The Adani Tug of War
It would be surprising if you hadn’t heard or read about Adani in recent times. Adani has been a political football in the media for almost half a decade, a heavily politicised media topic and a subject of high controversy. For those unfamiliar with the topic, Adani is an Indian mining giant that has been fighting to get a proposed $2 billion coal mine in North Queensland over the line. It would be one of the largest mines in the world and undoubtedly the largest in Australia. The project proposal has had a complex and drawn out history with protests for and against it’s planned economic benefits, financial viability, requests for government subsidies and loans as well as its expected environmental impacts. In light of the Environment Minister Melissa Price recently granting federal approval to the coal mine, the subject has become a hot topic in the media once again. This came about following intense pressure from her Queensland colleagues to sign off the plan before the federal election. What this means is that the project now only has to receive the green light from the Queensland Government before construction can go ahead. This has sparked further political protests. It is the timing of the announcement in anticipation of the upcoming election that has also caused a commotion.
The media plays a huge role in bringing these contesting perspectives into the public arena ultimately setting the agenda, shaping the public debate, perceptions and responses to the many risks Adani poses, particularly to the environment. The shift from traditional to new media has signalled substantial changes in how people access and interact with information, who has access to it, and who are considered “authorized” definers. This whole Adani scenario is a prime example of the key role that the media has played in representing these various risk factors and demonstrates the power that the media holds to potentially influence policy decision making. Environmental schemes such as this become extremely political agendas, as it depends on which politicians you vote into parliament who decide if these projects go ahead or not. An article published by The University of Colorado Boulder USA reveals that worldwide, coverage of climate change and the interconnection of media, politics and public opinion displays that media agendas match public agendas on the perception of climate change and policy implications. Through the introduction and rise of new media, this has only been escalated including the vast mix of the publics informal beliefs and understanding of the environment as well as formal environmental policies.
The federal Greens Leader Bob Brown who has been an active instigator of rallies against Adani accused the Courier Mail last week of their ‘disgraceful’ coverage of the “Stop Adani” convoy. The Courier Mail owned by News Corp published a report on the front page of the news paper highlighting offensive comments criticising coal workers, made by someone using a false name, on a social media page for the convoy. This also followed a story which was published last week about businesses in these mining communities refusing to serve anti-Adani activists. Brown was understandingly appalled as he claimed that he respects the opposition as people are entitled to their own opinions, so he expects to receive the same respect in return. He exclaimed that the comments “had no place in civil debate” tarring activists and creating hostility and that the published articles from the Murdoch media are a “disgrace to journalism and they’re a disgrace to fourth estate’s responsibility for fair and balanced journalism in this mammoth debate facing humanity”. What the Courier Mail has displayed is the media industries ability to shape audience opinion based on their biases as well as sparking political warfare.
It is interesting to consider to what extent public opinion combined with media affect policy decisions and outcomes. In the case of Adani, this is just another strongly relevant example of how closely interrelated the media, politics and public opinion really are. Through economic and political factors as well as production costs, ratings and ideologies combined, these all determine the content output of news corporations. The rise of new media has only escalated the spreadability of these biases and are consequently diffused more rapidly and widely over the internet, blurring the lines between fact and fiction. Perhaps we all need to become more aware of the news that we consume and the biases that are present. Particularly when it comes to long term issues such as the prosperity of our environment.
