ABSTRACT
The success of the Greens, independents, and the Teal candidates at the 2022 federal election raises a question about how traditional major party supporters were activated to switch their votes, especially in seats previously held by major parties. The chapter argues that the central reason voters change allegiances is that they become more aware of issues, especially those that impact directly on them or reflect their core beliefs. In this learning process, people are aroused to consider issues and what they mean more deeply and are subsequently activated to support one side of a debate. The literature generally deals with this mechanism in the context of organisations and the issues they face. This process of arousal and activation applies equally to politics, and it happens when news and political framing and agenda setting affect how public policy issues are portrayed by the news media and how, in turn, these issues are perceived by voters.
Framing, by politicians and the news media (including reporters and commentators/analysts), is an important aspect of political campaigning. How does this work? Are the frames used by reporters the same as those used by parties? Two classic theories important to professional communication are discussed in this chapter: framing theory and Hallahan’s proposition that “non-publics” and “inactive publics” become increasingly involved in debates about issues, often as critics, as their knowledge of them increases.
