rbr 2/01 e-democracy and election campaigns: recent case ......rbr 2/01 e-democracy and election...

RBR 2/01 E-Democracy and ElectionCampaigns: Recent Case StudiesFrom USA and Developments inAustralia

The use of the Internet as a tool for public participation in thepolitical process, an avenue for public discourse, and a mediumfor political campaigning and fund raising has burgeoned inrecent years. Web sites now provide a diverse ranges ofinteractive features – users may have the option of sending an e-mail to a politician, signing a petition, taking part in an online pollor joining a discussion forum, or even contributing to a campaignfund.

Research Brief No 2/2001 provides examples of electronic (e)-democracy in action, from both the international and theAustralian context, summarises emerging research from severalrecent American studies about users’ reliance on the Net toobtain political information, and canvasses some specific legalissues relating to Australian and Queensland electoral law.

An appendix provides a list of current Web sites relevant to theupcoming Queensland elections.

Karen Sampford

Research Brief 2/01February 2001

© Queensland Parliamentary Library, 2001

ISSN 1443-7902ISBN 0 7242 7903 2

Copyright protects this publication. Except for purposes permitted by the Copyright Act 1968,reproduction by whatever means is prohibited, other than by Members of the Queensland Parliament inthe course of their official duties, without the prior written permission of the Parliamentary Librarian,Queensland Parliamentary Library.

Inquiries should be addressed to:

Director, Research Publications & ResourcesQueensland Parliamentary LibraryParliament HouseGeorge Street, Brisbane QLD 4000Director: Ms Mary Seefried. (Tel: 07 3406 7116)

Information about Research Publications can be found on the Internet at:

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/parlib/research/index.htm

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1

2 EXAMPLES OF E-DEMOCRACY PROJECTS AND PROPOSALS...........1

2.1 MINNESOTA E-DEMOCRACY PROJECT ............................................................1

2.2 INTERNATIONAL TELEDEMOCRACY CENTRE ...................................................2

2.2.1 Electronic Petitions...................................................................................2

2.2.2 Electronic Consultant................................................................................3

2.2.3 E-Voter ...................................................................................................3

2.3 ONLINE POLLS................................................................................................3

2.4 POLITICAL PORTALS.......................................................................................4

2.5 ON THE AUSTRALIAN SCENE..........................................................................4

3 E-DEMOCRACY RESEARCH........................................................................6

3.1 PEW RESEARCH CENTRE.................................................................................6

3.1.1 Useage ....................................................................................................6

3.1.2 Reasons for using the Internet ...................................................................6

3.1.3 Most popular sites....................................................................................7

3.1.4 Impact of Net use ....................................................................................7

3.2 A CASE STUDY OF WHAT PEOPLE WANT FROM CANDIDATES’ WEB SITES ...7

4 INTERNET CAMPAIGNING AND ELECTORAL ISSUES IN AUSTRALIA.....................................................................................................8

4.1 QUEENSLAND.................................................................................................8

4.2 COMMONWEALTH .......................................................................................10

APPENDIX A – QUEENSLAND ELECTION 2001 ............................................11

APPENDIX B – NEWS ARTICLES......................................................................13

E-Democracy and Election Campains Page 1

1 INTRODUCTION

The use of the Internet as a tool for public participation in the political process, an avenuefor public discourse, and a medium for political campaigning and fund raising hasburgeoned in recent years. Examples of interactive processes based on onlineinformation technology now include online democracy projects such as the Minnesota E-Democracy Project and the International Teledemocracy Centre, Web sites for politicalparties, and home pages for individual Members of Parliament. Web sites now provide adiverse ranges of interactive features – users may have the option of sending an e-mail toa politician, signing a petition, taking part in an online poll or joining a discussion forum, oreven contributing to a campaign fund. Web portals are now springing up which aim tooffer citizens “… one stop shopping for all [their] political needs”.1

This Research Brief provides examples of e-democracy in action, from both theinternational and the Australian context (Section 2), and refers to both historical initiativesand current trends.

Emerging research from several recent American studies about users’ reliance on the Netto obtain political information is also summarised (Section 3). Specific legal issuesrelating to Australian and Queensland electoral law are canvassed in Section 4.

In addition to Web sites (past and present) specifically mentioned in the text of this Brief,Appendix A provides a list of current Web sites relevant to the upcoming Queenslandelections.

