How are podcasts shaping the 2025 Singapore election narrative?

object(WP_Post)#8514 (24) {
(“ID”)=>
int(39594)
(“post_author”)=>
string(2) “36”
(“post_date”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-30 23:54:10”
(“post_date_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-30 23:54:10”
(“post_content”)=>
string(9120) “

The largest affect on public notion of the 2025 election marketing campaign was not coverage. It was identification, tradition wars, and a rising worry of Australia ‘turning into America’. What started as a give attention to easing the price of dwelling shortly widened right into a broader debate about nationwide identification. Media protection and social media feeds revealed a tug of struggle. On one facet was coverage messaging. On the opposite, gaining appreciable floor, have been tradition and identification narratives fuelled by nervousness over exterior affect.

Firstly of the election cycle in early March, information protection centred on price of dwelling pressures and tax cuts. The Labor authorities’s funds announcement and the Liberal Social gathering’s response cemented the agenda, with matters like grocery store worth gouging, gasoline excises, and nuclear power proposals hanging a chord with voters. Early dialogue on social media confirmed a transparent give attention to making life extra reasonably priced for households. However within the background, frustration round Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs and issues about Australia–U.S. relations started to floor. Peter Dutton’s early promise to chop 40,000 public service jobs and push for a return to workplace work additional fuelled comparisons between Dutton and Trump amongst Australian audiences.

Because the election cycle progressed, worldwide occasions and conflicts moved to the forefront. Trump’s presence in international headlines alongside Canada’s equally timed election, intensified comparisons between Australian and Canadian public attitudes towards American affect. Media narratives shifted from home cost-of-living issues to broader conversations about defending the Australian lifestyle and defending nationwide pursuits notably in training, reshaping the battleground on which voters made their selections.

On March 28, protection and dialogue spiked as Anthony Albanese formally introduced the election date. Earlier, on March 10, a surge in dialog centred on new polling that urged a possible hung parliament, sharpening media give attention to Labor. Albanese’s look on At present, the place he responded to frustrations about delayed campaigning with, “We’re nearly serving to individuals, as a result of that’s what individuals count on,” strengthened his picture as a community-focused chief and contrasted with how previous prime ministers have been criticised throughout disasters. In the meantime, Peter Dutton’s social media consideration rose on April 12, as experiences surfaced of his opponent Ali France main in Dickson whereas an area tent encampment was demolished by Moreton Bay Council. Dutton, campaigning in Perth through the demolition, attracted criticism. A couple of days later, a compilation of clips linking Dutton to Donald Trump circulated broadly. These moments highlighted the distinct management kinds that formed voter perceptions all through the marketing campaign.

Though Labor drew probably the most consideration general, Dutton and the Liberals gained momentum throughout social media. The Liberal Social gathering’s early use of tendencies, AI instruments, and memes attracted dialog, however the involvement of influencers and podcasts proved polarising. Protection additionally highlighted a generational divide, with younger girls leaning left and younger males leaning proper. Influencers performed a key position in shaping these dynamics, from Albanese’s Completely satisfied Hour podcast look on March 26, the place his “delulu with no solulu” problem dominated information cycles, to Dutton’s interview on Sam Fricker’s podcast aimed toward younger male voters. Because the marketing campaign progressed, information more and more targeted on character assaults and gaffes on the expense of coverage debate. Points like housing, grocery store competitors, HECS aid, and power payments remained core to social gathering platforms, however many audiences have been drawn into yarns masking persona clashes and tradition wars.

Essentially the most shared information gadgets from the start of the marketing campaign to not too long ago underline this shift of consideration to cultural battle. Posts concerning the mobilisation of Muslim voters round Gaza, criticism of Liberal candidates campaigning in navy uniforms, warnings about public service job cuts, and debates over the political leanings of younger male voters all reveal how particular cultural flashpoints and area of interest group appeals dominated dialogue. As a substitute of broad coverage debates, election discourse was fragmented into controversies that infected identity-driven tensions, polarised audiences, and heightened mistrust.

