“In the future there will be no female leaders, there will just be leaders”
— Sheryl Sandberg
Our recent partnered research with Women in Media showed there is still significant gender discrimination within the media and a long way to go before parity is reached. Female voices are being excluded in shaping public perception in industries where women lead in employment, such as retail, sport and health. This creates hurdles for female experts and sources, and demonstrates the largest gap between women employment share and media representation.
All organisations have a role to play, with a responsibility to provide equal opportunities and outcomes for men and women.
Through the power of collaboration and raising each other up, it presents an opportunity for women to change the status quo.
Women in the workplace
Women’s voices and women’s participation within the workplace are lacking true representation and the amplification they deserve. Whether it’s in leadership, as a spokesperson or across the news value chain – there’s more that can be done to avoid misrepresentation of an organisation as this sends a conflicting message to their audience.
As the Women in Media research suggests, to avoid underrepresentation, organisations should:
Review and assess their level of representation
Invest in training and development for spokeswomen and
Commit to monitor change.
Workplaces have a responsibility to ensure there is a focus on gender balance through inclusion and diversity as well as provide support and visibility of pathways to leadership roles.
Mapping out the right spokesperson
When choosing a spokesperson, it’s the role of an organisation to select someone who is a well suited representative, and be able to provide the best answers for their key audiences. The characteristics of a spokesperson are similar to that of a leader, with competency (37%), confidence (31%), and good communication (26%) being the most important. They also need to speak with authority, with their opinions being trusted, but also an ability to connect with stakeholders and not shy away from empathy, if it’s needed.
Women need to be given the support and authority to be a trusted brand ambassador or spokesperson for the organisation.
At a time when a story hits the media, there is a framework organisations can put into place to ensure success:
Subject: who is the subject of the story and whose perspective does it amplify.
Narrative: what are the stories being told or what stories are being missed. I.e. Consider which stories are written by women/men or feature more women/men, who is telling the story – experts, sources, spokespeople etc.
Opportunity:1. how much opportunity does the spokesperson have to express their opinion, how frequently are they visually represented, what role do they play and how are they portrayed? 2. provide training and development of spokeswomen to contribute to achieving gender equity in the media. And as spokeswomen are called on their leadership and expertise, it will present a fair representation of Australian society.
Women in Media Gender Scorecard
The Women in Media Scorecard explores the visibility of women as authors, participants and subjects of news in Australian media. It identifies core areas in media analytics (bylines, sources, experts) to monitor change over time and positive or negative shifts towards achieving parity for women in Australian media. Isentia analysis included 18,346 reports from Australian press, radio and TV news coverage over a 14-day period, from 18-31 July 2022.
Trajectory to gender parity
Image source: Women in Media report
Some say a woman alone has power; collectively they have impact.
Across all industries and organisations, when it comes to women supporting other women, there is power in the pack.
Women often underestimate the value they can offer, the wisdom and knowledge they can share can benefit and support many women (and men too).
From increasing productivity and enhancing collaboration, to inspiring organisational dedication and boosting confidence, women can be unstoppable when working towards a desired goal, together.
“Women need to get behind other women. Encourage their expertise. Acknowledge their strengths. Champion their success. Amplify their voice.”
Interestingly, our research shows female reporters are 30% more likely to quote female sources than male reporters. This suggests that women do support women, yet women dominated industries are not being represented as such in the media. The highest underrepresentation of female sources tended to be associated with topics/sectors with a high female employment share, for example in retail, sport and health.
This presents an opportunity for organisations to increase women’s representation in leadership positions and boost women’s workforce participation. By doing this, it will encourage women to amplify other women and contribute to achieving gender parity within the workplace.
Men Dominate As Sources, Even In Industries Where Women Lead Employment
Source gender split vs industry employment
Image: Women in Media report Employment data source: ABS ANZSIC division level employment over the year ending August 2022. Some topic groups that operate across multiple ANZSIC divisions have been estimated.
The affinity bias
The media hype plus cultural perceptions might showcase that women don’t want to revel in another woman’s success. Yet it’s quite the opposite.
Dedicated days like International Women’s Day are a great opportunity to celebrate the achievements of other women beyond the divisions of national, ethnic, cultural, economic or political barriers. But it shouldn’t stop there.
Status quo bias and gender blindness are two key areas of bias within organisations. For whatever reason, when we think about a leader or a person with authority, our brains default to think of a male. The ‘think manager, think male’ norms continue to hold women back and contribute to a notable gender gap in self promotion within the workplace.
