[Theme Music Starts]

DANIEL:

From Schwartz Media, I’m Daniel James. This is 7am.

Australia is heading into a federal election at a time when trust in democracy is at a low ebb.

Over the past two decades satisfaction with the political system has collapsed, driven by economic inequality, housing stress, and the rapid spread of disinformation. Political parties are already preparing for a campaign that will lean heavily on negative messaging, an approach that has proven effective but fuels further division.

With trust in both politicians and the media in decline, the upcoming election will test the resilience of Australia’s democracy.

Today, journalist and broadcaster Patricia Karvelas on the forces undermining democratic trust and what it will take to rebuild it.

It’s Friday, March 7.

[Theme Music Ends]

DANIEL:

Patricia, thanks for coming on 7am.

PATRICIA:

Absolute pleasure.

DANIEL:

We hear a lot about trust in democracy declining, but what does that actually look like?

PATRICIA:

Well it looks like people becoming increasingly, in lots of different cohorts, not mixing and having a completely different experience of the same country. And of course that leads to all sorts of disruption and I think we're seeing that across the world. I don't think you can really separate anything from what algorithms are doing and how people have entirely different experiences of the information they're receiving, and that I think is a really big challenge to democracy.

So online I mean my 15 year old has an entirely different algorithm to me, which is probably healthy. I mean how weird if she had the one of a woman in her 40s, but she's also constantly subjected to videos from influencers and people who are sharing information that is completely not based in fact. And, you know, she has pretty good digital literacy skills, she can try and identify that, oh, this doesn't look legit. But I worry that we don't have a digital literacy level across the community which is deeper and that a lot of this misinformation, these silos that people operate in, are kind of getting hard baked into the way people are understanding the world around them. And I think Australia is in a better position than places that are similar across the world but we are not out of the woods, we are I think in a really tricky position and unless we double down on working out how to deal with it, I think we might end up stuffed, even if we end up stuffed a little later than everyone else.

DANIEL:

Stuffed is one word for it, but what do some of the stats say when it comes to how people are feeling about democracy at the moment?

PATRICIA:

So the work that I rely on is from the Australian National University who have done these long surveys with large cohorts of voters where they track sentiment. I've spoken to them at length about what they find here and satisfaction with democracy in Australia varies across age and education and income.

For instance those who haven't completed year 12 satisfaction with democracy is quite low and those with a degree or a higher qualification are the most satisfied with democracy. So what does that mean? We've got this big divide. You know we talk a lot about income and inequality, but the education divide appears to be growing as one of the biggest determinants of trust in democracy. And the real threat to democracy is trying to exploit the fears of that group, because it'll come back to bite the politicians who are exploiting it, because these people are increasingly not trusting democracy.

DANIEL:

Let's talk about that disconnect and that dissatisfaction with politics and with democracy. How is it being exploited?

PATRICIA:

Well we've seen around the world it being exploited in a very dramatic way aren't we? The election of Donald Trump is clearly part of that. We're seeing the rise of the far right in Germany is part of that. In Australia, I think we have more centre-right politics. We operate more in the centre. You'll notice that, for instance, Peter Dutton hasn't chased Donald Trump down every rabbit hole of policy. I know some people say it's all the same, it's Trump light. I do think there are differences in the policy being offered.

But if you look at disruption at the moment, all of the surveys show an increase in this not major party vote. And look at Clive Palmer's new party that is absolutely about exploiting this view in the community that the system is stacked against you.

Audio Excerpt - Clive Palmer:

“It's the Trump-et of patriots.”

Audio Excerpt - News Reporter 3:

“Billionaire Clive Palmer adopts the MAGA Manual.”

Audio Excerpt - Clive Palmer:

“Australia needs Trump policies.”

Audio Excerpt - News Reporter 3:

“Launching his third political party, backed by American conservative commentator Tucker Carlson.”

Audio Excerpt - Tucker Carlson:

“You need rich people on your side, it's just true. You have to have someone with power on your side.”

PATRICIA:

I think the mainstream parties, particularly Labor because they're in government, have not engaged enough with the grievance and they're all about their headline metrics. Joe Biden did it in the US too, look at our headline metrics. But if people feel in their households like they're in a recession, you can go on about how we avoided a recession at a sort of macro level, but at a household level you try and speak to anyone and see if they feel like they've avoided a recession.

And so this is where politicians that want to exploit that sentiment jump in and try and cultivate it for votes. Now of course you might get the vote by making everyone very angry all the time and speaking to that anger, but you're not actually deeply dealing with the kind of deeper issue that leads to this feeling. It's a sort of flip flop, oh you change your government, you flip another government, you know, disruption, disruption, disruption. In terms of long-term reform, things that will structurally get people ahead, if people feel like they're not getting ahead because they're not getting access to education and higher incomes that's the thing you need to deal with. That's the fundamental thing you need to deal with.

DANIEL:

And I guess this whole environment makes it ripe for disinformation campaigns working to undermine democracy itself and to drive that wedge. What have we been seeing recently on that front?

PATRICIA:

You know, there will be the campaign where journalists on the front line are observing the press conferences, the macro messages. But under the surface in terms of the information, the scare campaigns from both sides and other sides, the Clive Palmer's and so forth, that they put out officially and unofficially through proxies which is harder to see because different cohorts will be seeing it. So I might never see some of this misinformation, right? I might see some really acutely in one area because they've worked out my demographic and I'm being exploited.

