6.3 Content: Is election coverage biased?
Analysis of coverage of the 2006 Victorian election by The Age
Introduction
The 2006 Victorian State election was held on 25 November 2006. The following study examined coverage of the campaign and the election result by The Age and Sunday Age newspapers. Australian election campaigns are difficult to report, and those responsible for such coverage are familiar with accusations of bias, inaccuracy, lack of objectivity and lack of balance. Although such accusations are commonplace, evidence to substantiate them is not.
This analysis was undertaken in the knowledge that notions such as bias and balance are notoriously difficult to define and even more difficult to prove. The research employed a combination of content analysis and discourse analysis in order to provide a measure of the extent, nature and depth of coverage of the campaign and of the issues that emerged during this time.
The study found no evidence to support any accusations of deliberate or systematic bias or favouritism in the newspaper 's coverage towards any political parties, groups or individuals. While, as would be expected, the coverage was substantially influenced by conventional journalistic news values and by the obvious need to attract readers and hold their attention, within that context regular readers of the newspaper were presented with a generally comprehensive, detailed and balanced coverage.
The analysis period covered the period from 23 October to 27 November. During this time more than 350 articles were published across 36 editions of the newspapers, accompanied by photographs, lists, quotes from key players, comment from subject "experts", electorate interviews and, in the two days following the election, details of results on a seat by seat basis. The Agealso devoted a section of its website to the election, but this was excluded from this analysis.
More than 50 people authored articles, and the coverage also included contributions from Premier Steve Bracks and Leader of the Opposition Ted Baillieu. Retiring President of the Victorian Legislative Council, Monica Gould, provided a number of articles "from the red corner", and former Liberal Party leader Robert Doyle provided an equal number of articles "from the blue corner". In each case, these "corners" were printed side by side, with the political connections of each author identified at the end of the articles.
The issues
The Age began its election coverage on 23 October with a 24 page lift-out titled The State of Victoria. The opening article positioned the lift-out as a series of essays by "the election team" and included a review by the economics editor (Tim Colebatch) on the economic and ecological challenges that "cannot be dealt with during the course of a single parliament; they require a strategy for the next 10 or 15 years." An indicator of how the paper viewed its role in the campaign was contained in the statement that "Some would say that the traditional role of the media to call politicians to account and demand answers to the big problems facing Victoria is the easy bit. A much tougher exercise is to switch the focus back to our own specialists and ask them to outline the key challenges facing the state and offer some policy options".
A second indicator of the paper 's view of its role was contained in the editorial, which suggested that, while elections are often fought by denigrating the opposition, The Age promoted its role in opening debate on long term policy issues and encouraging voters to demand answers on the big questions. Problems and policy are the focus of the lift-out with a clear delineation of the key topics affecting Victoria: health; environment; water; economy; education; society; transport and planning; law and order; as well as the central questions of what voters want from their state government, and what, indeed, is the role of the states.
On the front page of this edition is an article reporting the decision by Natasha Stott-Despoja, former leader of the Australian Democrats, not to contest the next federal election, thereby "effectively sealing the demise of the Democrats". A further reference to that party "having lost its slim chance of polling" with her resignation occurred on 31 October. Only three further mentions of the Democrats were found in the coverage of the election. In the last of these, written when final counting had not been completed, Democrat candidate John Mulholland was reported as saying that "the media ignored us during this election campaign", a claim which at that point appeared to have some justification.
The topics listed in the 23 October lift-out all appeared in the campaign and in the newspaper 's coverage of the campaign over the next few weeks. One of the dominant themes was water and sustainability, which appeared consistently throughout the coverage. The issues that received extensive coverage were
| topic | headlines | articles |
|---|---|---|
| water and sustainability | 14 headlines | 28 articles |
| health | 8 headlines | 19 articles |
| education | 4 headlines | 19 articles |
| public transport | 4 headlines | 17 articles |
| policing | 5 headlines | 18 articles |
| government economic accountability | 8 articles |
The emphasis in the coverage appeared to reflect the emphasis given by the major parties to these issues in their own campaigning. Although such issues form the "bread and butter" of all state election campaigns in Australia, it is probable that aspects of the way the parties tackled them were influenced by media reportage, including the coverage in The Age.
