Joseph Camilleri

Another federal election. Another Labor Government with a much enhanced majority. A campaign with no great convulsions, except for the Liberal debacle. An Opposition Leader conceding defeat with proper decorum. All must be well in the land of Oz. But all is not quite as it seems.

Seldom have Labor and Liberal been so visibly disconnected from a rapidly transforming world. Never before has the lack of public interest in a national election and the electorate’s mistrust of parties and politicians been so palpable.

In the 1946 federation election, the two major parties together secured 93.3% of the total vote. Three years later, that figure rose to 96.2%. In 2025, they may secure 66% of the vote. The two parties supposedly focused their policy pitch on the cost of living. Hence, the endless election promises on housing, energy and medical bills, cost of education, tax cuts and more.

However, these promises, even if implemented, will do little to ease the pain of those in greatest need. They are palliatives that may relieve the symptoms for a while and, even then, only for some. They will do little to cure the ailment.

What is the ailment that neither party dares address? It is called inequality, the taboo word in Labor and Liberal parlance. In 2019-20, the 10% of Australian households with the highest incomes averaged weekly earnings of $5248 per week after tax, compared with $631 for the lowest 10%. In 2022-23, the richest 10% of households held 44% of all wealth, 126 times that of the lowest 10%.

To add insult to injury, the land of the “fair go” is now home to some 150 billionaires, each making $67,000 an hour, while more than two million Australians experience severe food insecurity.

How much of this is likely to change under the Albanese Government?

Another wound in the nation crying out for action got the same cold shoulder. The enduring pain of First Nations was met with stony silence, as was the Voice referendum fiasco, to which both parties contributed in no small measure.

Rather than seek ways to heal the festering wound, party leaders relegated the question to the too-hard basket. The prime minister, in effect, suspended further consideration of the Makarrata Commission, truth-telling and treaty-making.

The signal coming through loud and clear is that we are back to John Howard’s policy of “practical reconciliation” to which successive Liberal governments have clung, and in which an Albanese Government is now hoping to find refuge.

The disturbing levels of drug and alcohol abuse have been met with the same apparent indifference. One in six Australians has a drug addiction and one in ten an alcohol addiction, which means some two million Australians suffer from substance abuse.

The mental health packages by Labor ($1 billion) and Coalition ($900 million) to be expended over the next several years may make it easier, especially for young people, to access free mental health treatment. They do not, however, address the underlying economic, social or cultural factors driving the mental health epidemic.

The election campaign has been equally notable for its scant treatment of our climate change predicament, the biodiversity crisis, and other looming environmental threats. The attention devoted to the rise of far-right extremism or our dysfunctional mainstream and social media has been conspicuous by its absence.

What this tells us is that contemporary Australian politics is in the grips of a pervasive cognitive and moral myopia. Politicians, the major political parties and the institutions of the state, seem strangely unable to focus on the nation’s ills, other than by way of expedient short-term remedies and soothing reassurances.

Hardly surprising then that our political elites, and the security establishment which advises them, should be so detached from the momentous transition in world affairs. Yet, the writing is on the wall.

For many decades, America’s global supremacy has been the bedrock of Australia’s alliances and military planning. But that supremacy is long since gone.

Through the 1960s and 1970s, the US ran either a surplus, or a small trade deficit. A large deficit became the norm in the 1980s and 1990s, and by 2022 this reached a staggering $944 billion. In 1960, the US economy accounted for 40% of the global economy – by 2019 its share had fallen to 24%.

Much the same can be said for the leading Western economies. The G7 share of the world economy declined from a high of 67% in 1992 to 44% in 2022. Even more striking has been the decline in Japan’s share, from a high of 17.8% in 1994 to 3.6% in 2024.

These trends help explain the steady loss of US economic dominance mirrored and exacerbated by the steady decline of the West’s collective economic influence.

The converse trend has been China’s equally dramatic ascent. Since 2014, China has been the world’s largest trading nation,and since 2016 the world’s largest economy when measured by purchasing power parity.

Reinforcing this trend has been the performance of the fast-growing economies of Asia, notably India, Vietnam and Indonesia, and the rise of the BRICS group, now a considerable political force intent on creating a counterweight to the West’s global influence.

As one author has observed, “we are witnessing the unravelling of the global order… a period in history that bridges a fading industrial era dominated by Western countries and a new digital era underwritten by the rise of China and a vast Asian trading system".

A remarkable economic and geopolitical power shift is now in full view, but not, it seems, in the sight of the two major Australian political parties. And the shift we are presently witnessing may be even more profound.