Whether or not leaders spoke about getting Australia again on monitor, constructing a greater Australia, and even making Australia nice once more, these slogans signalled clear messages to voters. Most of the time, the general public expressed a want to distance Australia from america, notably in defending healthcare and training programs that set Australia aside. Early within the marketing campaign, when a journalist urged Anthony Albanese’s use of “construct again higher” echoed Joe Biden’s slogan, the remark was shortly dismissed. Although not formally endorsed, the slogan’s use by Jacinta Value and Clive Palmer shortly eclipsed social gathering strains, fuelling memes and comparisons to US Republicans throughout social media. This did little to assist the Liberals distance their official slogan, ‘Get Australia again on monitor,’ from US political parallels. As Trump’s affect grew to become a speaking level, glimpses of Trump-style messaging have been eagerly picked up by information retailers and social media alike, usually overshadowing Labor’s marketing campaign messaging and limiting its cut-through.

Because the marketing campaign unfolded, it grew to become tougher to separate coverage from persona or guarantees from the cultural narratives surrounding them. Media and social media consideration did greater than replicate public curiosity. They helped form it, steering the election dialog towards identification, values, and questions on Australia’s place in a altering world. Whether or not that affect outweighed coverage in swaying voters remains to be up for debate, however it clearly modified how the marketing campaign was seen, shared, and remembered.

Uncover extra of our political information companies

”
(“post_title”)=>
string(68) “Did tradition wars reduce by way of greater than coverage on the election path?”
(“post_excerpt”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_status”)=>
string(7) “publish”
(“comment_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“ping_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“post_password”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_name”)=>
string(67) “did-culture-wars-cut-through-more-than-policy-on-the-election-trail”
(“to_ping”)=>
string(0) “”
(“pinged”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_modified”)=>
string(19) “2025-05-01 04:22:11”
(“post_modified_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-05-01 04:22:11”
(“post_content_filtered”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_parent”)=>
int(0)
(“guid”)=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=39594”
(“menu_order”)=>
int(0)
(“post_type”)=>
string(4) “put up”
(“post_mime_type”)=>
string(0) “”
(“comment_count”)=>
string(1) “0”
(“filter”)=>
string(3) “uncooked”
}

object(WP_Post)#10917 (24) {
(“ID”)=>
int(39404)
(“post_author”)=>
string(2) “36”
(“post_date”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-23 23:54:03”
(“post_date_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-23 23:54:03”
(“post_content”)=>
string(8890) “

With social media platforms turning into central to political engagement, figures like Abbie Chatfield, Friendlyjordies, and The Juice Media are amplifying progressive causes and difficult conventional political narratives. However how vital is their impression? Are they genuinely influencing the election dialog, or is their affect extra about their capability to seize consideration and drive engagement? This evolving pattern raises necessary questions concerning the position of influencers in fashionable elections and the way they’re reshaping the best way political messages are communicated to youthful, digital-savvy voters.

Because the 2025 Australian federal election nears, influencer involvement has gained consideration, with social media main the cost whereas information protection initially lagged. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Chief Peter Dutton are tapping influencers to attach with youthful voters—Albanese engages with Abbie Chatfield’s viewers by way of values-driven storytelling, whereas Dutton targets younger males with Sam Fricker’s relatable podcasts. This displays a broader shift from conventional media to platforms like TikTok and Instagram. Journalists are more and more masking these influencer-driven moments, usually specializing in the viral unfold and political fallout. As an illustration, a viral February 13 video from an Israeli influencer accusing two NSW nurses of hateful feedback dominated Australia’s information cycle, prompting swift political reactions. Protection typically focuses on political responses, not the influencers themselves. This pattern was additionally seen with Greens Chief Adam Bandt’s DJ occasion in Melbourne, the place media famous his try to have interaction youthful voters. The Australian Electoral Fee cleared Chatfield’s posts that includes Albanese and Bandt, highlighting the rising regulation of influencer political content material. This focus in the direction of viral moments over coverage discussions raises questions concerning the impression on undecided voters and the evolving position of journalists in political engagement.

