Australians have voted, and three in five rejected the Voice, with only two in five accepting it. What would have been a great advance for Australia is now another chapter to the sad story of its uncomfortable identity.
My neighbourhood had plenty of ‘Yes’ posters but not a single ‘No’ poster. In media terms, the ‘Yes’ campaign had more out of home awareness and overt public support. So why didn’t it work? And what role did advertising and communications play in delivering the campaign’s final result?
The ABC’s Laura Tingle puts it bluntly – “There was no simple message from the ‘Yes’ campaign” – and in an Australian media landscape long dominated by simplistic three-word slogans, that is the awkward truth.
The ‘No’ campaign was built on a proven strategy: doubt, divide and conquer. It used all of the arts and science of advertising perfectly. A clear and consistent message of doubt about the details, the design, and the dollars. It’s a proven strategy that has seen the likes of the American Republican Party into power previously.
The ‘No’ campaign framed it as, fundamentally, the Voice was “unfair” by saying it wasn’t right to grant a small minority special privileges that everyone else didn’t have. What about the Greeks? The Italians? They said it’s unfair to treat people unequally – and that of course is a fundamental aspect of Australian identity, isn’t it? A fair go, fair dinkum and all that.
Uncertainty creates fear and it becomes the galvanising force. Pollinate’s data showed high agreement with fear of losing out, fear that it might make things worse. Essentially it became a fear of being fearful itself.
The ‘Yes’ campaign really only had one problem: it lacked a strategy. It was clear that the Voice would be opposed from the beginning and so the ‘Yes’ strategists simply needed a plan to ensure uncertainty and fear of change would not derail the campaign.
Instead, the ‘Yes’ campaign opted for a powerfully evocative message of hope. An appeal to people’s emotions. An appeal anchored in evoking a sense of equality and fairness. But the ‘No’ campaign was telling people that the Voice was unfair and would divide us even further. The bitter irony here is that the ‘Yes’ campaign literally reinforced the ‘No’ campaign message.
The brutal truth is that the ‘Yes’ campaign never had a chance without a strong, evidence-based strategy. It was all heat and no light. And in the shadows of our fears, the ‘No’ campaign’s persistent whispers flourished.
If there’s one thing those of us in the advertising, media and marketing profession can learn from the ‘Yes’ campaign, it is that evoking an emotional response without a well-considered strategy and plan will end in tears, unintended consequences and a waste of all of your money. It’s time to put the strategy back. Because as we’ve seen, hope without strategy is hopeless.
But beyond our industry, all Australians need to deeply consider the consequences of this outcome. For the 40% of ‘Yes’ supporters and allies, now is the time to keep courage that the cause for justice and fairness is ongoing. Hope springs eternal and young people were much more likely to vote yes, so it is by no means over yet.
