The future of Indigenous reconciliation in Australia looks uncertain after a stronger than expected rout in Saturday’s referendum.
Yes, they campaigned terribly well indeed
As a very old advertising man, I have watched with horrified admiration the No campaign unfold. I think this is the most effective political advertising campaign since the “It’s Time” slogan helped make Gough Whitlam PM 50 years ago. First, the campaign architects worked out which demographic to target, choosing the over 50s, small business owners, tradies, non-professionals, people without tertiary degrees and dedicated Coalition voters. Then, they designed a three-pronged campaign: fear (especially fear of change); ignorance (“if you don’t know, Vote No”); and, the hidden elephant in the room, prejudice (Indigenous people are better off as a result of colonisation). Regrettably, from my perspective – a Yes voter – this brilliant campaign will probably result in the referendum failing. However, it does demonstrate the power of advertising to influence the individual voter, not always with a beneficial result.
Revealed: the secretive rightwing firm providing ‘clout’ for voice no campaign
What you need to know about the night the Voice was defeated
High-profile ABC journalist and board member Laura Tingle has blown open a debate about the public broadcaster’s approach to the Voice referendum, arguing an obsession with balance has degraded coverage of the debate.
Tingle, the chief political correspondent for flagship current affairs program 7.30, was asked by an audience member at a book launch on Thursday night why the ABC devoted so much airtime to the No campaign and its arguments.
Tingle observed the pursuit of strict balance was difficult when outlandish claims were made and subjects were not willing to be scrutinised.
“At the ABC, we have to fill in a form every time we do a story about the referendum that says ‘here are the people we’ve spoken to, here are the number of minutes the Yes case has got, here are the number of minutes the No case has got’,” she said, a reference to the internal ABC Voice Tracker.
Tingle said opposition Indigenous Australians spokeswoman Jacinta Nampijinpa Price had declined invitations to appear on 7.30 since July.
“But somehow, the way the numbers have worked tells people that the Yes case has been wildly overrepresented on the ABC, and as a result, it affects the way we structure and report stories because they say if you can’t get somebody who’s a No, you can’t put on somebody who’s a Yes,” Tingle said.
“This is nuts ... it’s completely sick.” She added: “I shouldn’t be saying any of these things.”
Tingle lamented the ABC and other media reported seriously on Price’s comments at the National Press Club last month that colonisation had a positive impact on Indigenous Australians because it provided running water and food.
“In the interests of trying to be balanced ... we’ve ended up not doing a good job of covering the referendum debate,” Tingle said.
The veteran journalist, who was elected to the ABC board by staff in March, made the remarks at Glebe Town Hall in Sydney while launching journalist David Marr’s book Killing for Country.
In response to inquiries, the ABC rejected suggestions Tingle was critical of the broadcaster’s coverage and said she was endeavouring to defend the ABC from claims of bias against the Yes campaign.
It pointed out that tracking content was a routine component of election coverage.
“There has never been a policy to not interview a ‘Yes’ proponent due to a refusal by a ‘No’ proponent,” it said.
A statement from Tingle said she had tried to explain the dilemmas and frustrations of providing balanced coverage in a campaign when one side of the debate was not available, and when many wild claims were made.
“This is an issue that I think is an exceptionally difficult one for the media generally, not just the ABC, and not just in terms of this campaign, at a time when political messaging is splintering into social media messaging, and the old rules of political campaigning are changing,” she said.
“The ABC has provided unprecedented levels of coverage from around the country of the referendum campaign, particularly from Indigenous voices, and I’m very proud of the work my colleagues have done in often very stressful circumstances.”
As part of its obligation of impartiality, during elections, the ABC collects and publishes details of how much airtime each side or party received, as well as other forms of content.
The Voice Tracker requires journalists to log broadcast material to the nearest 15 seconds; if a Yes spokesperson received 15 seconds of airtime, that is logged as 0.25 points, and if a No representative appeared for 45 seconds, that is 0.75 points.
An FAQ document seen by this masthead states the purpose of the tracker is “to provide timely feedback on our coverage which will assist with presenting an appropriate diversity of voices and perspectives. The purpose is not to enforce a perfect 50:50 representative of each position”.
Vox pops from members of the public (excluding talkback callers) are tracked, as well as instances when requests to appear on air are declined.
In August, newsgathering editor Peter Gotting emailed staff reminding them to log whether the speaker was Indigenous, a grassroots community member or a public figure.
“We have had lots of examples recently of teams that produce the stories not completing the details,” he wrote.
The ABC’s news director, Justin Stevens, said the broadcaster’s coverage of the Voice referendum had been outstanding, including its elevation of First Nations journalists.
“Our coverage has at times been criticised by both the Yes and the No campaigns for overly representing or platforming the other,” Stevens said on Friday. “In reality, ABC coverage heard from, scrutinised and interrogated both.”
At the National Press Club this week, Labor senator Patrick Dodson praised the ABC and other media for “exemplary” coverage of the referendum campaign.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.
