The mammoth ad budget has already put the IR campaign on track to become the biggest advertising spending spree in Australian history. With no end in sight to the Government’s bid to swing the public behind the IR changes, observers predict it will easily outstrip the GST campaign in 2000, which cost $100 million.
And how do the pro’s describe the government’s strategy?
John Sintras, chief executive of Starcom and head of the Media Federation of Australia, said the campaign and the “staggering” number of ads had been a significant talking point in the industry. “There is a fine line between effective reach and overkill and they have crossed it,” he said. “I’m stuffed if I can think of someone who has launched with that kind of weight; $7million is what most people spend in a year. Not even Telstra or Coles spends at that rate.”
Combine this with the governments big spend on the anti-terrorism ads, and we see that over the past few weeks there has been some massive spending by them on their current pet topics.
The IR spend is really no surprise though, the proposed legislation, support for it and even further measures by the big end of town, and the wildly successful union campaign against IR has painted the government and the PM as a party for the bosses. On this one issue they have been framed as bad for working people and appear unlikely to wriggle out of it.
The government’s solution? Use the blunt instrument of crude propaganda, all at taxpayers expense of course.
The Goebels routine, not only to propagandise with the State’s resources, but tell a whopper of a lie while they’re about it.
The syrupy and oh so pseudo plausible wheedling voices that make vomiting over the TV the newest and most colourful form of political dissent.
‘All this is protected, according to law’ [you dumb fucks-watch what this law does after the propaganda stops]
The polling shows no change in public opinion from the last few months campaigning on both sides.
What has really helped the union campaign is all those church leaders and others who have jumped on board with them. Suddenly people see the campaign as something which isn’t just being attacked by the “usual suspects”, and it gains a lot more credibility.
OK, I know I’m no judge, or, probably more accurately, I’m a hostile judge, but the government’s adverts are like being mauled by a piece of warm lettuce and, by virtue of this and their saturation level of repetition, incredibly boring – compared to, say, the dreaded ‘unchain my gst heart’ effort, which had a song and an image. It seems to me that the union movement should thus keep some powder dry, save some money and largely let them run alone, free-riding on them doing their job of keeping the issue alive, and then come in strong again on the next round.
The real danger is the Business Council’s ad campaign: expect it to take an an extremely negative, attack-dog approach. Of course, even that might be wasted if people link it to the WorkChoices ads and ignore it.
SMH has an interesting article on the guy who didn’t even know he was going to be in the commercial. Apparently he got paid $13 for two hours overtime while they were filming. Actors paid to appear apparently received $5000. Workchoices working for you!
link
Thanks Mindy. I was wondering about the happy happy workers.
Yep those happy workers, working to the glorious one-year factory plan (more flexible than five). Spontaneous demonstrations of gratitude and joy are expected.
Here’s a good one: so the reluctant ‘actors’ got $13 – the employer got $7000 for the ad.
The money spent by the government on political advertising is insignificant compared to the money spent to promote left-wing ideas via the ABC — $700 million per year, every year.
I think the government should stop paid advertising for its policies, but to be fair, it should also stop funding the ABC.
There was a four-page ad for the wankchoices in my local community rag this morning (the illustrious Western Suburbs Weekly, catering to the ladies who lunch set of Cottessloe, Claremont and Peppermint Grove). Squished in between kiddy stories and real estate.
Apart from all my objections to government ad spending, what a stupid place to spend one’s ad money!
And also, most people who live in this area don’t need to worry too much about changes to the minimum wage or being shifted onto AWAs. Preaching to the converted and all.
As far as I can work out, EP, most of what’s on the ABC is unfunny shows with panels and BBC crime dramas.
This just in: apparently they’re paying everyone who’s near the ads, even if they’re not actually in them.
The claim that people are getting paid $6000 just for standing nearby conflicts with the claim that people who featured in the ads were underpaid.
The anti-Howard types are having trouble keeping their stories straight.
As far as I can work out, EP, most of whatÄôs on the ABC is unfunny shows with panels and BBC crime dramas.
All the more reason to defund it.
We can get the BBC crime shows over the Internet now.
Well, EP, in any case, it has nothing to do with the issue – government paid advertising. Even if one were to admit “left wing bias” in the ABC, it’s journalism/reportage not spin and propaganda concocted by Liberal Party aligned advertising agencies.
The TV ad campaign is shocking overkill and way out of character for general govt info campaigns. Some generalised, brief TV advertising over a week, announcing a detailed mailout info booklet was all that was required(after the legislation is approved). Personally, I’d have let the curtain faders rule the airwaves and introduced the changes with minimal hype. Then when the curtains don’t fade over the next couple of years they’ll look like rollbackers with the GST.
A tad off-topic: I always have a chuckle about the fact that when the ALP is the govt, the ABC is accused of anti-Labor bias but when the Liberals are in power the accusations are the opposite.
Could it just be that the parties do not like a true reporting and critique of their governments?
EP the actors were well paid. The staff of the factories who happened to be in the ads weren’t. No conflict.
Apparently one of the workers who appeared in the ad thought he was in a workplace safety commercial, no one told him anything.
Maybe I should invoice one of these agenies. I could do with a couple of grand
Don’t worry. The ALP will be able to do the same thing when they are in Federal power, whenever that may be, and they will.
Who is paying the costs for the High Court challenge?
Sure, Razor. And that makes it okay, does it?
The High Court challenge is fundamentally different. It is not merely a hideously expensive propaganda exercise. The Government is trying to stretch the corporations power as it has never been stretched before, and there is a genuine question about how far they can override State laws. Don’t tell me you can’t see the difference.
It feels like the same money to me Rob. Mine, being pissed up against the wall in bipartisan partisan ways.