Both Government and Opposition policies were initially announced and then compared at regular intervals: for example, transport (9 November); health and education (10 November); school infrastructure pledges (12 November); stamp duty (13 November); and water (21 November). On 20 November the paper presented readers with a comprehensive list and comparison of Labor, Liberal, National and Greens election pledges and policies in an easy-to-read format. Throughout the election coverage, articles reporting criticism of one of the major party 's policy or policies by the other routinely included a response from "the other side".
Given the impact of the drought across Victoria, the issues bearing on water supply and sustainability naturally formed one of the dominant themes in the coverage. An example of the treatment of this theme was provided in The Sunday Age on 29 October, via a full page. The set-up of the page is such that a large photo of Premier Bracks fills centre page, with a brief outline of Labor policy. The photo is flanked by a column each side on the subject of water. Above the photo is information about Liberal policy, below are articles on Family First and the Greens. The latter two focus on the likelihood of those parties getting members elected but contain only the briefest description of party policy.
The articles on water are thus the most prominent policy discussion material on the page. In the article on the right the issue of how dire Victoria 's water needs could become is discussed, while in the column on the left a possible solution is flagged. The article asserts that the parties should consider a policy of reducing logging in water catchment areas.
Health was another major theme of the coverage. In addition to the articles noted above, the closely contested seat of the Minister for Health, Bronwyn Pike, was the subject of eight further articles, the prime focus being the news angle represented by the headline which stated Greens poised to topple Pike in Melbourne.
On 30 October The Age reported on emergency department patients; time on trolleys prior to admission to a bed; lack of beds for mental health patients; and reported that neither party had yet adequately declared policy, stating that "Less than a month before the election, both parties have yet to reveal their policies for improving the hospital system, although the Liberals recently revealed their mental health policy". On 11 November, the newspaper ran a comparison of party health promises that had by then been announced. This article also reported the Liberals ' claim that Labor had closed 350 beds against Labor 's claim that it had opened 919. The Liberal claim was balanced against the reporting of Labor 's assertion that the Liberal promises had not been adequately costed.
Transport policy was the subject of early Liberal campaign promises and featured early in The Age, accompanied by comment on Labor 's "responsible" but unexciting response. On 29 October the newspaper claimed its idea to remove public transport zone three was taken up by both parties. During the campaign nine articles were published which reported the way in which the Opposition was endeavouring to remind the electorate of Labor 's "broken promises" on toll roads.
Education is one of the most consistent issues in Australian state election campaigns, and this one proved to be no exception. In this case, the Liberals received early coverage, in part because Opposition raised the subject before the Government. After articles reporting the parties ' pledges and comments by "expert" groups on them, two days prior to election day a full page report asserted that "the fundamental differences in the two major parties are most starkly evident in education policy".
A further aspect of the coverage was the question of whether the two main non-Labor parties would agree to form a coalition after the election in order to have the numbers to govern. On 15 November economics editor Tim Colebatch pointed out that, while the media had largely focused on the Labor Government and the Liberal Opposition, the "real choice" was between Labor and a Liberal/National coalition.
The minor contenders
The Nationals appeared in four headlines and 50 articles. The main themes running through these were issues around the allocation of National preferences; the question of whether the Nationals would be prepared to form a coalition with the Liberals if the election outcome made that possible; prospects for the election of Nationals ' candidates in individuals seats; and criticism by various Nationals of the major parties.
As would be expected, the common thread to virtually all reporting of the Nationals ' policies was the focus on rural Victoria. National Party policy was featured on 25 October, with particular reference to the Nationals ' promises to upgrade country roads; reduce vehicle registration fees for concession holders; upgrade rural rail lines; and abolish the motorcycle levy. A consistent sub-theme in the reporting of the Nationals was their claim that Labor had been "too focused on Melbourne".
