Waging war: A look back on this weeks Federal Election chatter
Labor’s pledge to introduce real increases to the minimum wage is if it wins the Federal Election, and the simmering undercurrents of a cultural war, have been the standout campaign themes this week.
The determined pursuit of fairness has been a fixture of the Australian political landscape for decades, yet cultural wars are a newer phenomenon. The idiom of today suggests workers are competing with bosses and businesses who seek to keep to salaries as low as possible. The current atmosphere of business-bashing was first introduced by the Coalition, who targeted the unpopular banking sector with extra taxes. More recently, Labor have rejected the longstanding policy framework of a globally competitive economy, dynamic labour market, and lower taxes, in favour of a social safety net.
For weeks, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has branded the upcoming election as a “referendum on wages”, putting forward the simple argument that ‘‘no Australian working full-time should be living in poverty’’. Meanwhile, the Coalition is expected to announce another round of income tax cuts ahead of the Budget.
Unions have also chimed in, with the Australian Council of Trade Unions calling for a $73 a week increase to the minimum wage over two years in the pursuit of a “living wage”. Labor quickly distanced itself from the Trade Union’s push, suggesting the final verdict should instead come from the Fair Work Commission. The core assumption for the Commission will be that the current hourly rate of $18.93 must rise – however Labor is yet to reveal any guidelines detailing how this increase would be assessed.
Unsurprisingly, the Council of Small Business of Australia pushed back, stating increased wages would force more businesses to incur payroll tax, and consequently be forced to look at ways to absorb costs; either through increased prices or cutting workers’ hours. Similar sentiments were voiced by Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who accused Labor of engaging in the politics of envy, and warning that Bill Shorten’s plans would result in the dismissal of many workers.
Most recently, the Australian Industry Group proposed a 2 per cent increase to keep wages in line with inflation, meaning the 2.23 million Australians earning $19 an hour would see just enough extra cash in their pay packets to buy an upsized meal at McDonald’s.
If the next Federal Election is truly a referendum on wages, the key question for voters should be; Are the market determined rates fair and just, or should the government intervene?
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.
The Federal Election has been announced and with 33 days of campaigning we thought it would be interesting to compare the number of mentions of the political parties over the past 2 weeks. Analysis from our media intelligence has given insight into Labor having a larger volume of media coverage across all media types in comparison to other political parties.
Examining coverage, we found the ‘Election’ had been the subject of over 33,000 media items and online being the preferred media type.
In terms of political parties, Labor has had a significant number of mentions of broadcast coverage whereas the Coalition had more mentions across more traditional media such as print, during the two-week period. Overall, Labor has had a decent lead over the Coalition in the number of mentions across broadcast, online and print combined during this time.
Interestingly, social mentions over Twitter, Facebook and YouTube were more prominent with individual parliamentarians rather than mentions of political parties. These items mentioned more controversial statements or social ‘worthy’ statements which generated these mentions.
It was found the Coalition had considerably more social mentions over Labor when searching for the parliamentarian’s name or their handle. One Nation were also in the mix, with more social mentions compared to the Greens and the Nationals combined.
With the data analysis we have uncovered, could this be insight into who will win the election on May 18?
If you would like to keep up-to-date for the remainder of the Federal Election campaign, our exclusive Federal Election briefing can ensure you're across all campaign announcements, funding commitments, policy updates and polling figures. If you would like to learn more about this service, get in touch with our team to discuss your needs.
"
["post_title"]=>
string(50) "How will media shape the Federal Election outcome?"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(146) "With 33 days of campaigning left, we compare the number of mentions of the political parties over the past 2 weeks surrunding the Federal Election"
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(49) "how-will-media-shape-the-federal-election-outcome"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 04:57:22"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2019-06-26 04:57:22"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(36) "https://isentia.wpengine.com/?p=1791"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Blog
How will media shape the Federal Election outcome?
With 33 days of campaigning left, we compare the number of mentions of the political parties over the past 2 weeks surrunding the Federal Election
During an election, the volume of media coverage on political promises and topical debates increases. This can have a positive or negative impact on your organisation.
With our comprehensive federal election briefing, you can monitor and track relevant media data to gain insight into the federal election.
Understand your organisation, your competitors, your industry and the important topics. Understand the media data that shapes each campaign day.
From policy, campaign and program announcements to funding commitments and latest polling figures we can ensure you're kept up to date.
"
["post_title"]=>
string(38) "Your insight into the federal election"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(404) "During an election, the volume of media coverage on political promises and topical debates increases greatly, which can have a significant impact on your organisation. As such, it’s imperative to monitor and track relevant media data so you can understand who’s saying what about your organisation, your competitors, your industry, and any other topic that’s important to you and your organisation."
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "publish"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(38) "your-insight-into-the-federal-election"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2020-01-23 02:55:48"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2020-01-23 02:55:48"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(0)
["guid"]=>
string(35) "https://isentia.wpengine.com/?p=927"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(0) ""
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
}
Whitepaper
Your insight into the federal election
During an election, the volume of media coverage on political promises and topical debates increases greatly, which can have a significant impact on your organisation. As such, it’s imperative to monitor and track relevant media data so you can understand who’s saying what about your organisation, your competitors, your industry, and any other topic that’s important to you and your organisation.