Influencers like Abbie Chatfield, The Juice Media, and Friendlyjordies have gotten central to the election rhetoric forward of the 2025 Australian federal election. Chatfield, who confronted scrutiny from the AEC, used her platform to rally help for the Greens, positioning herself towards what she described as a Liberal media technique to discredit influencers. Her posts, notably defending her political involvement, have garnered sturdy help, with hashtags like #abbieisinnocent and #freeabbie dominating her remark sections. In distinction, some critics dismiss her political position, questioning her credibility. The Juice Media, recognized for its sarcastic takes on authorities coverage, continues to problem political narratives with irreverent content material, resonating with youthful, disillusioned voters. Nevertheless, their method additionally faces backlash from those that see it as too cynical or divisive. Equally, Friendlyjordies critiques each main events, notably Labor’s stance on progressive points, whereas encouraging followers to unite towards company greed. His platform sparks heated debates, igniting each help and criticism. 

Total, these influencers have gotten polarising figures, amplifying political engagement whereas intensifying the ideological divide on social media, in the end shaping the rising affect of social media figures within the election discourse.

Chatfield, a vocal supporter of progressive causes like Palestinian liberation and women’s rights, has gained a strong following but faces criticism for oversimplifying political issues and for her perceived naivety, especially regarding preferential voting. Ferguson, who critiques colonialism and supports Palestinian liberation, is praised by supporters but criticised for lacking depth in her activism, with some accusing her of ignoring intersectionality. Friendlyjordies, known for satirical commentary, is admired for calling out political corruption, but his critics accuse him of bias towards Labor and oversimplifying complex issues. The Juice Media, using sarcasm to critique government policies, resonates with disillusioned young voters but alienates others who find their approach too cynical. These influencers contribute to a growing divide in Australian politics, mobilising progressive movements while deepening ideological rifts, as their content both challenges traditional politics and fuels polarisation.

Key issues like defence, the cost of living, and education are dominating political discourse and social media conversations. Global events, including Trump’s influence on international relations and trade, have sparked strong reactions, with Albanese facing backlash over Australia’s stance on Gaza and its defence ties with Israel. Meanwhile, Dutton’s comments on Ambassador Kevin Rudd and allegations of election interference have stirred tensions. On social media, debates over defence—highlighted by Indonesia’s denial of Russia’s military presence near Darwin—and cost of living concerns are intensifying. Education remains a key point of contrast, with Albanese’s Free TAFE policy gaining support while Dutton faces criticism for prioritising fossil fuel subsidies. Influencers are driving much of this engagement, but their role in amplifying already polarised narratives raises questions about whether they are truly reflecting voters’ concerns or deepening divides as the election approaches.

These conversations play out against a landscape in which social and news media have different – but overlapping – priorities. They’re driving debates on everything from education and nuclear energy to Trump-style politics and renewable energy. With the 2025 federal election on the horizon, stories sparked by creators — whether through critique, leaks, or commentary — are becoming part of the political media mix. It’s a shift that’s unfolding in real time, and one that’s reshaping how narratives break, spread, and gain momentum. But as these voices grow louder, one thing is clear: Are they truly amplifying the concerns of everyday Australians, or are they pushing further divides in a landscape already ripe with fragmentation?

Discover more of our political news services

”
(“post_title”)=>
string(73) “The rise of influencers in the 2025 Australian federal election landscape”
(“post_excerpt”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_status”)=>
string(7) “publish”
(“comment_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“ping_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“post_password”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_name”)=>
string(54) “the-rise-of-influencers-in-the-2025-election-landscape”
(“to_ping”)=>
string(0) “”
(“pinged”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_modified”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-24 00:08:49”
(“post_modified_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-24 00:08:49”
(“post_content_filtered”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_parent”)=>
int(0)
(“guid”)=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=39404”
(“menu_order”)=>
int(0)
(“post_type”)=>
string(4) “post”
(“post_mime_type”)=>
string(0) “”
(“comment_count”)=>
string(1) “0”
(“filter”)=>
string(3) “raw”
}

object(WP_Post)#8605 (24) {
(“ID”)=>
int(39117)
(“post_author”)=>
string(2) “36”
(“post_date”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-15 23:08:54”
(“post_date_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-15 23:08:54”
(“post_content”)=>
string(10484) “

