Blog post
May 30, 2023

What’s the wrap on soft plastic recycling?

The circular economy of Australia’s soft plastics recycling system

You’ve probably heard of REDcycle by now – the initiative started by a passionate mum, providing Australian’s with the opportunity to recycle their soft plastics. Its operation helped reduce the amount of landfill in Australia and its sudden halt in operation sent the community into a frenzy.

The pause in the popular REDcycle program presented an opportunity to rethink the model for soft plastics recycling in Australia and find end markets for recycled package content. It also prompted Australians to rethink the way they consume products, rather than just the way they recycle them.

Social media conversations show Australians continue to encourage retailers and large corporations to use their influential power to create impactful change. These conversations are heightened where regression (or progression) is made towards sustainability.

Soft plastic recycling to the kerb

As Australians become more conscience about their soft plastic usage, it raises the question of whether the collapse of the REDcycle program was a blessing in disguise or more of a curse on sustainability?

From the end of October 2022 to the end of March 2023, Australians have consistently felt negative sentiment towards REDcycle’s collapse with spikes when key announcements were made by the organisation. Overall, close to 45% of Aussies felt negatively compared to 18.5% positive.

Source: Pulsar TRAC. Sentiment across online and social media between 29 October 2022 – 23 March 2023

A Twitter user sharing their frustration about soft plastic recycling.

The collection of coverage

As people learned the news about REDcycle, there was heightened concern about how soft plastics were going to be recycled. With over 12,000 mainstream media items about REDcycle or soft plastic recycling, it supports the idea that Australia’s broken plastic recycling system is distressing for many and more needs to be done. 

The halt in operation brought on more concern for the environment and ignited feelings of anger and distrust after thousands of tonnes of plastic had been stockpiled instead of being recycled.

Soft plastic coverage over time
Source: Isentia, REDcycle coverage across broadcast, print. Source Pulsar Trends, Twitter coverage. Source: Google Trends, search coverage ( 1 October 2022 – 20 March 2023)

Media coverage across different channels (social media, search, broadcast and print) shows spikes of coverage on the same days (9 November, 7 February, 27 February) but at varying levels;

  • 9 November – REDcycle announced it would pause its operations indefinitely. This shock announcement caused an influx of conversations on social media platforms which then caused people to search ‘where to recycle soft plastics’.
  • 7 February –  additional stockpiles of plastic were discovered in warehouses. People felt disappointed and let down by REDcycle.
  • 23 February – supermarket giants announced they would take responsibility for the 12,400 tonnes of soft plastic stored by REDcycle in warehouses around the country, ahead of REDcycle declaring their insolvency. This announcement gained more chatter across social media in comparison to other channels. 

Conversations on Twitter represent social media as the preferred option for users in comparison to broadcast, print and search.

Closing the loop

As political leaders have the power to influence their supporters on sustainability development, sustainability advocates are pushing Australian leaders to accelerate plastic waste regulations. 

Conversations on Reddit rapidly grew on 9 November – the day the REDcycle program paused. Overall sentiment was anger and sadness with many expressing their feelings of disappointment after learning their donated soft plastics were not ending up where promised. Others felt frustrated or angry towards large organisations who were not holding up their end of the deal, especially after taking the time to correctly separate their recyclable waste. 

At 40%, political enthusiasts far outweigh any other active community on social media and forums. Their ‘passion’ for Australia can be overshadowed, as they share their beliefs towards the government – ranging from incompetence to over governing. Generation Z are true digital natives and make up 22% of active online communities. This cohort is motivated to make more sustainable choices, if it means it will benefit the environment for the long term.

Who are the active communities discussing soft plastics?
Active communities on social media and forums discussing REDcycle and soft plastic recycling. (October 2022 – March 2023)
Comment
byu/AutoModerator from discussion
inmelbourne

Supermarkets to the rescue

The REDcycle program illustrated the complexity of soft plastics recycling and the need to build robust systems to close the loop on this common household waste. For years there have been stockpiling issues, dumping, toxic fires and lax regulations, making it challenging to operate.

Australia’s largest supermarkets continue to work towards reducing unnecessary plastics in their stores, and support the development of circular economies through the use of recycled material. 

Supermarket chains have moved quickly to find an alternative solution, teaming up with the National Plastics Recycling Scheme (NPRS) with financing from the Federal Government and top food and grocery producers to establish the Roadmap to Restart Taskforce.

