Who Really Sets the Budget Agenda—Media or the Public?
Who’s shaping the conversation around the 2025 federal budget—traditional media or the public? News coverage has framed the budget through a global lens, linking economic policy to Donald Trump, NATO spending, and deregulation. But on social media, the focus is closer to home. Early discussions revolved around tax cuts and cost-of-living relief before shifting to Medicare funding, public service job cuts, and the real-world impact of budget decisions.
This divide reveals a growing disconnect between political narratives and public concerns. While news dissects party strategy and fiscal responsibility, online conversations highlight frustration over essential services and household finances. As the budget approaches, the real question is: Will media framing or public sentiment ultimately shape how Australians respond?
In January 2025, the Australian federal budget was shaped by how media coverage highlighted global influences, particularly Donald Trump’s calls for NATO defence spending increases, framing Australia’s defence and trade priorities. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute argues Australia must “do more, spend more, risk more” in response to global threats, shaping debates within the Coalition. However, social media discussions focus more on direct budget impacts, particularly tax cuts and cost-of-living concerns. News outlets like The Australian and Herald Sun cover the growing budget deficit and fiscal responsibility, but social media sees widespread criticism of tax cuts, seen as election tactics without addressing inflation and essential services.
Public discussion is more engaged in how the budget affects areas like cost of living pressures like healthcare and education, with Channel 7 Sunrise and Weekend Australian reporting on inflation and its link to energy security. Social media engagement on Trump’s influence is secondary to local concerns, such as “bracket creep” and rising bills, reflecting a shift away from global issues like NATO, which are less discussed compared to the deficit and inflation impacts. This shows how social media conversations are focused on tangible, personal consequences, contrasting with news coverage that intertwines global and domestic policy discussions.
In February 2025, federal budget coverage often referenced Donald Trump’s economic policies, with references to comparing the Business Council of Australia’s tax cut push to Trump’s pro-business, deregulation agenda. Commentary like Ross Gittins’ SMH piece, discusses reduced government spending and red tape to similar policies abroad. On social media, tax cuts dominated early discussions, with many arguing the opposition’s focus on cuts and deregulation echoed past policies that ignored inflation and wage stagnation. Labor’s staged approach—tackling inflation before tax relief and healthcare investment—was seen by some as pragmatic, while others dismissed it as political manoeuvring. Comparisons to Trump-era tax cuts emerged, with debate over whether similar policies would work in Australia.
As the conversation evolved, Medicare and healthcare funding took centre stage, drawing more attention than Trump or the budget deficit in news coverage. Viral posts criticised past Coalition cuts to Medicare, bulk billing, and aged care, warning of further reductions under Peter Dutton. Others pointed to his past role in Coalition health policies, questioning his commitment. Job cuts to public services were also a concern, with warnings of delayed Medicare processing and added pressure on frontline healthcare workers. While news coverage framed the budget around political strategy and fiscal policy, social media reflected shifting anxieties—first tax cuts, then healthcare access and economic fairness.
In March 2025, media coverage of the Australian federal budget has centred on the impact of Donald Trump’s tariffs, with news outlets highlighting concerns over trade tensions and their effect on Australia’s economy.
On social media, the focus has shifted to domestic issues like tax cuts, the budget deficit, and cost-of-living relief. Reports from Crikey and ABC News on the budget deficit have sparked social media debates about the sustainability of the government’s financial strategy. While some defend Labor’s post-COVID measures, including a $1.8 billion energy rebate, others criticise the government’s handling of inflation and the deficit. Social media reactions are more focused on domestic policy choices than global trade concerns, often reflecting more critical and emotionally charged reactions to leadership and policy, contrasting with the neutral, policy-focused tone of traditional news. The coverage also shows how economic issues are framed differently, with media offering analysis and social platforms fostering more polarised debates, suggesting the growing influence of grassroots concerns in shaping political discourse.
The Australian and ABC News set the agenda for this year’s federal budget coverage, shaping how key issues are framed for the public. Some leading stories published by The Australian centres on Coalition divisions, portraying the budget as a test of Peter Dutton’s leadership amid concerns over a weak economic agenda. MPs warn that an overemphasis on public service cuts and a lack of compelling policies—particularly on cost-of-living relief like energy rebates—could undermine voter confidence. The coverage highlights the Coalition’s struggle to present a credible alternative to Labor while managing internal pressure to adopt bolder economic policies.