As the federal election campaign reaches its midpoint, patterns in media coverage and public attention are beginning to shift. Early social engagement was driven by cost-of-living pressures, energy policy, and political point-scoring, but has waned following the first leaders debate, despite this forum providing leaders the opportunity to set the agenda and strategies of the major parties. So how has coverage focus evolved since the first debate and are audiences still engaging with the campaign or switching off?

Social media engagement ahead of the federal election has been sharp and personal. It focused less on policy and more on identity and representation. From debates on topics such as  immigration to housing stress and culture, social media has driven a values-first narrative. But while early attention  was strong, both media coverage and social engagement have started to wane in the weeks since the campaign launched. The first leaders debate briefly reignited attention—trust, identity, and media—but coverage patterns suggest a shift away from daily blow-by-blow reporting towards broader social and cultural tensions.

As the federal election campaign nears its halfway mark, last week’s media highlights show a contest still struggling to cut through. Key moments included the first leader’s debate, the Treasurers Debate, the energy showdown at the National Press Club, and Senator Jacinta Price’s Perth appearance with Peter Dutton, which drew attention for its MAGA-style rhetoric.  The first leaders debate was billed as a chance to reset the race—but for many viewers, it reinforced existing divides. Media attention around the debate momentarily lifted visibility for all major parties—but the spike was short-lived. The only party that has seen continued increases in social media engagement is the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s sustained rise in social media engagement may be linked to its digital-first strategy, including an AI-generated campaign ad spruiking a fuel excise cut and a meme-style diss track targeting Anthony Albanese—tactics designed to capture online attention and drive shareability.

The Liberals also pitched a $1200 tax cut, Labor attacked their WFH backflip, and the Greens pushed housing and tax reform. Meanwhile, Dutton warned of a Labor-Greens-Teal alliance. Coverage suggests public engagement is driven more by polarising moments and political theatre than detailed policy.

When the election campaign officially kicked off, cost-of-living pressures dominated the news agenda. Fresh off the back of the federal budget, it’s no surprise that affordable healthcare, lower gas and energy prices, and tax cuts were the key messages party leaders wanted to land with voters. But coverage quickly pivoted. In the past week, foreign diplomacy—particularly how each leader would manage Donald Trump—has surged in prominence. While Trump’s role in tariff threats has made headlines, his influence on the broader election narrative goes beyond trade. Media reporting has increasingly centred on Albanese and Dutton’s capacity to navigate a potential Trump presidency, with ideological alignment, national security, and economic fallout all in play. The first leaders’ debate was expected to refocus the campaign on domestic issues. However, it briefly touched on international concerns, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese addressing the potential economic impact of Trump’s proposed tariffs. Albanese described these tariffs as an “act of economic self-harm” that would dampen global growth, highlighting the intertwining of foreign policy with domestic economic concerns. This suggests that sustained attention is more likely when domestic issues are reframed through the lens of foreign diplomacy, and national identity.

In the social media landscape, Trump was a flashpoint in election-related conversation. His influence—real or perceived—was quickly linked to the Liberal Party, with MAGA-style rhetoric and Trumpian policy cues gaining traction online. These narratives tend to escalate on platforms where ideological alignment and cultural grievance amplify engagement. But it wasn’t all imported culture wars—the federal budget, and the Liberal Party’s fuel excise rebuttal, also drove significant social chatter. In recent weeks, comparisons between major party messaging and Trump-era policy—from international student caps and nuclear energy to debates about school curricula—have continued to dominate discussion.