The Greens were mentioned directly in 18 headlines, of these articles 15 were focused primarily on preference deals, the likelihood of Green members being elected or the balance of power that would result, whereas Greens policy was often mentioned only as part of a wider discussion of water and sustainability issues rather than being presented in discrete articles. The first article headlining the Greens, Greens certain of Parliament Place appeared on 29 October; on 31 October a report suggested the Greens were "tipped to hold balance of power in the upper house". Starting on 7 November there were six articles focusing on Bronwyn Pike 's seat of Melbourne. These articles were particularly focused on the distribution of preferences given to the Greens as a determining factor although they also discussed campaigning style. In total there were 31 articles discussing preferences. On the day after the election, an article by Carol Nader and Jill Stark commented on "talk of dirty politics and preference deals" having dominated the weeks leading up to the election.
Initial coverage of Family First appeared on as a minor part of a page one article on 23 October in which he reported the party 's warning that the Greens were "soft on drugs". During the campaign, 21 articles mentioned Family First in one form or another, most commonly in regard to what the party meant by "family" and what the party 's policies meant for families. Three articles reported the potential for preference deals with the Liberals, and two reported the potential for preference deals from Labor, one of which reported criticism from the Greens that Labor could preference Family First. On 10 November Family First 's Cameron Eastman was profiled in a piece on headlined Ex-commander aims to rouse the sleeping giant. Although one sentence in the piece referred to broader policy, the focus of the article was on the chances of Eastman gaining a seat.
On the day after the election, but while the count was still incomplete, The Age reported that Family First was unlikely to win any seats, even though the party had almost doubled its vote. Another article reported Family First as receiving 4.27 per cent of the primary vote, only 1 per cent less than the Nationals.
A report on the eve of the election stated that the minor party People Power could win a seat or two in the upper house, although election analysts were reported as saying that, while such an outcome was mathematically possible, it was extremely unlikely. In the same article The Age reported People Power candidate Stephen Mayne 's view that the party 's policy of being in the middle was "inoffensive", stating that "it 's hard to argue with a platform that wants to clean up politics, get rid of poker machines and provide a better deal for carers, people with disabilities and mental illness". An article on 31 October described People Power as "centrist anti-pokies party" which had lost several high-profile representatives and is now experiencing "inner turmoil".
Despite the considerable role they have played in recent times nationally and at state level, the Australian Democrats did not receive extensive coverage. The party was the focus of only five articles, two of which dismissed the party as electorally dead following the decision by Natasha Stott-Despoja not to stand again. One article on 23 November did report the campaign by Paul Kavanagh although the key focus of the piece was Mr Kavanagh 's extensive walking in part to provide health benefits following advice from his doctor rather than his policies.
Only five articles were published in relation to independent candidates. Perhaps the most significant of these was an interview with Russell Savage, independent for Mildura, following his defeat.
The Campaign
On 31 October The Age characterised the campaign thus far as "grandiose promises" from Baillieu, and "tit-for-tat, anything-you-can-do" responses from Bracks. The editorial asserted that, despite this approach resulting in some worthwhile policies, what was needed was "broader visions on this state 's sustainable and smarter state economies", in the process referring to its own lift-out that "identified issues which deserve focus". It was also argued that long-term, far-sighted policies were needed rather than "rear-view politics", and a joint approach to deal with issues such as climate change was advocated.
In the latter phase of the campaign several articles appeared that portrayed the Liberal leader 's campaigning style as showmanship and commented on his somewhat unusual appearances such as swinging on a lamppost, singing, and emerging from his regular swim in Speedos to meet reporters. Against this, Steve Bracks ' campaigning was reported to be "statesman like", with the Premier being at the head of a team who had been included in the campaign, in contrast with Baillieu 's "one man show".
On the last day prior to polling day an item appeared under the headline Campaign highs and lows, listing "best quotes, best and worst speech, best stunt, biggest self promoter, most memorable aids, best protest, biggest gaffe, biggest dummy spit, clumsiest moment, missing in action...". This was a light-hearted gibe at both major parties and some of the minor ones, and is fairly balanced.
Election advertising was an issue at various times. On 26 October a planned Labor TV ad using a "grab" of Ted Baillieu was reported under the headline Labor 's "Grubby" ad starts campaign rolling. The piece, accompanied by four photographs from the ad, took up a half-page. The ABC demanded that the ad be edited so as to remove footage taken from Stateline. The ad was described as linking Baillieu to Kennett 's public service cutbacks and the photos demonstrate that as Baillieu 's face is superimposed with the words 3,500 nurses cut; 800 police cut; and Don 't let Baillieu take us back. Baillieu was quoted as responding, "People will remember that it was the Cain and Kirner governments that left Victoria all but bankrupt, and Steve Bracks was senior advisor to that government".