2 EXAMPLES OF E-DEMOCRACY PROJECTS AND PROPOSALS

2.1 MINNESOTA E-DEMOCRACY PROJECT

Created in 1994 by a citizen group of computer enthusiasts, the Minnesota E-democracyproject: http://www.e-democracy.org is a non-partisan, citizen-based organisation whoseaim is to increase citizen participation in elections and public dialogue through the use ofelectronic communication technologies. The American project hosted the country’s firststate-wide online political debate, with all the candidates for governor ultimatelyparticipating in an electronic debate, during which users of the Internet site were able to

1 Josephine Ferrigno-Stack, ‘Public opinion on the web: Confusion, chaos and fabulous piecharts’, November 2000, < http://netelection.org/commentary>, p 1.

E-Democracy and Election Campaigns

read candidates’ answers to three debate questions posed by the organisers, candidaterebuttals and responses, and other material posted by the candidates. 2

2.2 INTERNATIONAL TELEDEMOCRACY CENTRE

The International Teledemocracy Centre (ITC): http://www.teledemocracy.org,established in 1999, is a multi-disciplinary research unit in the Faculty of Computing andEngineering at Napier University, Edinburgh, Scotland. The Centre researches andapplies advanced information and communication technologies with the aim of assistingthe general public, voluntary organisations and business to participate in government, aswell as promoting the application of information technologies by governments andparliaments, elected members and their support staff.

An “e-democracy toolkit” available on the Web site:http://www.teledemocracy.org/toplevel/e-toolkit.htm includes electronic consultations,electronic petitions and electronic voting.

2.2.1 Electronic Petitions

Unlike the Westminster Parliament, where petitions must be made through a Member ofParliament, any individual or corporate body may petition the Scottish Parliament.Clicking on the link to e-petition on the ITC Web site allows users to add their names on-line if they agree with a particular petition, and/or to join an integrated electronicdiscussion forum on the topic. The democratic ideal of participation is encouraged byincorporating a mechanism to comment on the petition – whether positively or negatively.All petitions are legitimate, to be submitted to the relevant authority.

Speaking at a conference on e-democracy held at the House of Lords on 20 November2000, John McAllion, a Labour Member of the Scottish Parliament, said that a particularbenefit of electronic petitions over the traditional paper version was that the InternationalTeledemocracy Centre rates the confidence level of the signature and provides ademographic breakdown of supporters.3

2 ‘Minnesota E-Democracy Project : An early experiment in interactive electronic democracy’,<http://www.benton.org/Library/State/edemocracy.html>

3 ‘The cost of e-democracy: just 10p a voter’, 21 November 2000: <http://www.kablenet.com>,downloaded 25 January 2001.


2.2.2 Electronic Consultant

E-consultant hosts real consultations in which users can participate. The organisationconducting the consultation summarises the topic, provides background information andraises a number of issues or questions about which comments are sought. Eachconsultation lasts a specified number of weeks, during which users are able to add theircomments. The organisation conducting the consultation then provides feedback on theconsultation, indicating what action they intend to take based upon comments they havereceived.

2.2.3 E-Voter

The online tool, E-Voter, supports the education of young people on the purpose ofspecific elections, the voting process and how votes are counted. For example, thesystem was recently used in September – October 2000 to support the Scottish HighlandYouth Voice elections.

E-Voter includes election news, candidates’ statements, election results, a participationcomponent with a threaded discussion and voting, and an evaluation component to allowevaluation of the system.

2.3 ONLINE POLLS

Interactive polling on the Net now takes a variety of forms.4

Exemplifying the traditional question and answer approach, over the four week periodpreceding the American election 2000, both the Democratic and Republican NationalCommittees posted questions on their home pages, the results of which were tabulatedand presented in the form of a pie chart. At sites such as votecom: http://www.vote.com,an American initiative, now also with offshoots in Japan, Korea, the UK and Australia,after site visitors register their vote on a particular issue, they are then directly invited topost a personal message on the site’s bulletin board or join in an online chat. Sites suchas www.bettervote.com put a series of opinion questions with intensity monitors to sitevisitors. The combination of a user’s opinion on the polling questions and his or her levelof intensity about the questions is intended to produce a match between the user’s beliefsand a candidate’s views, enabling the user to determine which political candidates holdviews closest to his or her own. This feature is seen as having a dual benefit, “… both