The first leaders’ debate briefly touched on foreign policy, with Albanese warning Trump’s tariffs could hurt global growth, while Dutton framed it as a test of strong leadership. Domestically, Dutton’s renewed push for nuclear power reignited social media debate—drawing comparisons to Trump-era policies and fuelling discussion about Australia’s energy future. At the same time on social media, promises like HECS cuts, free TAFE, and more funding for public schools sparked genuine engagement, especially among younger voters and education workers, showing that practical, future-focused policies can still cut through. Compared to the start of the campaign, where cost-of-living dominated as a top-line concern, the conversation has expanded: audiences are now weighing both hip-pocket issues and the national values shaping Australia’s future.

While the debate itself tended to be overshadowed by frustrations about access and media control, a few political undercurrents still surfaced. Anthony Albanese drew some positive mentions, but reactions were far from policy-focused. The Liberal Party’s early claim of victory became a point of humour, with several users likening it to Trump-style misinformation tactics. Disillusionment with the major parties ran deep, with repeated calls to “break the donor-fuelled duopoly” and shift support toward independents or smaller parties. Still, these reactions seem more like a symptom of broader voter cynicism than a sign of energised political engagement, reflecting broader themes around the declining trust.

The leaders’ debate didn’t reset the race—it refracted it, spotlighting how media coverage is now shaped less by policy detail and more by polarising symbols and cultural cues. As election day nears, the contest for attention is revealing just as much about media strategy and voter fatigue as it is about party platforms.

Discover more of our political news services

”
(“post_title”)=>
string(78) “Did the leaders debate reignite voter interest or just stoke the culture wars?”
(“post_excerpt”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_status”)=>
string(7) “publish”
(“comment_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“ping_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“post_password”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_name”)=>
string(77) “did-the-leaders-debate-reignite-voter-interest-or-just-stoke-the-culture-wars”
(“to_ping”)=>
string(0) “”
(“pinged”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_modified”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-15 23:49:24”
(“post_modified_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-15 23:49:24”
(“post_content_filtered”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_parent”)=>
int(0)
(“guid”)=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=39117”
(“menu_order”)=>
int(0)
(“post_type”)=>
string(4) “post”
(“post_mime_type”)=>
string(0) “”
(“comment_count”)=>
string(1) “0”
(“filter”)=>
string(3) “raw”
}

object(WP_Post)#10915 (24) {
(“ID”)=>
int(35541)
(“post_author”)=>
string(2) “36”
(“post_date”)=>
string(19) “2024-11-13 21:55:26”
(“post_date_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2024-11-13 21:55:26”
(“post_content”)=>
string(11456) “

The Australian podcasting news industry continues to grow. While Australian audiences do consume content from international brands like the BBC, they also exhibit strong affinity for independent Australian productions over mainstream sources. In a period of uncertainty amidst Apple’s recent update to automatic download policies Australia’s podcast audience has rapidly expanded, with ad revenue rising from $5 million in 2017 to over $100 million in 2024. So how do podcasts fit into the Australian news cycle? As audiences direct attention to independent and international productions, audience targeting, partnerships and media monitoring trends indicate a shift and a need to adapt engagement metrics and messaging strategy.

To highlight the impact of podcasts on audience engagement, we tracked coverage of key news themes in Australian podcasting from January 2020 to November 2024.

Podcasts surged into the mainstream during the pandemic, and they’re now evolving by integrating with platforms like video and audiobooks to meet new audience expectations. 

While general podcast news discussion remains steady, discussion on news podcasts indicates listener engagement peaks around high-impact stories, suggesting that the topic and information itself is what truly resonates with audiences. Outlets like The Australian Financial Review and ABC have expanded into the format, yet even major programs like ABC’s Background Briefing face fluctuating engagement compared to discussion about news content being consumed through podcasts. The data suggests there’s a gap being left by main outlets in the podcasting space. While traditional media adapts, independent producers are gaining traction with stories that deeply resonate on identity and community issues, such as the 2021 Christian Porter case and The Briefing’s 2024 episode on pianist Jayson Gillham’s lawsuit against the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra. Understanding audience preferences and monitoring content trends helps communicators craft strategies that leverage podcasting’s unique appeal.