The West-centric world, in which first Europe, and then the United States, held sway, is steadily giving way to a new world in which other civilisational centres and their rich histories, traditions and languages are emerging or re-emerging.

The centre of cultural gravity is visibly shifting from the West to the East, from Occident to Orient.

The Trump phenomenon is a manifestation of this shift. Trump’s rallying cry “Make America great again” says it all. American supremacy belongs to yesteryear.

In early April, Trump’s America chose to put on a tantrum by unleashing an unsustainable trade war on the rest of the world. A month later, the exorbitant tariffs indiscriminately imposed on rich and poor, friends and adversaries alike, had to be drastically rolled back.

China remains the exception, with 145% tariffs on Chinese goods still in force. But not for long. This is a war the US economy cannot win.

The Liberals were hardly expected to offer any useful observations on any of this. But what does Labor see as the strategic, economic and cultural implications for Australia?

How will the Labor Government meet the challenges ahead? How will it respond to the gruesome reality of genocide that has reared its ugly head once again? What of the seeming paralysis of the United Nations, and the blatant disregard of international law? With whom will it consult and collaborate?

And, closer to home, what of Australia’s outmoded and divisive Anglophone military alliances and entanglements and costly military procurement projects of dubious value? A host of questions the election campaign conveniently swept under the carpet.

If risks were ignored, so were the opportunities that beckon. Asia’s ascent and America’s decline, coupled with Australia’s rapidly changing cultural profile, constitute a unique moment for the nation to shed its colonial mindset, recognise the sovereignty of First Nations, and reset its sense of place in the world.

Election 2025 does have a salutary message. Neither Liberal nor Labor is up to the task. The country’s political institutions are in a state of atrophy. Those yearning for leadership and initiative will need to look elsewhere.

Civil society — with its imaginative social movements, far-seeing advocates, independent publishers, and public-spirited and culturally diverse unionists, educators, artists, writers and philanthropists — offers a more promising avenue.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/05/election-2025-the-labor-liberal-waltz-of-irrelevance/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

Albanese reaps dividend of not toeing US line
By LI YANG | China Daily

Labor Party leader Anthony Albanese became the first Australian prime minister in 21 years to secure a second consecutive term, when he claimed victory in the federal election on Saturday.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio congratulated Albanese on his election to a second three-year term, saying that "The United States looks forward to deepening its relationship with Australia to advance our common interests and promote freedom and stability in the Indo-Pacific and globally". But the Albanese government has increased its majority by not modeling itself on the incumbent US administration.

Instead of stressing the "shared values" that Rubio highlighted in his congratulatory remarks, Albanese told supporters in Sydney after his win in the election that: "Australians have chosen to face global challenges the Australian way, looking after each other while building for the future," adding that "Today, the Australian people have voted for Australian values: for fairness, aspiration and opportunity for all; for the strength to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need".

Labor had held a narrow majority of 78 seats in the 151-seat House of Representatives, the lower chamber where parties form governments, but is on track to increase its majority in its second term, which as many observed is attributable to the Albanese government's determination to draw a clear demarcation line with the US administration's beggar-thy-neighbor policy in trade and geopolitics.

If the US administration really hopes to drag Australia to its side, it should know the damaging impacts of its tariff policy and the chaos caused by its "Indo-Pacific" strategy in the Asia-Pacific, as well as Australia's energy policy, as inflation has been a major election issue in the country, with both the Labor Party and the Conservatives agreeing the country faces a cost of living crisis.

The central bank of Australia reduced its benchmark cash interest rate by a quarter percentage point in February to 4.1 percent in an indication that the worst of the financial hardship had passed. The rate is widely expected to be cut again at the bank's next board meeting on May 20, this time to encourage investment amid the international economic uncertainty generated by the US administration's tariff policy, according to a report of the Associated Press.

By contributing to regional peace and stability, promoting free trade and consolidating the stability of global industry and supply chains, the Albanese government can better help Australia cope with the economic challenges during its second term. A stable external regional environment will also serve Australia's interest.

Almost all regional countries have seen through the US' tricks in its "Indo-Pacific" strategy, which is to divide the region to meet its own narrow ends to contain China. And Australia has no reason to foot the bill for the US' geopolitical game.

Delivering his victory speech at a Labor event in Sydney, Albanese said that his government was taking on the task of repaying voters' trust "with new hope, new confidence and new determination. Together we are turning a corner and together we will make our way forward".

Saying that it was a time of profound opportunity for the nation, he said that "We have everything we need to seize this moment and make it our own, but we must do it together".