On the 24 November front page article the campaign was described as having turned nasty, with Labor claims of personal profit by Baillieu when schools were sold under the Kennett government. A Labor TV campaign began on 1 November documenting the awarding of sales of former school sites to real estate agency Baillieu, Knight and Frank, a link The Age claimed to have exposed in 1994. Mr. Baillieu was reported as denying he had profited because he was national director of the company at the time; he was also president of the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party national treasurer of the time was also linked to purchase of the schools, according to the same report.
Labor was reported several times, starting on 6 November, attacking Baillieu 's share portfolio, including claims in ALP television ads that he would be "a part-time Premier". Considerable space and a total of seven articles were devoted to the issue of Ted Baillieu 's share portfolio, including one half-page list documenting the contents. This list also appeared above a detailed article titled, Baillieu Share Silence may be hurting campaign, which also discussed the issue of Mr Baillieu 's refusal to "spell out under what circumstances he will step outside cabinet meetings when his ministers are discussing companies in which he owns shares". The article incorporated an opinion from ethicist and governance expert that the responses were far from satisfactory.
On 1 November a page one article reported that the campaign was becoming negative, with news that the Opposition 's television campaign would feature Bracks with a Pinocchio-style "growing nose" relating to allegedly broken promises such as making EastLink toll free; and a report that the last week of Labor 's television campaign would link Baillieu with Kennett-era public service job cuts.
On 16 November an article reported that "The Age believes" that the Nationals were planning a series of television advertisements in which the Liberals would be criticised for being "city-centric"; the Nationals leader Peter Ryan was reported to have attacked the Liberals following the major parties ' preference announcements because Liberal preferences would be allocated to the Greens in four city seats. The Liberals ' chances of winning appeared to have been dealt a severe blow, and the Nationals leader was quoted as promising "retribution".
On 21 November The Age reported that Labor advertisements claimed the Greens had "sold out to the Liberal Party" and that the Greens had threatened court action in relation to the claim. According to lawyers quoted in the report, the advertisements used John Howard 's head inside the Greens "trademark triangle". Other comments in the same report included Labor 's launch of advertisements opposing Federal industrial relations law; Liberal advertisements criticising Labor ads for being anti-Baillieu rather than concentrating on policy; Liberal ads criticising Bracks on a broken promise regarding tolls on Scoresby freeway; Liberals distributing pamphlets on Labor/Green "deal"; and the Nationals using advertisements taking a swipe at the Liberals over the "Greens deal".
One of the more newsworthy aspects of the campaign was the allocation of party preferences. There were 30 articles reporting or discussing various preference negotiations or the deals that followed those negotiations, six of which carried headlines relating to the issue. In these 30 articles, negotiations over the allocation of preferences by Labor, Liberals, the Nationals, the Greens and Family First parties are reported. There was considerable speculative comment, with multiple reports about the negotiations, considered by some to be unseemly and, indeed, "grubby", and to be more about winning seats than any sympathetic alignment of policies.
An example of this was provided by the piece published on page 1 on 6 November. The article reported that "warfare" was about to "erupt" between the Liberal Party and potential coalition partner the Nationals over the preference deal the Liberals were "close to striking with Labor", under which Labor preferences would go to the Liberals in some National rural seats; in return the Liberal Party would give Labor its preferences ahead of the Greens in some inner-city seats. As a result, the Nationals could lose two of their seven lower house seats, with their leader and deputy leader in danger of defeat; and they could lose two or three of their four upper house seats because the new proportional voting system for Legislative Council would make it harder for rural candidates to win.
A focus on personalities was a notable aspect of the campaign coverage. At several points, the personality was a "ghost from the past". Mention was made in a number of articles of Jeff Kennett in relation to the Labor campaign "reminding" voters of the cuts he made in Victoria and trying to link Ted Baillieu to him as close personally and likely to repeat such policies. In an article on 8 November, a former deputy secretary of the federal Treasury argued that the Kennett Government had restored the state 's economic viability, and that the Bracks Government had been the beneficiary of this. Among other things, he argued that Labor 's strategy of trying to link Ted Baillieu to Kennett might backfire because it might not be interpreted as negatively by voters as Labor had assumed it would be.