4 As catalogued by Ferrigno-Stack.


collect[ing] public opinion and provid[ing] a service to the user, helping us wadethrough the morass of political information on the Web”.5

Although there are now many online polls, the political polls reported on the Web on bothmedia and non-media sites vary in their reporting of results: some report full pollparameters such as sample size and margin of error, but not all do. As Ferrigno-Stackexplains, the significance is that: “The inclusion of this information allows us, theusers, to decide if the poll is valid and valuable to our decision-making process”.6

2.4 POLITICAL PORTALS

Political portals (eg voter.com, generally regarded as the most popular of the politicalportals, politics.com and Grassroots.com) are sites whose aim is to offer impartialelection news and information about candidates, the opportunity to participate indiscussion forums, plus tools to make it easier for voters to engage in various courses ofaction such as communicating with elected officials, or mounting an effective lobbyingcampaign.7

At the American Grassroots.com site: http://www.grassroots.com, for example, site userscan enter their zipcode to find out who their Member of Congress is, and e-mail themabout a variety of issues. Or they can find their local paper, and send a letter to theeditor (sample letters are provided, together with tips on writing letters to the editor).

2.5 ON THE AUSTRALIAN SCENE

Catherine Gilbert has described how the 1996 Federal election saw the creation of Websites by political parties become an essential part of the campaign process, while Voice ofAustralia provided an online poll.8

5 Ferrigno-Stack, p 2.

6 Ferrigno-Stack, p 3.

7 Michael Cornfield, ‘Voter.Com goes pig’, Election 2000: Campaign on the Net, 22 September2000, <http://www.wwnorton.com/e-2000/campaign.htm> downloaded 29 January 2001; CarrieKirby, ‘Political web sites fall flat’, <http://www.wwn.com/wwn/article>, downloaded fromWorking Woman.com on 29 January 2001.

8 Catherine Gilbert, ‘Providing information to parliaments: Current trends in the online provision ofinformation to Members of Parliament in Australia’, Information Online & On Disc 97:Proceedings of the Eight Australasian Information Online and On Disc Conference and


In February 1998, the Canberra Commons, a non-partisan site, became the site for thefirst online debate between candidates in a state or territory election.9

In September 1999, Barry O’Farrell, Deputy Liberal Leader in New South Wales,proposed that the NSW Parliament should use the Internet to trial initiatives such as:

• Online broadcasts of parliamentary proceedings

• Notification and explanation of legislation, regulations and issues beforeParliament and the results of votes taken

• Discussion forums to allow citizens opportunities to express views and raisequestions directly with Members of Parliaments, including Ministers

• Surveys and polls on topical issues to gauge voter feedback.

Mr O’Farrell, speaking at a conference on political communication held in September1999, was reported as saying:

Society is increasingly less trusting of politicians and equally moredemanding about having a direct say in decision making.

New information technologies, including the Internet, can be harnessed toboth restore credibility and increase citizen participation in the politicalprocess.

These initiatives [above] would better inform people and give them a moremeaningful role in decision making.

It would also ensure that MPs were subject to greater accountability.

Tomorrow’s Digital Citizen will be better informed and more inclined to wantto participate in the democratic process.10

Following international trends, in the space of a relatively few years since the mid 1990s,the Internet has inevitably emerged as a political medium in Australia, as overseas, withmost major political parties now having Web sites.

Many individual Members of Parliaments have also created their own home pages, theforerunner being Victor Perton, the Victorian Shadow Minister for Conservation andEnvironment: http://home.vicnet.net.au/~victorp/home.htm. Currently, at federal level, all

Exhibition, Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre, Sydney Australia, 21 –23 January 1997,pp 347- 361 at p 359.

9 Karin Geiselhart and Steve Colman, ‘Two web-based Australian experiments in electronicdemocracy’, < http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw99/papers/geiselhart/paper.html>, p 3. Downloaded25 January 2001.

10 ‘Push towards e-democracy for NSW’, < http://www.barryofarrell.com/edemocracy.html >


members of the House of Representatives have a home page of some description; thesecan be accessed via www.aph.gov.au.

3 E-DEMOCRACY RESEARCH

In the wake of the recent American Presidential elections, a number of studies have beenconducted to determine the extent to which the Internet is used to obtain politicalinformation. Some key findings and trends are summarised below.