23 February 2023, supermarket giants announced the return of soft plastics recycling by late 2023, despite the lack of recyclers. This announcement generated 6 x the amount of ‘supermarket’ Twitter mentions compared to 1 Nov 2022.

Twitter mentions and soft plastic recycling
Source: Pulsar TRENDS. Supermarkets and soft plastic recycling conversations on Twitter.

Although it’s a promising development, announcements like these are what drive the conversations and force change. This rings true as sustainability advocates push for more substantial action to address soft plastic waste in Australia.

Large organisations are being challenged to rethink how they package their products and how they can be more sustainable, what about the government?

A RED hot go

Minister for Environment and Water, Tanya Plibersek, has been vocal in her response to the soft plastics recycling crisis. Initially, the program’s failure was met with calls for urgent action with Ms Plibersek weighing in on the news, saying it was “really concerning” and put the pressure on major supermarkets to come up with an alternative recycling program.

Although it is acknowledged that the government plays a role, it has been made clear the responsibility also lies with manufacturers and packagers.

State and Federal Ministers are actively sharing their opinions and policies online in an effort to make change faster and positively influence their audience. Victorian Premier, Dan Andrews and the Victorian Government are leading the way, banning the selling and supply of single-use plastics in the state.


Commonwealth, State and Territory governments have jointly invested considerable funds into developing local capabilities to recover the challenging recycling stream and have committed to turning around Australia’s lack of progress on its recycling targets, setting new targets for 2025.

Who is leading the soft plastic conversation
Source: Pulsar TRAC. Influential federal and state leaders driving conversations about recycling and soft plastic usage.

Adding another interesting layer of insights on social media from our sister company Pulsar, is that reddit is playing a major role in disseminating sentiment surrounding the REDcycle program. The below chart shows the most recurring keywords grouped by channel. The larger the tile, the more times the topic has appeared in that channel. Conversations involving scientists were notable and finding a solution to plastic pollution was a key narrative.

Top keywords by channel. (October 2022 – March 2023)
https://twitter.com/IJepson/status/1590496324209999874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfwu0022u003eN

Trust was also a recurring keyword across all channels, indicating trust needs to be rebuilt. is something that needs to be rebuilt. Australians have begun to lose faith in the recycling industry as there is a lack of transparency into how much actually gets recycled.

The introduction of a new taskforce – the Road to Restart – will work towards rebuilding the public trust in soft plastic recycling. The taskforce also endeavours to ensure supermarkets and the packaging sector will get it right on their own accord.

The way forward

Conversations through online forums show Australians deeply care about sustainability, stating that ‘unless it can be recycled, it shouldn’t be produced.’

Social media platforms are especially fueled by sustainability advocates who need to share a broader awareness of recycling initiatives and earn potential audiences – conversations are widespread and emotions are elevated. Whereas broadcast and print channels are sharing the facts and the need to know information, directing audiences to use the information they have and to search where they can take their soft plastics. In addition to sustainability advocates, everyday Australians are learning how to pivot, seeking out support and ideas from fellow supporters on Twitter and other social media platforms.

If organisations can work together and policymakers can set clear legislative frameworks, it’s possible to implement necessary changes in both manufacturer and consumer behaviour to create a thriving circular plastics economy. 

The pause of REDcycle is certainly on its way to being a good thing for the environment.

If you would like to learn more about discovering how media intelligence can lead to insights across environmental issues or the active communities leading the conversations using audience intelligence, get in touch with us today.

Share

Similar articles

object(WP_Post)#12116 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(49040) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-08-11 02:14:11" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-08-11 02:14:11" ["post_content"]=> string(14309) "

The advent of LLMs and AI search means that there has been a colossal shift in how audiences are consuming information today,  and a reciprocal shift in how all types of organisations, from government agencies to brands are responding . But while discussion amongst PR and comms pros tends to fall disproportionately on how brands are impacted, the needs of the former are just as keenly felt, and often quite distinctive.

So how can government agencies respond, especially in a time of global flux, when major policy changes need to be communicated and important stakeholders need to be managed? After all, government organisations do care about reputation, much as brands do, but have quite distinctive goals when it comes to ensuring accurate information reaches the right audiences.

There is a new entry point for stakeholders


The era of "Let me Google that" is rapidly fading. Instead of clicking through to official websites, people are asking chatbots for direct answers.  What’s striking is that government agencies often have no visibility on how they’re being talked about in the LLM space, even as it becomes a central channel for messaging and reputation. 

