lens of political tactics rather than substance. When Abbie Chatfield’s pro-Greens posts attracted AEC scrutiny in early April, the story became more about influencer regulation than her political message.
3. Polarisation dominated public debate
The second leaders’ debate on 10 April marked a turning point, with stark contrasts on energy, education and immigration. Dutton’s focus on crime and border control drew backlash, while Albanese was seen as calm but cautious. Instead of clarifying party differences, the debate intensified existing divides.
Online commentary quickly split along ideological lines. Audiences did not just debate the leaders’ points but used the debate to reinforce partisan views, highlighting how polarised public discourse has become.
4. Influencers reshaped election storytelling
Influencers became central to election storytelling. Abbie Chatfield faced strong support and criticism after posting about the Greens and questioning the Liberal Party’s media strategy. The Juice Media released satirical videos targeting defence and energy policies, resonating with disillusioned younger audiences.
Even incidents unrelated to official campaigns became flashpoints. In February, a video from an Israeli influencer alleging antisemitic comments by NSW nurses went viral, triggering political statements and shifting media attention to broader issues of hate speech and accountability online.
5. Culture wars outpaced policy in the final stretch
As the election neared, cultural tensions gained traction. On 12 April, media attention turned to Peter Dutton after reports emerged that his Labor opponent Ali France was leading in Dickson. Around the same time local authorities dismantled a tent encampment in the area while Dutton was campaigning in Perth. This raised questions about leadership and visibility on local issues.
Across social and news media, themes like Gaza, curriculum debates and identity politics took centre stage. Slogans such as “Get Australia back on track” were interpreted as echoes of US political rhetoric. Jacinta Price and Clive Palmer were both linked to similar messaging, fuelling memes and commentary about the Americanisation of Australian politics.
Rather than rallying around shared policy concerns, audiences engaged with content that reflected deeper anxieties about national identity and international influence.
What stood out the most wasn’t necessarily the policy itself, but the moments, memes, and messages that tapped into cultural tensions. The freedom for media and social media users to connect with and amplify these narratives created an arena where some politicians struggled to engage effectively. While some stuck to party lines without fully understanding the patterns driving media and social discourse, others embraced the shift, adapting to the rhetoric that was emerging online. The lesson is clear: in today’s media environment, ignoring what people are saying or the patterns of conversation isn’t an option.
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.
In our last update, housing coverage centred on advice for mortgage holders amid rising rates and cost-of-living pressures. In this second release of the series, the conversation has shifted, with news increasingly framing Australia’s housing challenge through construction, innovation, and government action. Reports highlight fast-tracked developments, AI-powered modular builds, and reforms to cut red tape, alongside community-driven projects in Nhulunbuy and pressures on urban infrastructure, showing that solving the crisis requires building both faster and smarter. The patterns in coverage reveal which stories and policy levers are gaining traction, and how different angles from scale and efficiency to localised community impact are shaping the wider conversation.
Government policy is driving much of this coverage, shaping the narratives that dominate media discussion. First-home buyer programs such as the Home Guarantee (5% Deposit Scheme), Help to Buy, and Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee are frequently cited, alongside social and affordable housing initiatives including the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, NSW’s $610 million Social Housing Accelerator Fund, and state-level projects in Toowoomba and Wagga Wagga. Coverage of supply-side reforms, Melbourne high-rise plans, and debates over negative gearing, capital gains, and rental caps illustrates how policy and regulation frame public debate. Across outlets and regions, the way these stories are told signals which elements of housing policy are resonating, which have momentum, and where attention is likely to shift next.
Where previous reporting centred on interest rates and mortgage advice, a calm, and financial “top-down” discussion, the shift to construction and reform places the emphasis on system-level solutions. Yet, as before, a gap remains between media coverage and social discourse.
On social media, the conversation continues to unfold as a “bottom-up” outcry. This month, debates over housing affordability and accessibility have been increasingly framed through immigration. Political groups such as Pauline Hanson’s One Nation and the Family First Party Australia are amplifying anti-immigration narratives on X and Facebook, claiming that new arrivals are the direct cause of housing stress. These messages are countered by voices rejecting both the logic and the racism seen to underpin such rhetoric, instead pointing to investors as the real drivers of market pressures and reframing housing as a human right. Demonstrations such as March for Australia have further fuelled this dynamic, with slogans tying immigration to Labor, raising the risk of political damage.
The conversation shows right-leaning voices continue to dominate online, with more balanced perspectives struggling for visibility. Policy proposals like a “bedroom tax” appear to have amplified anxieties about population growth, giving further oxygen to anti-immigration claims.
Layered over this, the Reserve Bank’s three rate cuts in recent months have become a fresh point of contention. Some argue that lower rates are simply inflating house prices, benefiting existing homeowners while worsening conditions for would-be buyers and savers deepening the perception of a system stacked against the public.
While the media is foregrounding structural solutions to increase supply, public discourse is still driven by frustration, identity politics, and competing narratives of blame. Solving the housing crisis will not only require practical reforms but also careful navigation of the volatile public conversation that risks overshadowing those solutions.