ABC News, meanwhile, leads with the direct impact of the budget on households, reporting on electricity price hikes and their uneven regional effects. It also broadens the discussion by linking fiscal policy to social outcomes, with one popular story focusing on the Productivity Commission’s report on rising Indigenous incarceration rates reinforcing the stakes of government spending choices. This contrast in coverage underscores how print media frames the budget as a political contest, while broadcast news tends to focus on its real-world consequences.
The high engagement across news outlets such as ABC, Australian Financial Review, Crikey, The Saturday Paper, The Sydney Morning Herald, and 9News highlights a clear audience focus: A widely shared ABC article highlights how the Albanese government plans to address rising costs with energy bill relief, resonating with audiences concerned about personal finances. Crikey’s commentary on the political clash between Labor and the Coalition, particularly over spending commitments, engages audiences with broader political implications. Similarly, the Sydney Morning Herald focuses on surprise revenue gains and potential energy relief, speaking to voters affected by rising electricity costs.
Audiences appear particularly engaged by news that ties political decisions directly to their personal and family financial realities—whether through energy cost relief, healthcare funding, or discussions around budget deficits. The framing of economic policies as part of an election strategy intensifies political rivalry, especially with stories positioning the Coalition’s fiscal responsibility as a counter to Labor’s spending.
https://t.co/Oup0A8nm9Z One that focuses on what Australia needs to do in such a world — spend more on defence, spend more on aid for our region, work more closely with like-minded democracies.
Social discussion reflects a positive outlook on the Labor budget, highlighting confidence in the government’s actions, particularly in disaster relief and economic recovery. Supporters see the budget as a chance to showcase progress, with a focus on strengthening the safety net and easing cost-of-living pressures. However, scepticism remains over wage growth, spending priorities, and whether rising defence costs align with immediate domestic needs. This tension underscores a broader divide in Australian perspectives—between those who view the budget as reinforcing long-term progress and those who question whether media narratives either overstate recovery or fail to scrutinise key trade-offs. The debate also signals a pushback against selective media framing, as Australians navigate between government messaging and critical scrutiny of economic challenges.
Yesterday he said he went to Canberra to meet with Services Australia about relief so it could be rolled out immediately. Why don't they listen?
— Kazza Boots 😷💉🪟🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ (@kazza264) March 8, 2025
Engagement with budget discussions on social media shows how politicians, journalists, and the public interact. Labor politicians use social media to promote the budget and counter opposition views, while political enthusiasts offer independent analysis. Journalists from outlets like Crikey and News.com.au provide investigative insights. Political influencers, with strong ideological leanings, generate engagement through hyperbolic framing, reinforcing confirmation bias. While politicians shape how the budget is understood, media outlets, despite smaller engagement, still play a crucial role in framing key updates, highlighting the fragmented nature of audience reception and the influence of partisan messaging.
The 2025 federal budget debate highlights the growing divide between media narratives and public concerns. While traditional outlets focus on political strategy and fiscal policy, social media engagement reveals a stronger emphasis on tax cuts, Medicare, and cost-of-living relief. This shift underscores the need for messaging that resonates with lived experiences.
As election season approaches, the question remains: Will political leaders adjust their approach to reflect public sentiment, or will the disconnect between media coverage and voter priorities continue to shape the debate?
Loren is an experienced marketing professional who translates data and insights using Isentia solutions into trends and research, bringing clients closer to the benefits of audience intelligence. Loren thrives on introducing the groundbreaking ways in which data and insights can help a brand or organisation, enabling them to exceed their strategic objectives and goals.
While renewables like wind and solar are often framed as the future of energy, the renewables market faces many challenges in seeing that journey through, especially regarding Australia’s Paris climate agreements. The path to a clean energy future in Australia is fraught with disruptions and distractions, as media reports, and exploring the factors shaping media coverage of energy alternatives and clean energy reveal a shifting understanding of renewable energy sources.
Peak media coverage of renewables centres on government actions seen as hindering clean energy progress. Stories like keeping Eraring operational, nuclear energy debates, and delays in environmental law reforms highlight a perception of indecision on ecological issues. While traditional media spikes around policy updates, social media discussions are steadily growing, reflecting increasing public engagement with Australia’s renewable energy transition. Analysing these trends reveals how media narratives shape and respond to audience perceptions in this evolving debate.
Renewable energy is widely hailed as a cleaner, cheaper, and more stable alternative to fossil fuels, but media and social discussions paint a more complex picture. Concerns about affordability and feasibility are growing, driven by economic shifts, supply chain issues, and the lingering effects of the 2022 energy crisis, which media attribute to cold snaps and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, all while Australia remains heavily reliant on coal and gas exports.