When AI models become the primary gatekeeper, audiences bypass official portals entirely — driving down site traffic and leaving agencies vulnerable to misinformation, negative sentiment, or worse, being left out of the conversation altogether. 

Therefore, the entry point is different. For commercial brands, this shift is profound but in some ways mediated – an FMCG brand, for instance, often discovered through third-party platforms in any case. But for government entities, the stakes are entirely different. As the sole, authoritative source for public information, they need citizens on their websites to get accurate details. Government agencies, especially if they are the authority or regulator in a particular industry or sector, need to make sure audiences know where to go to get the right information.

Different types of government agencies have different considerations

Not all government agencies are alike, and they all have different parameters that are quite non-negotiable for them, just by the way they function. 

  1. Service delivery agencies - these rely heavily on content freshness. They can’t risk outdated sources impacting eligibility or process changes not reaching audiences.
  2. Regulators - these need to transmit authority and trust. Regulators have to make it a priority that they’re amongst the first place audiences go to for information and that the industry they’re regulating does not put them in the shade on the channels stakeholders are actually using
  3. Policy departments - did the AI's account of a policy match what was actually announced? They want to be able to make sure the accuracy of a policy (and ideally, its effectiveness) is translated when audiences search through LLMs.
  4. Local and state authorities want to make sure the services they carry out on behalf of locals are visible too. Much like service providers, there is a question around access and awareness of programmes and regulations, but also an added consideration: not appearing on LLMs discontent amongst those wishing to see a return on taxation and electoral mandates, and give credence to bad actors.

What do government agencies want to get out of this new LLM-mediated landscape? 

Reputation is important, but that exists downstream from maintaining a flow of accurate information. It’s useful for communications teams in government organisations to self reflect and ask themselves the following questions:

  • Where are citizens going to find information about your services if not your website — and do you know what they're being told?
  • If there was a significant policy change or incident in the last twelve months, do you know how it's currently being characterised when someone asks an Al tool about your agency?
  • When you communicate a major service change or policy update, do you have any way of measuring whether it’s surfacing in searches about you?
  • How do you currently understand the gap between what your agency publishes and what citizens actually receive when they search for information?
  • Are there community groups, advocacy organisations, or media outlets shaping perception of your agency - and do you know if that's feeding into what Al models say?

These are gaps they already realise, but they don’t actually know what to do about it – how to manage or measure them. They need a tool that allows them to know this critical piece of information and make informed decisions. 

Lumina AI View: AI visibility for PR & Comms


Lumina AI view is built for communicators who want to understand how their organisation and their competitors are being talked about by various AI models – including ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude. AI View users get an insight into which sources are being cited, and how they would need to respond as a way of protecting their reputation or making sure correct information about them is being disseminated. 

The tool provides an AI view score — a composite metric ranging from zero to 100, designed to help track brand performance over time and facilitate comparisons against competitors. It is calculated using five weighted factors — sentiment, visibility, authority, dominance and freshness. Beyond the overall score, the platform provides a summary of a brand's AI narrative based on four distinct reputation pillars — direction, performance, integrity and innovation. 

These pillars help users identify exactly which dimension of a brand's reputation is under pressure, offering specific, actionable insights for board presentations or reviews. Ultimately, while the AI view platform provides the necessary intelligence, the strategic decisions regarding how to respond to these insights remain with the organisation.

Spotlight: An Australian Council


This progressive local government council is located in Australia’s leading center for culture and sports.

The council earned an AI view score of 74 reflected by strong reach and authority. Publications like CBD News and its own website are the most cited by LLMs — interestingly, most of them being cited by Claude.

Content freshness scored lower at 48. Their website still carries error pages and annual reports from a few years ago. If a report — one that is seen as an organisation’s most comprehensive and authoritative content, is still being cited even if it’s older, might potentially be in the way of the organisation’s own perception. Which means more work is needed to prevent outdated content from still appearing.

What type of content is showing up?

Most citations for the council originate from government sources, followed by news outlets, reports, and blogs. The domain is evenly split between owned content and content earned from external sources media articles and independent authorities. 

While most are recent, some older articles from major outlets such as The BBC remain visible and may significantly influence how LLMs perceive the council. Owned content typically addresses last year’s budget plans and the council’s latest vision for the city, which LLMs are referencing. Government sources are the major content type, however, external sources have a greater impact on the council’s overall LLM score.