3.1 PEW RESEARCH CENTRE

Pew Research Centre, in conjunction with the Pew Internet & American Life Project,conducted a nation-wide survey of 4,186 online users during October and November2000. Key findings were that convenience, rather than the desire to access new ordifferent sources of information, was cited by the majority of users (56%) as the mainreason they used online services for election news and information.

3.1.1 Useage

The survey reported that almost one in five Americans (18%) said they went online forelection news during the 2000 Presidential campaign, compared to 4% in the 1996campaign. Among regular users of the Internet, one-third went online for election news.Nearly seven in ten of those who went online to get election news sought information onthe candidates’ positions.

3.1.2 Reasons for using the Internet

The Pew Research Centre concluded that convenience was the Internet’s main attractionas a source of news about the election campaign. 56% cited convenience as their mainreason for going online for election news, compared to 45% in 1996. During the 1996election campaign, a majority of those who went online for election news said they did sobecause they were not getting all the news they wanted from traditional media sources;only 29% gave this reason in the current survey.

Of those who went online for election news, 35% registered their views in Internetpolitical polls, while 22% used e-mail to contact candidates or receive e-mail fromcandidates, and 5% made campaign contributions over the Internet.


3.1.3 Most popular sites

When asked what sites they used most often for election news, 55% said they used thewebsites of major news organisations such as CNN or the New York Times, or localnews organisations. Only 7% said that they used sites that specialised in politics, adecrease from 15% in 1996. Candidates’ websites were used by only 7%, down from25% in 1996.

3.1.4 Impact of Net use

Of those who went online for election news, 43% said it did affect their voting decisions,compared to 31% in 1996. This impact was most pronounced among younger people,with 50% of online election news consumers under 30 saying the information theyreceived made them want to vote for or against a particular candidate.

3.2 A CASE STUDY OF WHAT PEOPLE WANT FROM CANDIDATES’ WEB

SITES

Researchers at the NetElection.org website, a project of the Annenberg Public PolicyCentre of the University of Pennsylvania, focussed on the use and utility of House andSenate candidate web sites in the American 2000 election.11

Survey respondents were drawn from two online surveys of web users. 1,165respondents were recruited through banner ads on major commercial web sites, while anadditional 593 people responded to an invitation on two political web sites to participatein the survey. More than 97% of survey respondents reported using the Internet everyday; a large proportion used the Internet to follow politics.

56% of House and Senate candidates had web sites in 2000. Almost all (97%) ofSenate Republican candidates had their own web sites, compared to 86% of SenateDemocratic candidates.

However, the research found that many candidates’ sites did not offer the informationmost requested by those users defined as “web-enthusiasts” (ie those who use theInternet often and are likely to seek political information on the Internet). 81% of web-

11 Steven M Schneider, ‘Congressional candidate web sites in campaign 2000: What web enthusiastswanted; what candidates provided’, The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University ofPennsylvania, January 2001; see also ‘Over half of House and Senate candidates had web-sites– but, many failed to deliver what web-users wanted’, Press Release, 10 January 2001, <http://netelection.org >


enthusiasts wanted candidate web sites to provide background information oncandidates. 89% of web sites provided biographical information on candidates and 75%provided information about candidates’ position on issues. However, whereas 60% ofweb-enthusiasts wanted information comparing candidates, only 12% of candidates’ sitesprovided specific comparisons on campaign issues. While 36% of web-enthusiastswanted candidates to identify campaign contributors online, only 3% of sites did in factprovide contributor information. While 16% of web enthusiasts expressed an interest inthe availability of a moderated discussion forum on candidates’ web sites, only 3% of thesites provided such forums.

4 INTERNET CAMPAIGNING AND ELECTORAL ISSUES INAUSTRALIA

The rise in the use of the Internet by political parties of all persuasions has raised anumber of legal issues as regards the application of provisions in the Electoral Acts, bothstate and federal.

4.1 QUEENSLAND

In October 1999, the Queensland Electoral Commission identified to the QueenslandParliamentary Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee (LCARC) anumber of issues for examination and ultimate determination as to whether legislativechanges should be made. Among these matters was an issue relating to misleading votersand s 163(2) of the Electoral Act 1992 (Qld), in relation to which the ElectoralCommission had sought the advice of the Crown Solicitor.