Topics like grid overload, the need for better battery subsidies, and the failure of taxpayer-funded rebates to support solar businesses dominate conversations. Meanwhile, wind farms face local opposition due to environmental and land use impacts, and debates over nuclear energy disrupt investment in solar and wind, further complicating Australia’s clean energy strategy.
Nuclear energy’s potential introduction into Australia’s future energy mix has further unsettled renewables investors, with media highlighting concerns over its impact on wind and solar investments. For more context listen to our podcast interview with Pablos Holman, General Partner at Deep Future. Wind energy faces criticism for using taxpayer funds to benefit private companies, while hydrogen’s future is uncertain following high-profile project withdrawals by Fortescue and Origin. The media’s portrayal of these issues underscores ongoing public and industry doubts about Australia’s renewable transition and the role of nuclear in the energy debate.
Watch below the shifts in coverage of significant policies and strategies over time to understand why some strategies stay in the headlines while others peter out.
The Labor government’s flagship Future Made in Australia Bill is central to its energy vision and, in November, was passed to support a net-zero transition. The May budget highlighted turning Australia into a renewable energy superpower with dedicated funds for solar, battery, and hydrogen projects. However, the opposition has framed hydrogen and critical minerals tax breaks as "corporate welfare". Over time, it looks like Labor’s Future Made in Australia Bill is at a tug of war for media attention against the opposition’s nuclear strategy. Australia’s energy future, however, is not wholly detached from fossil fuels. Labor's Future Gas Strategy positions gas as a necessary transition fuel while being central to Australia’s energy and export sectors.
Climate activists criticise the Future Gas Strategy for extending Australia's reliance on fossil fuels. Media critics call it another "broken promise" by the Albanese government, highlighting mismanagement that has negatively affected energy supply and costs. Though the "Future Made in Australia" narrative around energy security resonates with many, the government’s conflicting strategies raise questions about long-term benefits and who truly gains from its policies.
Australia's shift to clean energy faces complex debates and conflicting government signals, from promoting renewables to considering nuclear power. Despite loud voices in the media advocating for taxpayers and businesses, deeper media analysis reveals multiple layers and motives behind their arguments.
Insights into media and public perceptions towards Australia’s clean energy future
While renewables like wind and solar are often framed as the future of energy, the renewables market faces many challenges in seeing that journey through, especially regarding Australia’s Paris climate agreements. The path to a clean energy future in Australia is fraught with disruptions and distractions, as media reports, and exploring the factors shaping media […]
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.
The NRL is launching in Las Vegas. Can it win over the US?
Israel, Lebanon & The Big Ceasefire Question
The Details You Missed From The Attempted Assassination of Donald Trump
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.
How Australian podcasts fit into the news cycle & ignite cultural moments
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 […]
It’s become a truism to state that local journalism is in decline. But that story has been complicated by a new form of socially conscious ‘start-up’ publication cropping up across both ANZ and the wider world.
Consumers of local journalism are turning to independent sources, such as CityHub and Westender, that focus on community-driven stories, accountability, and underrepresented voices. This shift is compounded by the decline of traditional outlets, as highlighted in recent articles discussing the closure of regional papers due to rising costs, Meta's withdrawal of funding, and shrinking government ad budgets. These pressures reinforce the need for meaningful engagement with local journalism, as audiences demand authenticity and transparency in coverage of issues like housing, civil rights, and activism. By examining these independent outlets, we gain insights into how independent journalism continues to shape public discourse and meet the expectations of news consumers today.
Over time, the ANZ media has itself been writing increasingly about local journalism. Some of this laments its decline; elsewhere, it’s cited in national stories as a story source. But over time, we also see some of that attention focusing on publications such as The Westender and Cityside.
The Westender’s content and engagement reveals that local journalism consumption in Brisbane is significantly influenced by timely and relevant political topics, and pressing community issues such as the housing crisis.
Engagement patterns suggest that timely advocacy and local relevance are key draws for the publication, highlighting a community eager for information that resonates with their values and interests.
Over in Sydney, meanwhile, CityHub amplifies underrepresented voices and promotes accountability by covering issues such as military bases ("We Need to Talk About Pine Gap"), NSW’s anti-protest laws, and housing policies. It offers alternative perspectives that challenge mainstream narratives, fostering civic engagement and activism. With audiences engaging on platforms like X and Reddit, local outlets build credibility through community-driven stories and partnerships with organisations like Australians For War Powers Reform.