The biggest influence on public perception of the 2025 election campaign was not policy. It was identity, culture wars, and a growing fear of Australia 'becoming America'. What began as a focus on easing the cost of living quickly widened into a broader debate about national identity. Media coverage and social media feeds revealed a tug of war. On one side was policy messaging. On the other, gaining considerable ground, were culture and identity narratives fuelled by anxiety over external influence.
At the start of the election cycle in early March, news coverage centred on cost of living pressures and tax cuts. The Labor government's budget announcement and the Liberal Party’s response cemented the agenda, with topics like supermarket price gouging, fuel excises, and nuclear energy proposals striking a chord with voters. Early discussion on social media showed a clear focus on making life more affordable for families. But in the background, frustration around Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs and concerns about Australia–U.S. relations began to surface. Peter Dutton’s early promise to cut 40,000 public service jobs and push for a return to office work further fuelled comparisons between Dutton and Trump among Australian audiences.
As the election cycle progressed, international events and conflicts moved to the forefront. Trump’s presence in global headlines alongside Canada's similarly timed election, intensified comparisons between Australian and Canadian public attitudes toward American influence. Media narratives shifted from domestic cost-of-living concerns to broader conversations about defending the Australian way of life and protecting national interests particularly in education, reshaping the battleground on which voters made their decisions.
On March 28, coverage and discussion spiked as Anthony Albanese officially announced the election date. Earlier, on March 10, a surge in conversation centred on new polling that suggested a potential hung parliament, sharpening media focus on Labor. Albanese’s appearance on Today, where he responded to frustrations about delayed campaigning with, “We’re just about helping people, because that’s what people expect,” reinforced his image as a community-focused leader and contrasted with how past prime ministers were criticised during disasters. Meanwhile, Peter Dutton’s social media attention rose on April 12, as reports surfaced of his opponent Ali France leading in Dickson while a local tent encampment was demolished by Moreton Bay Council. Dutton, campaigning in Perth during the demolition, attracted criticism. A few days later, a compilation of clips linking Dutton to Donald Trump circulated widely. These moments highlighted the distinct leadership styles that shaped voter perceptions throughout the campaign.
Although Labor drew the most attention overall, Dutton and the Liberals gained momentum across social media. The Liberal Party’s early use of trends, AI tools, and memes attracted conversation, but the involvement of influencers and podcasts proved polarising. Coverage also highlighted a generational divide, with young women leaning left and young men leaning right. Influencers played a key role in shaping these dynamics, from Albanese’s Happy Hour podcast appearance on March 26, where his “delulu with no solulu” challenge dominated news cycles, to Dutton’s interview on Sam Fricker’s podcast aimed at young male voters. As the campaign progressed, news increasingly focused on character attacks and gaffes at the expense of policy debate. Issues like housing, supermarket competition, HECS relief, and energy bills remained core to party platforms, but many audiences were drawn into yarns covering personality clashes and culture wars.
The most shared news items from the beginning of the campaign to recently underline this shift of attention to cultural conflict. Posts about the mobilisation of Muslim voters around Gaza, criticism of Liberal candidates campaigning in military uniforms, warnings about public service job cuts, and debates over the political leanings of young male voters all reveal how specific cultural flashpoints and niche group appeals dominated discussion. Instead of broad policy debates, election discourse was fragmented into controversies that inflamed identity-driven tensions, polarised audiences, and heightened distrust.
Whether leaders spoke about getting Australia back on track, building a better Australia, or even making Australia great again, these slogans signalled clear messages to voters. More often than not, the public expressed a desire to distance Australia from the United States, particularly in defending healthcare and education systems that set Australia apart. Early in the campaign, when a journalist suggested Anthony Albanese’s use of "build back better" echoed Joe Biden’s slogan, the comment was quickly dismissed. Though not officially endorsed, the slogan’s use by Jacinta Price and Clive Palmerquickly eclipsed party lines, fuelling memes and comparisons to US Republicans across social media. This did little to help the Liberals distance their official slogan, 'Get Australia back on track,' from US political parallels. As Trump’s influence became a talking point, glimpses of Trump-style messaging were eagerly picked up by news outlets and social media alike, often overshadowing Labor’s campaign messaging and limiting its cut-through.
As the campaign unfolded, it became harder to separate policy from personality or promises from the cultural narratives surrounding them. Media and social media attention did more than reflect public interest. They helped shape it, steering the election conversation toward identity, values, and questions about Australia's place in a changing world. Whether that influence outweighed policy in swaying voters is still up for debate, but it clearly changed how the campaign was seen, shared, and remembered.
Did culture wars cut through more than policy on the election trail?