The main personalities to receive attention during the campaign were, of course, the leaders of the two major parties, Premier Bracks and Opposition Leader Baillieu. Bracks was referred to in a majority of articles, extending from major news stories to minor briefs, from stories reporting major policy areas to personality and colour pieces. He was consistently reported in simple terms such like Premier Bracks stated or Bracks announced. When he was described terms were used such as "Ballarat boy of Lebanese ancestry" or "Nice Mr Bracks"; or his activity is described such as "The Premier is on his haunches deep in conversation with a pair of quietly industrious pre-school boys". The descriptors were overwhelmingly positive or neutral; the main exception to this pattern was the description of him as being over-confident of winning.
The Opposition Leader was described in more mixed terms, beginning with physical attributes, "The first thing you notice about him is his height ... six foot seven... he manages to tower over everyone... without being an imposing presence... Ted Baillieu comes across as just a little shy". Later in the campaign, descriptions such as, "In a matter of weeks, Mr Baillieu has morphed from the Liberals ' nervous and unassuming leader to an all-singing, all-dancing contender"; and "Once criticized for not being visible enough, Mr Baillieu has evolved into a one-man side-show in the latter weeks of the campaign, as much a celebrity as a statesman", appeared.
The explanation for the somewhat mixed nature of the coverage by the newspaper of Baillieu compared with Bracks seems obvious: the controversy surrounding his share portfolio, and the somewhat theatrical nature of some of his campaign appearances. The treatment of the former issue is summed up by the headline Why Baillieu must sell his share portfolio. An article also made a comparison with John Howard and Peter Costello 's stance of non-share holding. As already indicated, the Opposition Leader 's campaigning style involved an unusual level of showmanship and this, too, was a consistent aspect of the coverage of his campaigning. Such showmanship is, as yet, not a common feature of electioneering in Australia, and the newspaper 's focus on this can be explained in terms of news values and as a means of showing readers what the Opposition Leader was "really" like. An opinion piece on 22 November referred to his "budgie smugglers" and noted that "as long as they (voters) remember the face. Or body. Or both".
The two leaders ' partners also received some attention from The Age. On 16 November a piece headed Nobody votes for them so why do they matter?, with accompanying photographs of the leaders ' partners, both women were quoted as describing themselves primarily as wives and mothers. The article compared their levels of political involvement, and financial and educational backgrounds, and Ms Bracks was described as being a political advantage for her husband. Commenting on the issues around Baillieu 's share portfolio, his wife defended him, saying that "They (Labor) are playing the man and I think they are a bunch of bullies". There were several references to Ted Baillieu as "The hunk from Hawthorn", a phrase reportedly used by his wife.
In addition to Bracks ' reference to federal industrial relations policy, the Federal Liberal Party also made an intermittent appearance in the coverage. On 11 November Prime Minister John Howard was reported to have embarrassed Mr Baillieu by stating that the Liberals would inevitably form a coalition with the Nationals if this was what was required to form a government. Mr Howard was also reported to support Baillieu in regard to his handling of his share portfolio and the offer to place it in a blind trust.
On 13 November, the front-page lead story reported Prime Minister Howard 's claims that the Bracks Government was taking credit for the economic success of the Federal Government, that the Victorian budget was operating at a deficit, and that the Victorian Government had "squandered" a GST windfall. It also contained a response from Victorian Treasurer John Brumby, pointing out that the state 's budget was calculated the same way as every other state 's budget, and that the state budget was in good shape.
At different stages of the campaign the views of a number of interest groups were also reported, including the police, nurses and the churches. On 6 November, The Age ran an article reporting the views of a coalition of church welfare groups about the need to consider deprived families. It reported a view that mental health funding was poorly targeted and, indeed, helped "middle class" people. On 8 November, a piece titled School funding outcry quoted the view of the chairman of the Catholic Education Commission of Victoria that, "We are the poor cousins as far as the State Government is concerned".