Beijing has congratulated the Labor Party and Prime Minister Albanese on their election victory, and said that China is willing to work with the Australian government to follow the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries and continue to promote the building of a more mature, stable and fruitful China-Australia comprehensive strategic partnership. A stable and healthy Sino-Australian relationship is conducive to benefitting the two countries and their peoples, and making positive contributions to promoting peace and stability in the region and the world.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202505/06/WS68194ed4a310a04af22bd8c5.html

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

Edward Hurcombe

This year’s federal election demonstrated that Australia’s media landscape has changed. Big players  are no longer “kingmakers” in politics.

Influencers on TikTok and Instagram have  seemingly become journalists. Politicians  are going on podcasts, and campaign advertising  has become memes.

Australia’s news media has historically been concentrated in the hands of a few large companies. Now there are fresh new voices.

But who are these new players? Are they even “journalists”? And to what extent are older media, such as News Corp, still influential?

Too much attention?

Labor’s stunning victory last Saturday night defied even the most optimistic predictions. But it was also evidence of the apparently declining influence of the largest commercial media company operating in Australia: News Corp.

In the recent past, News Corp and its owner Rupert Murdoch were regarded by politicians as  a major factor in deciding elections. Getting on Murdoch’s good side was an important goal for budding prime ministers.

But despite its  major papers supporting the Coalition at every state and federal election since 2010, the Labor Party still wins elections.

In the aftermath of the Coalition’s smashing defeat, commentators were even openly considering whether the Liberal and National parties were paying too much attention to Murdoch and his Sky News channel.

Analysts have suggested the Coalition’s fixation on “culture wars”,  promoted by Sky News television hosts, left them out of touch with the issues ordinary Australians care about. The Coalition’s focus on Welcome to Country ceremonies in the final weeks of the campaign is an example of this tone-deaf misstep.

Shifts of influence

The other major feature of this election was the rise of influencers. This started in December last year, when Peter Dutton appeared on Sam Fricker’s podcast. Fricker is a former diver with 168,000 Instagram followers.

Anthony Albanese followed suit in early 2025,  when he appeared on Abbie Chatfield’s podcast. Chatfield is a politically progressive Instagram star with more than 560,000 followers.

Influencers weren’t just interviewing politicians, however. They were also reporting the news. In March, the Labor Party invited a dozen influencers to participate in the annual budget lock-up.

The privilege of reading the budget ahead of its official launch is usually reserved for journalists, but financial and feminist influencers, among others, were also included.

Some news outlets raised eyebrows at this development, while others expressed concern at reports the Labor Party had  funded the travel costs for these influencers.

But what was clear was the government felt it could no longer rely on traditional media to get the message out. Instead, it recognised that influencers are now a major source of news for many people – especially young people.

How do we make sense of this?

Does this mean influencers have replaced journalists? Well, it’s more complicated than that.

Research from the University of Canberra has shown young audiences receive most of their news from social media, and video content is increasingly popular for this demographic. The video platform YouTube has also become a  powerhouse for political content, and upstart digital outlets such as  The Daily Aus on Instagram have cemented themselves as legitimate news sources.

But we shouldn’t ignore traditional media. The ABC along with SBS are still the most trusted news source in Australia. The ABC’s recent election night coverage  broke viewership records.

Established media has also been  experimenting in digital news. This includes Guardian Australia’s  influencer-style TikTok content, and the “Politics Explained” videos produced by the ABC’s multiplatform journalism team.

These developments in Australia reflect what’s been happening in the US, where legacy outlets such as the Los Angeles Timesand the Washington Post have become adept at creating fun, accessible and informative news content for digital audiences.

The recent focus on influencers also neglects how Australian news has been facing digital disruption for decades. In the 2010s, BuzzFeed Australia was also producing  accessible and millennial-friendly news, and  faced similar controversy when its journalists joined the Canberra Press Gallery.

Still, influencers present both opportunities and challenges for news. On the one hand, they can reach audiences who would otherwise be avoiding news. They can provide fresh new perspectives on issues, especially on topics relevant to young people, such as housing.

However, their ambivalent status also can present ethical concerns. Not being bound by newsroom codes of conduct can be freeing, but it can result in the transparency issues we saw in the budget lock-up.

Influencers’ emphasis on “authenticity” can also lead to partisan news coverage. Some influencers who call themselves “citizen journalists” have even been accused of  spreading misinformation.

Australia’s news landscape is much more diverse than it used to be. But it’s also more complex than simply a story of old versus new media.

Republished from THE CONVERSATION, 8 May 2025

Disclosure statement Edward Hurcombe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

https://johnmenadue.com/post/2025/05/in-the-age-of-the-influencer-does-the-political-backing-of-news-corp-matter-anymore/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.