Housing narratives in the media and online: Building solutions, blaming people
In our last update, housing coverage centred on advice for mortgage holders amid rising rates and cost-of-living pressures. In this second release of the series, the conversation has shifted, with news increasingly framing Australia’s housing challenge through construction, innovation, and government action. Reports highlight fast-tracked developments, AI-powered modular builds, and reforms to cut red tape, […]
How is media coverage shaping views of Brisbane 2032 and its global impact?
The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, and human stories shape the narratives across news and social media and ultimately reflect how the country is experiencing and remembering Brisbane 2032.
Leading Topics: News vs. social
The difference is while the news media is overwhelmingly concerned with the logistics of the Games, the public is more interested in its social and economic consequences.
On social media, the conversation is a mix of excitement and concern, with a strong focus on what the Games will feel like. Discussions about social impact and economic outcomes are prominent, as people debate everything from housing affordability to the potential for new community arts programs.
In the news, the narrative is far more narrow. An incredible amount of the coverage is dedicated to infrastructure, with a particular focus on the cost and controversy surrounding the main stadium. The second-largest topic is the political jousting that accompanies these infrastructure debates.
The most discussed stakeholders are institutions and communities, not individuals
While politicians dominate the news, what's making a real impact on social media are the communities and institutions at the heart of the conversation.
In the news, the most-quoted voices around Brisbane 2032 are overwhelmingly political figures, led by the Queensland Premier and Deputy Premier. Much of the coverage has centred on Premier Crisafulli’s media appearances, including a notable stop at Rockhampton’s Fitzroy River to promote plans for a feasibility study into using the site for rowing events despite concerns about crocodiles and currents.
The Deputy Premier, meanwhile, has been most prominent for his push to build a new stadium at Victoria Park. That proposal has fuelled debate over whether Brisbane 2032 is shifting away from being a sporting project to a political land grab. The discussion is further sharpened by Queensland’s reported shortage of tradies, with calls for urgent measures to recruit more skilled workers to meet the surge in construction and infrastructure demand tied to the Games.
Even Donald Trump makes an appearance in the coverage, with Brisbane’s bid to host the Quad Leaders’ Summit drawing headlines and gaining the support of Prime Minister Albanese.
On social media, the conversation is being shaped largely by organisations and grassroots communities. Victoria Park, now at the centre of the stadium debate, has become a focal point for how people see the legacy of Brisbane 2032, and Queensland more broadly. Campaigns to preserve the green space are gaining traction, amplified both by smaller local outlets such as The Westender and by national publications including ABC and The Guardian.
Defining "legacy": The public hopes and media narratives
The term "legacy" represents the most significant challenge in the Brisbane 2032 narrative, as the data reveals a mismatch between the public's focus on experience and the media's framing of cost and conflict.
On social media, the legacy conversation is aspirational and driven by the sporting theme, where discussions about preserving green spaces like Victoria Park highlight a desire for tangible, long-term community benefits. Other cities are also seizing the aspirational momentum of events like Brisbane 2032, with figures such as Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate using social media to highlight for hyper-local audiences the potential returns on investing in this opportunity. News coverage frames legacy as a political and economic undertaking, dominated by the cost of stadiums, the allocation of funding, and the political conflict between the government and its opposition.
Framing the use of the Fitzroy River as an opportunity for sustainability or presenting construction timelines as local job creation makes the connection between political debates and the community and sporting outcomes people truly care about more resonant, while also painting a positive vision for the legacy of Brisbane 2032.
Specificity wins: Vague PR is ignored, detailed stories drive engagement
Generic ‘good news’ posts or Olympic press tend to generate weaker engagement The content that captures public attention is highly specific, and often human-centric or controversial.
On social media, the most engaging content included the debate around HYROX judging standards, the passionate campaign to include Lawn Bowls in the games, and celebrating the specific achievements of individual swimmers.
In the news, it’s not the general updates that resonate, but detailed reports, whether on cost blowouts at specific venues, the impact of turning a local river into an Olympic event site, or the campaign to include Australian Rules Football in the program.
Media moments and narratives gain traction when meaning is applied. Shift content strategies from generalities to detailed storytelling, focus on journeys, the tangible impact of a new community facility, or a transparent explanation of a complex issue for example. The battle for the hearts and minds of the public ahead of Brisbane 2032 will be won in these details.
See how the right analysis can help you anticipate risks, shape messaging and connect with your audiences. Request a free demo.
Winning the Brisbane 2032 narrative: A media analysis
How is media coverage shaping views of Brisbane 2032 and its global impact? The stories that resonate, whether it is a stadium cost blowout, a community campaign to preserve green space, or the push to include Australian Rules Football in the program, capture how Australians are gearing up for a once-in-a-generation Games. These specific, contested, […]
Every stakeholder relationship is different, and managing them effectively takes more than a one-size-fits-all approach.
From campaign planning to long-term engagement, having the right tools and strategy in place can make the difference between missed connections and meaningful impact.
This guide covers:
Identifying and understanding your key stakeholders
Mapping and modelling for influence and engagement
Equipping your team to maintain and grow strategic relationships
