The populism that dogs today’s politicians – foreseen by Neil Postman (in “Amusing Ourselves to Death”) and testified to by Lindsay Tanner (in “Sideshow”) – is a lamentable consequence of “always on” media.
Is the opportunistic, narrative-absent populism of Gillard-in-government and Abbott-in-opposition now table stakes for political relevance? Will our future leaders all have to conduct themselves according to the Julia & Tony template; do they all have to be Gill-botts?
Are there enough of us around who see and worry about this? Is there anything at all that might improve this? Are there any signs that some of those improvements are underway?
By its very essence, populism makes un-popular – but necessary – reforms very difficult to enact. This is not to say that there aren’t popular reforms that aren’t also necessary. NDIS is a recent example (though even that one wasn’t universally popular of course).
At its essence isn’t all of this really a question of poor resolution of conflicts between self-interest reforms that are in (most of) our mutual-interest? There are factors other than media that fuel this of course (the limited time between elections being one), but the contemporary media cycle does seem to be driving this self-mutual interest conflict well into the red zone.
Is there a way through this to a new media environment where self-mutual interest conflicts can be more productively resolved?
Are there green shoots in the emergence of a less parochial, less beholden new media (Independent Australia, New Matilda for instance) while traditional media retreats to “safety” behind paywalls?
Too early to tell but I’m keen to find out, aren’t you?