Podcasts offer creators the freedom to pursue stories with fewer constraints of advertisers, investors, or other stakeholders, leading to content deeply shaped by personal passion and a strong connection to the subject. This independence empowers impactful storytelling, as illustrated by The Teacher’s Pet, where Hedley Thomas’s rigorous reporting on the case of Lynette Dawson uncovered new, critical details and underscored the journalistic integrity driving audience engagement in a shared pursuit of truth. Similarly, New Politics, co-created by Eddy Jokovich, leverages its Patreon-funded model to explore perspectives outside mainstream narratives, showcasing the power of independent journalism through podcasting.

Sports and entertainment tend to generate high visibility and engagement, suggesting they benefit from a faster publishing cadence and broad appeal. However issues like global conflicts draw significant attention, especially among communities directly impacted. The Briefing podcast, for example, addressed the October 2024 conflict in Gaza in a recent episode where Lebanese-Australian journalist Liz Deep-Jones offered a personal perspective. This type of coverage shows how podcasts can provide both journalistic depth and emotional resonance, connecting listeners to complex stories in a more relatable way.

Even if a major broadcaster or outlet owns a podcast production, the unique style and tone set by the hosts and production team often place podcasts outside the conventional PR and communications scope. Unlike the carefully curated talking points found in a typical puff piece or advertorial, podcasts allow for candid, in-depth discussions that explore complex topics with a degree of freedom seldom found in traditional news media channels. This authenticity is driven by the podcast format itself, which favours nuanced discussion offering audiences a more transparent and less scripted narrative style.

Many of the leading news podcasts, like The Quicky by Mamamia, follow a daily release that taps into the rhythm of the 24-hour news cycle, providing timely responses to breaking news. This format appeals to listeners by delivering news in a quick, digestible style, ideal for staying informed on the go and catering to audiences prioritising both convenience and relevance. It’s no surprise, then, that top news highlight podcasts often incorporate ads at multiple points—before, during, and after episodes—capitalising on the high listener engagement these accessible, on-the-go updates create.

Sports and entertainment podcasts tend to attract higher engagement with frequent, easily digestible episodes, often in the preferred 20-30 minute range, which sustain a steady listener base. Personalities like Hamish and Andy, and John Graham exemplify how audience visibility can be driven more by engaging personalities than by traditional news analysis. In contrast, outlets like The Australian Financial Review maintain a more analytical focus with podcasts such as The Fin and Chanticleer, known for their conservative, business-centric tone. Meanwhile, digital-first brands like Mamamia take a more hybrid, accessible approach across varied topics, leveraging podcasting to reach broader audiences and foster engagement with impactful news stories. This range of formats illustrates how different brands tailor their podcast strategies to meet audience preferences, from rapid updates in entertainment to in-depth discussions on current events.

While legacy media outlets leverage their reputations to enhance their podcast presence, credibility alone doesn’t ensure engagement. Instead, PR and communications teams can boost audience connection by aligning content with listeners’ interests and authenticity, helping refine podcasting strategies to capture attention and drive meaningful engagement.

Interested in learning more? Email us at info@isentia.com

”
(“post_title”)=>
string(77) “How Australian podcasts match into the information cycle & ignite cultural moments”
(“post_excerpt”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_status”)=>
string(7) “publish”
(“comment_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“ping_status”)=>
string(4) “open”
(“post_password”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_name”)=>
string(36) “how-podcasts-fit-into-the-news-cycle”
(“to_ping”)=>
string(0) “”
(“pinged”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_modified”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-14 22:24:35”
(“post_modified_gmt”)=>
string(19) “2025-04-14 22:24:35”
(“post_content_filtered”)=>
string(0) “”
(“post_parent”)=>
int(0)
(“guid”)=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=35541”
(“menu_order”)=>
int(0)
(“post_type”)=>
string(4) “put up”
(“post_mime_type”)=>
string(0) “”
(“comment_count”)=>
string(1) “0”
(“filter”)=>
string(3) “uncooked”
}