Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications

Margaret Jean Simons, Jack Holten Latimore, David Nolan

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractOther

Abstract

This presentation draws on a case study of an intervention in Indigenous policy debate, and what it suggests about
potential shifts in process of mediated agenda setting. In the policy process, the expertise of opinion pollsters has been
a significant influence in public debates, and polling has provided an important tool through which policy actors have
worked to build policy agendas. The presentation focuses on a case study of such a process in action, as mobilised by
19
the ‘Recognise’ campaign for constitutional recognition of Australia’s first peoples, and a subsequent controversy that
occurred following an intervention by the activist digital media organisation IndigenousX. A significant criticism of both
Indigenous policy making and mediated policy discussion has been its reliance on a narrow range of policy actors and
voices, and the predominance of well-resourced actors that are able to mobilise institutional and economic capital to
both shape and delimit Indigenous policy agendas. The production of polls, and the successful promotion of findings as
the basis for news stories, has been a significant resource within Indigenous policy processes. Where the Recognise
campaign’s use of polling was quite typical in this respect, its contestation by IndigenousX, through the production and
publication of a second poll that disputed the findings of the first, points to a significant digital disruption of the
mechanisms, relationships and ‘media ecology’ through which Indigenous news representation is produced. This paper
provides an analysis of this controversy in order to trace these shifting relationships and, by doing so, reflect on what it
suggests about the changing ways in which mediated policy agendas are produced and contested, and discusses a
current digital action research project that seeks to further amplify a greater diversity of Indigenous voices.

Cite this

Simons, M. J., Latimore, J. H., & Nolan, D. (2018). Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications. Abstract from A Crisis of Expertise?, Melbourne, Australia.
Simons, Margaret Jean ; Latimore, Jack Holten ; Nolan, David. / Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications. Abstract from A Crisis of Expertise?, Melbourne, Australia.
@conference{5a2fb1809c9d4e4984c18eda5655b2b2,
title = "Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications",
abstract = "This presentation draws on a case study of an intervention in Indigenous policy debate, and what it suggests aboutpotential shifts in process of mediated agenda setting. In the policy process, the expertise of opinion pollsters has beena significant influence in public debates, and polling has provided an important tool through which policy actors haveworked to build policy agendas. The presentation focuses on a case study of such a process in action, as mobilised by 19the ‘Recognise’ campaign for constitutional recognition of Australia’s first peoples, and a subsequent controversy thatoccurred following an intervention by the activist digital media organisation IndigenousX. A significant criticism of bothIndigenous policy making and mediated policy discussion has been its reliance on a narrow range of policy actors andvoices, and the predominance of well-resourced actors that are able to mobilise institutional and economic capital toboth shape and delimit Indigenous policy agendas. The production of polls, and the successful promotion of findings asthe basis for news stories, has been a significant resource within Indigenous policy processes. Where the Recognisecampaign’s use of polling was quite typical in this respect, its contestation by IndigenousX, through the production andpublication of a second poll that disputed the findings of the first, points to a significant digital disruption of themechanisms, relationships and ‘media ecology’ through which Indigenous news representation is produced. This paperprovides an analysis of this controversy in order to trace these shifting relationships and, by doing so, reflect on what itsuggests about the changing ways in which mediated policy agendas are produced and contested, and discusses acurrent digital action research project that seeks to further amplify a greater diversity of Indigenous voices.",
author = "Simons, {Margaret Jean} and Latimore, {Jack Holten} and David Nolan",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "15",
language = "English",
note = "A Crisis of Expertise? : Legitimacy and the challenge of policy making ; Conference date: 15-02-2018 Through 16-02-2018",
url = "http://arts.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/2662137/FINAL-Expertise-Conference-Abstracts.pdf",

}

Simons, MJ, Latimore, JH & Nolan, D 2018, 'Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications' A Crisis of Expertise?, Melbourne, Australia, 15/02/18 - 16/02/18, .

Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications. / Simons, Margaret Jean; Latimore, Jack Holten; Nolan, David.

2018. Abstract from A Crisis of Expertise?, Melbourne, Australia.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractOther

TY - CONF

T1 - Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications

AU - Simons, Margaret Jean

AU - Latimore, Jack Holten

AU - Nolan, David

PY - 2018/2/15

Y1 - 2018/2/15

N2 - This presentation draws on a case study of an intervention in Indigenous policy debate, and what it suggests aboutpotential shifts in process of mediated agenda setting. In the policy process, the expertise of opinion pollsters has beena significant influence in public debates, and polling has provided an important tool through which policy actors haveworked to build policy agendas. The presentation focuses on a case study of such a process in action, as mobilised by 19the ‘Recognise’ campaign for constitutional recognition of Australia’s first peoples, and a subsequent controversy thatoccurred following an intervention by the activist digital media organisation IndigenousX. A significant criticism of bothIndigenous policy making and mediated policy discussion has been its reliance on a narrow range of policy actors andvoices, and the predominance of well-resourced actors that are able to mobilise institutional and economic capital toboth shape and delimit Indigenous policy agendas. The production of polls, and the successful promotion of findings asthe basis for news stories, has been a significant resource within Indigenous policy processes. Where the Recognisecampaign’s use of polling was quite typical in this respect, its contestation by IndigenousX, through the production andpublication of a second poll that disputed the findings of the first, points to a significant digital disruption of themechanisms, relationships and ‘media ecology’ through which Indigenous news representation is produced. This paperprovides an analysis of this controversy in order to trace these shifting relationships and, by doing so, reflect on what itsuggests about the changing ways in which mediated policy agendas are produced and contested, and discusses acurrent digital action research project that seeks to further amplify a greater diversity of Indigenous voices.

AB - This presentation draws on a case study of an intervention in Indigenous policy debate, and what it suggests aboutpotential shifts in process of mediated agenda setting. In the policy process, the expertise of opinion pollsters has beena significant influence in public debates, and polling has provided an important tool through which policy actors haveworked to build policy agendas. The presentation focuses on a case study of such a process in action, as mobilised by 19the ‘Recognise’ campaign for constitutional recognition of Australia’s first peoples, and a subsequent controversy thatoccurred following an intervention by the activist digital media organisation IndigenousX. A significant criticism of bothIndigenous policy making and mediated policy discussion has been its reliance on a narrow range of policy actors andvoices, and the predominance of well-resourced actors that are able to mobilise institutional and economic capital toboth shape and delimit Indigenous policy agendas. The production of polls, and the successful promotion of findings asthe basis for news stories, has been a significant resource within Indigenous policy processes. Where the Recognisecampaign’s use of polling was quite typical in this respect, its contestation by IndigenousX, through the production andpublication of a second poll that disputed the findings of the first, points to a significant digital disruption of themechanisms, relationships and ‘media ecology’ through which Indigenous news representation is produced. This paperprovides an analysis of this controversy in order to trace these shifting relationships and, by doing so, reflect on what itsuggests about the changing ways in which mediated policy agendas are produced and contested, and discusses acurrent digital action research project that seeks to further amplify a greater diversity of Indigenous voices.

M3 - Abstract

ER -

Simons MJ, Latimore JH, Nolan D. Expertise, public opinion and Indigenous policy agendas: Shifting media assemblages and their implications. 2018. Abstract from A Crisis of Expertise?, Melbourne, Australia.