The stakes are higher for government agencies

When brands track LLM visibility, they often ask, "Are we shown in a positive light?" or "Are we cited accurately?" For the government, additional questions arise: "Is this information accurate enough for someone to act on?" and "Are we still viewed as more authoritative than what we oversee?" Mistakes can have serious consequences, such as individuals applying for ineligible programs or missing critical deadlines for new initiatives or elections. This can quickly lead to public frustration. It is essential for government communicators to recognize these risks.


If you would like to know more about our Lumina suite, please reach out here and our team will get in touch with for you a quick demo.

" ["post_title"]=> string(77) "Why is tracking government visibility on LLMs different from tracking brands?" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(121) "Government agencies often can't see how AI chatbots describe them. Here's why LLM visibility matters and how to track it." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(46) "latest-reads-ai-visibility-government-agencies" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-08-11 02:14:19" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-08-11 02:14:19" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=49040" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
Why is tracking government visibility on LLMs different from tracking brands?

Government agencies often can’t see how AI chatbots describe them. Here’s why LLM visibility matters and how to track it.

object(WP_Post)#12074 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(47963) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-06-03 02:01:58" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-06-03 02:01:58" ["post_content"]=> string(5651) "

There is a new frontier where public perception is shaped: Large Language Models. Right now, LLMs are answering critical questions about your organisation. What are they saying? And more importantly, which sources are shaping those answers?

To navigate this landscape, public relations professionals don't need generic tools, but rather technology that speaks their language, and addresses the realities of a changed media and informational landscape.

That is why we're unveiling Lumina AI View, the latest addition to our intelligent suite of AI tools from Isentia. Trained specifically on the workflows and challenges of modern PR & communications, Lumina AI View helps you understand exactly what AI knows about you, and how it learned it.

A new standard for AI visibility

AI View tracks your citation strength and source quality alongside those of your competitors, giving you a clear view of where you hold authority and where you have gaps.

Lumina AI View maps your AI reputation from the ground up, allowing you to:

  • See which sources matter: When tools such as ChatGPT or Gemini discuss your organisation, which outlets do they cite? Track your source footprint over time and view the impact of key target media on how you’re discussed. We measure your citation strength and source quality alongside those of competitors, giving you a clear view of where you have authority and where you have gaps.
  • Gain industry-specific insight: Your competitors get cited from Financial Times and Bloomberg. You get cited on Reddit. Each brings opportunity – and risk. Discover how you measure up against industry standards, and target the sources that actually influence how AI represents you.
  • Catch narrative shifts early: AI responses change when new sources appear, sentiment shifts, or old controversies resurface. Get alerts when citation patterns change suddenly, before they impact the way you’re perceived by stakeholders.

Measure your progress: From media monitoring to full media intelligence

Lumina AI View is built on the principle that insights get stronger with repeated measurement. To help you maintain a clear view of your reputation, our proprietary scoring system provides regular updates that show you:

  • Evolving trends in how sources cite your organisation
  • Competitive standing and benchmark metrics
  • Where models differ in information presented, and sources cited 

Whether you run it weekly, on-demand, or whenever you need a check-in, patterns will emerge, trends will become clear, and you will build a baseline that makes any sudden narrative changes both comprehensible and the prerequisite to action.

Lumina AI View is part of Lumina AI, a comprehensive suite of AI tools built specifically for communicators. Our Lumina suite evolves traditional media monitoring into narrative intelligence, enabling you to truly understand how perceptions form, evolve, and impact your reputation.


Get in touch to register your interest and see what Lumina AI View can do for you.

" ["post_title"]=> string(66) "Introducing Lumina AI View: AI Visibility Built for PR & Comms" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(158) "Lumina AI View, the latest in Isentia's AI suite, is trained on PR & comms workflows to help you understand what AI knows about you — and how it learned it." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(59) "introducing-lumina-ai-view-ai-visibility-built-for-pr-comms" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-07-15 03:12:57" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-07-15 03:12:57" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=47963" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
Introducing Lumina AI View: AI Visibility Built for PR & Comms

Lumina AI View, the latest in Isentia’s AI suite, is trained on PR & comms workflows to help you understand what AI knows about you — and how it learned it.

Ready to get started?

Get in touch or request a demo.