But I think we are absolutely set for an election with a lot of fear-mongering from lots of perspectives, can I say. And my big thesis, if anything, is that unless we start doing a whole lot more work on digital literacy, civics education and understanding of the way the system works, I think we're cooked. I think the education system is leaning in a bit, but I still think it's way lower than it needs to be. And so you've got to be able to make your citizens be informed and question things rather than take everything as fact when indeed it's not.

DANIEL:

After the break, how do politicians and the media regain trust?

RUBY:

Hi, Ruby Jones here.

7am tells stories that need to be told. Our journalism is founded on trust and independence.

And now, we're increasing our coverage.

Every Saturday until the election, we’ll bring you an extra episode, to break down the biggest political moments of the week.

If you enjoy 7am, the best way you can support us is by making a contribution at 7ampodcast.com.au/support.

Thanks for listening and supporting our work.

[Advertisement]

DANIEL:

Unfortunately disinformation and misinformation isn't new, but its impact, of course, is bigger because of the way the media landscape has changed so much. I'm sure you've seen it unfold before your own eyes during your time as a journalist. How has that changed your role as a reporter, as a broadcaster, working in public broadcasting?

PATRICIA:

It's made it harder, much harder, but you can't be nostalgic for the good old days because it's a waste of your time. But because of the disruption, politicians are able to game the system a lot more and avoid scrutiny and that has made my job a lot harder.

So if you are a politician that wants to get a message out, I've had like really senior political figures people say to me, why wouldn't I just get on TikTok and share whatever I want to say unfiltered, uninterrupted by you, get as much reach as I can, try and amplify it, rather than policed by you, because that's what journalists do, we push what we think is important they're right there. Basically, like why would we bother?

Now, I am a purist, I will admit it, and I think you would bother because it's the right thing to do. You should subject yourself to scrutiny. Also it's a sign of strength, if I can use the muscular language of our times. If you're so strong, whoever you are, subject yourself to scrutiny, that's how strong you are. It's the way to be tested to become a leader or a minister, a prime minister, opposition leader, whatever you are. Which is why, because I do want to acknowledge it, I thought the prime minister coming on Q&A, which he did for our season launch, was a really important message too, which is, you know, I will come on, take hostile questions, because voters have a right to ask, and not just you know, only speak to friendly Instagramers.

DANIEL:

Beyond fronting up like that, what do you think politicians can do to rebuild trust with the electorate?

PATRICIA:

Politicians need to stop being politicians. And now, I don't know why they haven't got this yet. Maybe they're so institutionalised, or they have been so micromanaged, I feel a bit bad for some of them actually. They've been so media-trained to within an inch of their existence that they are scared to say things. And I'll give you an example.

I actually don't think it's entirely on Albanese. I think his entire political party must take responsibility for the fact that sometimes he sounds very uncertain, which has been exploited by Peter Dutton as a sign of lack of strength. I believe he sounds uncertain because in the middle of every sentence, he's thinking about every single word that's about to come out. But, you know what Trump does? He speaks so much more authentically, and when things go wrong, he'll then speak again in the next hour and kind of correct or change its direction. Our politicians seem to not be able to do this, Albanese being the most acute version, and I think they need to do that more to be honest. Not be Trump, but be able to trust in what they're saying, and then, like if it goes wrong because it will, Daniel, it will definitely go wrong. I'm not saying this is not a risky strategy. There are ways to actually address that.

What's the benefit of it? Connecting with people. Authenticity. The public isn't trusting them because they're not levelling. They're not bringing you into the conversation of the conundrums we're facing as a culture. There's no process for politicians to go through anymore because they're so worried about consequences, and they've all got to break that or the public will be more distrustful.

DANIEL:

Final question, Patricia. Given the erosion in trust, given the benefits in division, how will this shape the upcoming election campaign?

PATRICIA:

I think it'll make it a really hard and negative campaign. I think the value of, you know, the straight shooter is really going to be important. Misrepresentation is a problem, so we're going to see everyone misrepresenting. We've seen it before from both sides. We've seen the death taxes campaign in a previous election by the Coalition to scare people from voting for Labor clearly had some impact. We've seen Medi-scare, that the Coalition was, you know, going to privatise and get rid of Medicare or whatever the charge was, essentially. It wasn't their plan. You might not like the Coalition, but you need to also be truthful about what their plan is.

And the truth is, there can be a collection of facts. You can say this was Peter Dutton's record as Health Minister, right? He also has just promised to match Labor on health spending. Both of these things can be true. Now, if the public doesn't believe that he'll deliver, that is vibes and feelings and they can feel that. But in our domain we deal in facts, not supposition, not vibes. And we must stick to that. And so back to how these campaigns, it's going to be ugly. We're going to distrust each other. And so, buckle up because I think that's what's going to happen.

DANIEL:

Well thank you for the work that you do, Patricia, and thank you for coming on 7am.

PATRICIA:

Thanks for having me.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

DANIEL:

Also in the news Today,

Treasurer Jim Chalmers says the US has not yet made a decision on whether Australia will get an exemption on tariffs.

The treasurer says government discussions on the 25% tariffs on aluminium and steel imports are still continuing.

And, US President Donald Trump is threatening Hamas with obliteration if it doesn’t return all Israeli hostages in Gaza, dead or alive.

In a social media post after meeting with former hostages in Washington, Trump warned Hamas leadership that they were on their last chance to leave Gaza.

Meanwhile however, President Trump’s special envoy continues to negotiate directly with Hamas, in contradiction to decades of previous US policy.

I’m Daniel James, 7am will be back tomorrow, and every Saturday until the federal election.

Tomorrow we’re taking a deeper look at the biggest voting block in Australia and asking what the major parties are doing to court the votes of younger Australians.

See you then.

[Theme Music Ends]

[Advertisement]