This pattern suggests that certain topics resonate more deeply with the audience than others. Stories that receive particular attention advocate for diversity and anti-racism, and frequently call out local councils for failing to act on commitments, such as anti-racism strategies. CityHub highlights the views of prominent local figures and groups, like Greens councillor Dylan Griffiths, who pushed for Inner West Council's ceasefire call in Gaza, and the Arab Council for Australia, whose frustration led to the mass resignation of the Multicultural Advisory Committee. This type of reporting offers a platform for communities seeking to impact policy—something often underrepresented in mainstream media coverage unless it’s taking place on national scale.
The active sharing of CityHub content on platforms like X and Reddit highlights community engagement around social issues.
CityHub’s audience is most likely to engage with political themes, followed by culture and crime, often focusing on issues that directly impact their lives, values, and beliefs.
Clearly, CityHub and publications like it are fulfilling a need that has been unfulfilled amongst the community - but what influential figures help disseminate these stories amongst willing audiences?
It’s no surprise that advocacy groups are actively sharing and disseminating calls to action. Content creators, particularly those writing for CityHub, effectively communicate the stories they cover, resulting in increased engagement for the local outlet. The reach and influence of these reporters often surpass that of CityHub itself. Additionally, credible community figures, such as university lecturers, further enhance the publication’s coverage.
CityHub and The Westender illustrate the critical role of independent local journalism in shaping public dialogue and accountability. This active participation reflects a community eager for accountability and willing to challenge local authorities on issues like systemic inequalities and inadequate policies. The preference for independent sources indicates growing scepticism towards mainstream media and a trust in alternative narratives that align with their beliefs.
How a new type of local journalism is engaging ANZ audiences
It’s become a truism to state that local journalism is in decline. But that story has been complicated by a new form of socially conscious ‘start-up’ publication cropping up across both ANZ and the wider world. Consumers of local journalism are turning to independent sources, such as CityHub and Westender, that focus on community-driven stories, […]
The role –and nature– of news and journalism is constantly evolving, from how it is consumed to which voices are trusted. New platforms, the rise of citizen journalists, and shifting news consumption habits are continuing to reshape the traditional and new media landscapes, creating both challenges and opportunities for PR and communications professionals.
In regions like Australia and New Zealand (ANZ), these challenges are particularly significant due to the unique ecosystem and levels of public engagement. With a relatively small number of major news outlets, the way journalism is practiced and perceived in ANZ carries considerable weight.
And this has a day-to-day impact on how PR & Comms professionals carry out their jobs. What does it mean when trust in journalism fluctuates, or when emerging platforms challenge traditional outlets for influence?
To kick off our study into the state of journalism and news - in both ANZ and beyond - we’ve started by quantifying how the public talk about the media.
Compared to the UK and US, Australia and New Zealand audiences are more likely to label journalism as ‘important’, albeit with a not inconsiderable amount of conversation describing it as "dead."
What’s behind the difference? Certainly, both countries' audiences advocate for quality reporting and accountability, as exemplified by New Zealand journalist Jack Tame’s revelation of a gun lobbyist's lies after the Christchurch attack. At the same time, local journalism faces challenges, with regional outlets shutting down due to lack of government funding, as noted by ACM’s Managing Director Tony Kendall. These in turn lead to spirited defenses of local journalism’s importance.
However, neither of these trends are necessarily unique to the ANZ regions. The answer can potentially be located when we look at how these conversations take place over time.
Clearly, public conversations around journalism - both in ANZ and elsewhere - are not in their nature consistent. This reflects how particular moments in the news cycle can lead to a sudden outpouring of interest and conversation.
So what are those moments in ANZ?
One centres on the recent court cases being mediated between the Australian government and social media organisations. In looking to place a monetary and moral value on news, these proceedings prompt the ANZ public and media to talk about journalism as something ‘important’ and worth protecting.
Another hinges around the return of Julian Assange to Australian soil. This has prompted differing responses across individuals and media outlets - but what’s certain is that it places ANZ at the centre of an important unfolding conversation about the role and responsibilities of the media.
Australia and New Zealand are global outliers in many sectors, from sport to mining & energy. Journalism, it seems, is another that could reasonably be added to that list.
PR and communications strategies must adapt to a landscape where sources of information are more fragmented and where citizens themselves can act as newsmakers. It’s important to understand how attitudes around these vital channels and contacts take shape.
We’ll be exploring the journalist and media landscape through multiple different lenses over the coming couple of months. If you’d like to attend one of the events we’re hosting around the region - or view a webinar recording - please reach out to us at info@isentia.com
The role –and nature– of news and journalism is constantly evolving, from how it is consumed to which voices are trusted. New platforms, the rise of citizen journalists, and shifting news consumption habits are continuing to reshape the traditional and new media landscapes, creating both challenges and opportunities for PR and communications professionals. In regions […]
