Exploring a post-truth referendum

Australia's Voice to Parliament and the management of attention on social media

Bibliographic Data

ID5904149
AuthorsTiffany Graham (0000-0002-4053-9313, Queensland University of Technology, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume198
Issue1
Pages152-175
Publication date2024-08-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueMedia International Australia (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1329-878X • E-ISSN: 2200-467X
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/1329878x241267756
OpenAlexW4401241625
LanguageEN
Citations received6
References cited21

This article examines the circulation of unverified and misleading information during the 2023 Australian Voice to Parliament referendum, focusing on X (formerly Twitter). Adapting Harsin's concept of Regimes of Post-Truth and a participatory perspective of propaganda, we analyse over 224,000 posts, exploring the interplay of Voice-related discussions on X and campaign messaging. We find that the Yes campaign employed a traditional messaging approach, emphasising public support and presenting historical facts and statistics. In contrast, the No campaign's disciplined messaging style mobilised pan-partisan attention, fostering a collaborative 'truth market' on X about the constitutional amendment that eclipsed the Yes campaign's more conventional approach. A proliferation of conspiratorial assertions fostered collaborative work from No campaigners as well as participatory efforts from Yes campaigners to debunk and criticise them. We conclude that the No campaign cultivated a series of public relations-induced realities about the referendum, effectively managing attention within a hybrid media system

Citizen journalism · Media studies · Parliament · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Public sphere · Referendum · Social media · Sociology · Computer Science · Law · Media Studies and Communication · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Public Administration · Social Media and Politics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access