On 8 November, The Age reported police union "wars", and warnings to both parties not to interfere with police independence in response to a Liberal proposal where they would deploy more police if elected. Labor Police Minister Tim Holding was reported to have responded that such an approach was irresponsible and that operational matters were the province of police. The Opposition police spokesperson Kim Wells, in response to a question on how such policy could be enforced, was reported to have stated that he would query the Commissioner if police were not deployed in accordance with their election undertakings; although he would not sack her if she did not comply but, rather, would "negotiate".
In a report headed Lib promise fails to sway police union the Police Association responded to party promises regarding police With regard to Labor, the report claimed there was "a deal made in private" and that "the smart money" was saying Bracks has agreed with the Association that it "won 't be playing hardball when the association is involved in pay negotiations".
On page one on 1 November, the newspaper reported that its investigative unit had used Freedom of Information laws to uncover documents that showed that "A senior Bracks Government minister interfered with the tendering for an $8 million state contract to appease building unions and their members...". The article quoted a senior public servant and outlined information from internal documents, including the diary of a public servant, which indicated that, after being removed from a short list of tendering firms, a company had complained to the Building and Construction Commission and subsequently been returned to the short list - after which it went on to win the tender.
The result
In the event, Labor won 55 of the 88 lower house seats (seven fewer than in 2002), the Liberals 23 seats, and the Nationals nine. One independent was re-elected and one lost his seat. In the Legislative Council, Labor won 19 of 40 seats, the Liberals 15, the Greens three, the Nationals two and the Democratic Labor Party one (the first time the DLP had won a seat in the Victorian Parliament since 1955).
These results were covered comprehensively in The Sunday Age next day. Angles covered included Labor 's "comfortable" win, results in individual electorates; Steve Bracks ' success in becoming the first Victorian Labor leader to win a third term; the possibility that he could remain in power until 2014 and thus become the state 's longest-serving premier; Bracks ' assessment of the significance of the victory ("unequivocal message to John Howard over his "extreme" industrial relations laws"). An edited version of Baillieu 's concession of defeat was also run. There was an opinion piece the next day in which Baillieu was described as a "walking karaoke machine in budgie smugglers". It noted Labor had a comfortable majority; that the Liberal campaign was not about a team but "all about Ted"; the shadow treasurer was described as "uninspiring" because he had "managed to completely stuff up the Liberal 's major costings announcement". By comparison, the Labor campaign had been based on policies.
Summary
The Age newspaper has long played an influential role in the political life of the state of Victoria. Despite its limitations, this analysis suggests that the newspaper continues to play that role - or, at least, that it did so in the state election of 2006. The analysis indicated that The Age both carried and contributed to serious discussion of the major issues which emerged during the election campaign, and that this contribution originated both from the contenders for power and also from its own assessment of what was best for Victoria.
What some readers would no doubt have regarded as unduly serious coverage was balanced by a regular input of lighter content. As a result, regular readers of The Age were presented with a comprehensive and generally balanced coverage of issues and policies, parties and personalities. The role played by the newspaper was more than being a means of information transmission to electors, for not only did it select and shape the campaign material it carried according to relatively predictable journalistic considerations such as news values and the need to hold the attention of readers but, on occasion, it also directly shaped the coverage. The most notable example of this was the part the newspaper played over the issue of Ted Baillieu 's share portfolio and the potential it raised for conflicts of interest should the Liberal leader find himself Premier after the election.
The analysis undertaken also revealed the dominant part played in the reportage - and apparently also public perception - by the personal style of the leaders of the major political parties. It is hardly novel to observe that Australian politics is going down the path blazed by US politics in terms of celebrity and personality, or at least with regard to the personality and image of the party leaders. This trend was apparent in the reportage of this campaign, encouraged by the showmanship of the Leader of Opposition, in particular.
The minor parties received less coverage than might have been expected, especially the Australian Democrats which seemed to be regarded as spent force from the early days of the campaign. This may or may not have been the case but, undoubtedly, journalistic portrayals of the party in this light did nothing to prevent that prediction from being realised. Other aspects of the campaign that received coverage included the vexed relationship between the Liberals and the Nationals, and the return from the politically dead of the Democratic Labor Party.