Women are 33% less likely to promote their performance and only 60% of women actively make people aware of their accomplishments. And this wasn’t due to a lack of desire, however it was more likely to attribute their failures to lack of ability. Because women feel the workplace is harder on them, they’re harder on themselves, causing their confidence to take a hit. Yet for women to advance in leadership roles or further their career, self-promotion is a must.
In instances where women are confident and assertive at work, they can be penalised by others and be referred to as bossy. In fact, women are twice as likely to be branded as bossy in the workplace for doing the same behaviours as men.This can often impact their desire to celebrate their achievements and also have a negative impact on how well they are liked by their peers.
Gender equity
Within the media landscape in particular, women reporters are more likely to:
Challenge gender stereotypes
Raise gender inequality issues
Reference legislation or policies that promote gender equality or human rights.
Yet they don’t get seen as experts in their field and get the bylines to showcase this.
The Women in Media research shows only two of the 35 identified topic groups (6%) recorded a greater share of women sources than men. Females are notably under-represented when comparing the share of experts in media reporting with the share of sector employment. The pattern of media underrepresentation in women-dominated industries extends from sources to the share of experts quoted.
With the spotlight on gender equity, now is the time for women to support and amplify other women across all industries.
A call to arms
At Isentia equity, inclusion and diversity is something we are all passionate about and we choose partnerships that help us shine a light on these issues. We value the voice that our women leaders and employees can have within our company and industry and are always looking for opportunities to elevate their voices.
Company CEO Joanna Arnold believes ‘the true value of insights is when it’s used to shine a light on societal issues and inspire behaviour that drives change. Our innovation in audience intelligence underpins our purpose to help surface the diverse voices shaping wider societal narratives’ so that they can be better represented in the media and other channels shaping public perception”.
The Women in Media Research highlights that much work remains to provide gender equity and share of voice for women in organisations and through representation in Australian media.
Organisations can play an important role in gender equity by:
Investing in training and development for their spokespeople and instill confidence into their female employees
Constantly review and assess their level of female representation
Ensure the chosen person is an accurate representation of the workplace
Commit to monitoring change and
Build a supportive workplace culture
Moving forward, as more women encourage and support other women, the more will be received in return.
We can continue to support the positive impact organisations have towards female representation and gender parity. We want to improve the barriers and drivers for women representation in organisations across societal, organisational and individual levels.
If you’d like to learn more about The Women in Media Scorecard or discover how Isentia can help your organisation with impactful insights-driven research, get in touch with us today.
References
Women in Media Report, 2022
Isentia’s Leadership Index 3: Leading Through Change
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.
With social media platforms becoming central to political engagement, figures like Abbie Chatfield, Friendlyjordies, and The Juice Media are amplifying progressive causes and challenging traditional political narratives. But how significant is their impact? Are they genuinely influencing the election conversation, or is their influence more about their ability to capture attention and drive engagement? This evolving trend raises important questions about the role of influencers in modern elections and how they are reshaping the way political messages are communicated to younger, digital-savvy voters.
As the 2025 Australian federal election nears, influencer involvement has gained attention, with social media leading the charge while news coverage initially lagged. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton are tapping influencers to connect with younger voters—Albanese engages with Abbie Chatfield’s audience through values-driven storytelling, while Dutton targets young men with Sam Fricker's relatable podcasts. This reflects a broader shift from traditional media to platforms like TikTok and Instagram. Journalists are increasingly covering these influencer-driven moments, often focusing on the viral spread and political fallout. For instance, a viral February 13 video from an Israeli influencer accusing two NSW nurses of hateful comments dominated Australia’s news cycle, prompting swift political reactions. Coverage generally focuses on political responses, not the influencers themselves. This trend was also seen with Greens Leader Adam Bandt’s DJ event in Melbourne, where media noted his attempt to engage younger voters. The Australian Electoral Commission cleared Chatfield’s posts featuring Albanese and Bandt, highlighting the growing regulation of influencer political content. This focus towards viral moments over policy discussions raises questions about the impact on undecided voters and the evolving role of journalists in political engagement.