The biggest influence on public perception of the 2025 election campaign was not policy. It was identity, culture wars, and a growing fear of Australia ‘becoming America’. What began as a focus on easing the cost of living quickly widened into a broader debate about national identity. Media coverage and social media feeds revealed a […]
With social media platforms becoming central to political engagement, figures like Abbie Chatfield, Friendlyjordies, and The Juice Media are amplifying progressive causes and challenging traditional political narratives. But how significant is their impact? Are they genuinely influencing the election conversation, or is their influence more about their ability to capture attention and drive engagement? This evolving trend raises important questions about the role of influencers in modern elections and how they are reshaping the way political messages are communicated to younger, digital-savvy voters.
As the 2025 Australian federal election nears, influencer involvement has gained attention, with social media leading the charge while news coverage initially lagged. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton are tapping influencers to connect with younger voters—Albanese engages with Abbie Chatfield’s audience through values-driven storytelling, while Dutton targets young men with Sam Fricker's relatable podcasts. This reflects a broader shift from traditional media to platforms like TikTok and Instagram. Journalists are increasingly covering these influencer-driven moments, often focusing on the viral spread and political fallout. For instance, a viral February 13 video from an Israeli influencer accusing two NSW nurses of hateful comments dominated Australia’s news cycle, prompting swift political reactions. Coverage generally focuses on political responses, not the influencers themselves. This trend was also seen with Greens Leader Adam Bandt’s DJ event in Melbourne, where media noted his attempt to engage younger voters. The Australian Electoral Commission cleared Chatfield’s posts featuring Albanese and Bandt, highlighting the growing regulation of influencer political content. This focus towards viral moments over policy discussions raises questions about the impact on undecided voters and the evolving role of journalists in political engagement.
Influencers like Abbie Chatfield, The Juice Media, and Friendlyjordies are becoming central to the election rhetoric ahead of the 2025 Australian federal election. Chatfield, who faced scrutiny from the AEC, used her platform to rally support for the Greens, positioning herself against what she described as a Liberal media strategy to discredit influencers. Her posts, particularly defending her political involvement, have garnered strong support, with hashtags like #abbieisinnocent and #freeabbie dominating her comment sections. In contrast, some critics dismiss her political role, questioning her credibility. The Juice Media, known for its sarcastic takes on government policy, continues to challenge political narratives with irreverent content, resonating with younger, disillusioned voters. However, their approach also faces backlash from those who see it as too cynical or divisive. Similarly, Friendlyjordies critiques both major parties, particularly Labor’s stance on progressive issues, while encouraging followers to unite against corporate greed. His platform sparks heated debates, igniting both support and criticism.
Overall, these influencers are becoming polarising figures, amplifying political engagement while intensifying the ideological divide on social media, ultimately shaping the growing influence of social media figures in the election discourse.
Chatfield, a vocal supporter of progressive causes like Palestinian liberation and women's rights, has gained a strong following but faces criticism for oversimplifying political issues and for her perceived naivety, especially regarding preferential voting. Ferguson, who critiques colonialism and supports Palestinian liberation, is praised by supporters but criticised for lacking depth in her activism, with some accusing her of ignoring intersectionality. Friendlyjordies, known for satirical commentary, is admired for calling out political corruption, but his critics accuse him of bias towards Labor and oversimplifying complex issues. The Juice Media, using sarcasm to critique government policies, resonates with disillusioned young voters but alienates others who find their approach too cynical. These influencers contribute to a growing divide in Australian politics, mobilising progressive movements while deepening ideological rifts, as their content both challenges traditional politics and fuels polarisation.
Key issues like defence, the cost of living, and education are dominating political discourse and social media conversations. Global events, including Trump’s influence on international relations and trade, have sparked strong reactions, with Albanese facing backlash over Australia’s stance on Gaza and its defence ties with Israel. Meanwhile, Dutton’s comments on Ambassador Kevin Rudd and allegations of election interference have stirred tensions. On social media, debates over defence—highlighted by Indonesia’s denial of Russia’s military presence near Darwin—and cost of living concerns are intensifying. Education remains a key point of contrast, with Albanese’s Free TAFE policy gaining support while Dutton faces criticism for prioritising fossil fuel subsidies. Influencers are driving much of this engagement, but their role in amplifying already polarised narratives raises questions about whether they are truly reflecting voters’ concerns or deepening divides as the election approaches.
These conversations play out against a landscape in which social and news media have different - but overlapping - priorities. They’re driving debates on everything from education and nuclear energy to Trump-style politics and renewable energy. With the 2025 federal election on the horizon, stories sparked by creators — whether through critique, leaks, or commentary — are becoming part of the political media mix. It’s a shift that’s unfolding in real time, and one that’s reshaping how narratives break, spread, and gain momentum. But as these voices grow louder, one thing is clear: Are they truly amplifying the concerns of everyday Australians, or are they pushing further divides in a landscape already ripe with fragmentation?
The rise of influencers in the 2025 Australian federal election landscape
With social media platforms becoming central to political engagement, figures like Abbie Chatfield, Friendlyjordies, and The Juice Media are amplifying progressive causes and challenging traditional political narratives. But how significant is their impact? Are they genuinely influencing the election conversation, or is their influence more about their ability to capture attention and drive engagement? This […]