Influencers like Abbie Chatfield, The Juice Media, and Friendlyjordies are becoming central to the election rhetoric ahead of the 2025 Australian federal election. Chatfield, who faced scrutiny from the AEC, used her platform to rally support for the Greens, positioning herself against what she described as a Liberal media strategy to discredit influencers. Her posts, particularly defending her political involvement, have garnered strong support, with hashtags like #abbieisinnocent and #freeabbie dominating her comment sections. In contrast, some critics dismiss her political role, questioning her credibility. The Juice Media, known for its sarcastic takes on government policy, continues to challenge political narratives with irreverent content, resonating with younger, disillusioned voters. However, their approach also faces backlash from those who see it as too cynical or divisive. Similarly, Friendlyjordies critiques both major parties, particularly Labor’s stance on progressive issues, while encouraging followers to unite against corporate greed. His platform sparks heated debates, igniting both support and criticism.
Overall, these influencers are becoming polarising figures, amplifying political engagement while intensifying the ideological divide on social media, ultimately shaping the growing influence of social media figures in 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?
The rise of influencers in the 2025 Australian federal election landscape
With social media platforms becoming central to political engagement, figures like Abbie Chatfield, Friendlyjordies, and The Juice Media are amplifying progressive causes and challenging traditional political narratives. But how significant is their impact? Are they genuinely influencing the election conversation, or is their influence more about their ability to capture attention and drive engagement? This […]
In Singapore, the rise of podcasting has shifted from entertainment and lifestyle into a new arena – public discourse and politics. As the 2025 General Election draws near, podcasters are making waves across online news and social media. To kick things off, we used Narrative AI, the first search engine for public opinion, to identify how large the global narrative on podcasts and their influence on audiences is in the last 6 months, using data from X.
We subsequently narrowed the focus of this global trend to Singapore and analysed on Pulsar TRAC more than 7k mentions across platforms like YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, TikTok, podcasts, Online News, blogs and forums to understand where the discourse is coming from, which channels are capturing the podcasters’ content and how audiences are responding to this content.
Mentions of podcasts in news and social media are growing
Social media is where the larger chunk of podcast conversation is taking place, specifically those episodes that feature a political figure, journalist or those that include healthcare-related discussions. The audiences that engage with these videos, majority being on YouTube, search for political credibility that resonates with them. Young Singaporeans watching these podcasts expect to see leaders who don’t just uphold the image of being a politician, but also someone who is grounded and trustworthy.
Youth and politicians' lives dominate podcast narratives
The audiences that consume these podcasts the most are young Singaporeans looking to participate in the conversation as much as they can. These audiences are being more proactive than ever.
With younger voters consuming media differently, these appearances are efforts by political candidates to connect with the public. Lawrence Wong, Josephine Teo, Indranee Rajah, and Desmond Tan, have used podcasts to communicate directly with the public – sidestepping traditional media filters.
Top podcasters on election-related content
When we focus on who the most mentioned podcasters around election content are, the Straits Times’ podcasts, the Daily Ketchup and Yah Lah BUT emerge on top. These podcasts have figured that the most discourse happens around content that’s either educational or controversial around elections. The public is actively responding to political content shared via podcasts, particularly those by The Straits Times and independent shows like Yah Lah BUT.
Satire and irony are key strategies to make politics palatable, especially for younger, digital-native audiences. The Daily Ketchup and Yah Lah BUT are blending serious topics like the GE2025, party agendas, healthcare, and opposition voices with humour that make them almost meme-worthy. Posts such as “PAP really said: ‘Trust me, bro’” TikTok clips show that these are genuinely made for content to go viral while retaining serious undertones too.
What’s interesting to note is that The Common Folks, with content in Malay and Indonesian, is tapping into a cross-border Southeast Asian audience and has some of the highest engagement on its content. Local slang, cultural jokes, and casual festive content like Raya greetings and songkok jokes have generated thousands of views, at times outperforming English-language political pods. This suggests a large, under-acknowledged appetite for vernacular podcast content that has a blend of humour and relatability.
Podcasts are no longer just background noise – they’re becoming one of the most relevant ways Singaporeans engage with politics. With high engagement on platforms like TikTok and YouTube, a wide spread of topics from youth issues to party politics, and growing presence in both mainstream and social media, podcasters are carving out a key role in shaping the GE 2025 conversation.
What is making podcasts stand out ahead of the Singapore GE2025?
In Singapore, the rise of podcasting has shifted from entertainment and lifestyle into a new arena – public discourse and politics. As the 2025 General Election draws near, podcasters are making waves across online news and social media. To kick things off, we used Narrative AI, the first search engine for public opinion, to identify […]
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.
Did the leaders debate reignite voter interest or just stoke the culture wars?
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 […]
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 […]