Section 163(2) states:

A person must not for the purpose of affecting the election of a candidate,knowingly publish a false statement of fact regarding the personal characteror conduct of the candidate.

The Crown Solicitor, who was asked to advise whether the word “publish” includedmaterial which may be accessible on the Internet, concluded that:

Although it is not without doubt, I consider that the word “publish” withins.163(2) of the Act is in my view broad enough to include material that isaccessible on the internet. I am of the opinion that political advertisingmaterial accessible on the internet which is capable of misleading voters, ismaterial that has been published, and is therefore capable of being caught bys. 163(2) of the Act.


My only cause of concern is that there may be the basis for a technical legalargument if the relevant internet site used to publish the material in questionis based outside of the State.

Clearly, the States have power to pass law with an extraterritorial effect. Inthis regard, it may be prudent to include a definition of ‘publish’ in the Actthat specifically states that the term includes the act of disseminating materialon the internet which is accessible by persons in Queensland. This wouldprovide a sufficient connection to ensure that the law has a sufficientextraterritorial nexus and would also make any prosecution action moresecure in the future.

On the basis of the Crown Solicitor’s advice, the Electoral Commission recommendedthat the Electoral Act include a definition of “publish” as proposed by the CrownSolicitor.12

The matter was subsequently examined in LCARC’s May 2000 report: Issues ofElectoral Reform arising from the 1998 State Election and Amendments to theCommonwealth Electoral Act 1918.13 The Committee accepted the advice that hadbeen given by the Crown Solicitor and endorsed by the Electoral Commissioner andaccordingly, recommended (see Recommendation 8) that the Attorney-General, as theresponsible Minister, amend the Electoral Act to include a definition of “publish” for thepurpose of s 163(2) to make it clear that the term includes the act of disseminatingmaterial on the Internet that is accessible by individuals in Queensland. The Committeealso recommended that the Queensland Electoral Commission consider obtaining advicefrom the Crown Solicitor about the impact of the Internet on the application of otheroffence provisions in the Electoral Act.14

In a response from the Attorney-General, Hon MJ Foley MP, tabled in Parliament on 5September 2000, Recommendation 8 was supported and an undertaking given tointroduce the necessary amendments to the Electoral Act 1992 into the LegislativeAssembly as soon as possible.

12 Letter from Mr D O’Shea, Electoral Commissioner Queensland to Mr G Fenlon MLA, Chair,Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee, 25 October 1999.

13 Queensland. Legislative Assembly. Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee,Issues of Queensland Electoral Reform arising from the 1998 State Election and Amendmentsto the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, Report No 23, May 2000.

14 Queensland. Legislative Assembly. Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee,pp 25-27.


4.2 COMMONWEALTH

Under s 328(1) of the Electoral Act 1918 (Cth), it is an offence for anyone to print,publish or distribute, or to cause, permit or authorise the printing, publication ordistribution of an electoral advertisement which does not contain, at the end of theadvertisement, the name and address of the person who has authorised theadvertisement, and the name and place of business of the printer. Section 328(5) definesan electoral advertisement to include any advertisement, handbill, pamphlet, poster ornotice which contains electoral matter, defined in s 4(1) of the Act as matter intended orlikely to affect voting in an election. (The definition of electoral advertisement doesn’tinclude an ad in a newspaper announcing the holding of a meeting.) Similarly, a personmust not produce, publish or distribute or cause, permit or authorise to be produced,published or distributed an electoral video recording unless the name and address of theperson who authorised the video recording appears at the end of it: s 328(1A).

A breach of the above provisions carries a maximum fine of $1,000 for an individual, or$5,000 for a body corporate. The Australian Electoral Commission has expressed theview that electoral advertising on the Internet should include the identification of thoseresponsible for the material, in the same terms as prescribed by the Cth Electoral Act.15

15 Australian Electoral Commission, ‘Electoral Advertising’, Electoral Backgrounder No 5,published 17 July 1998, http://www.aec.gov.au/pubs/backgrounders/vol_5/main.htm, pp 1-2.


APPENDIX A – QUEENSLAND ELECTION 2001

http://www.citycountryalliance.org/

http://www.onenation.au.com/PHON/New_Pages/One_Nation_States/Qld/Qld_State_Frame/Qld_PHON_Index.html

http://www.beattie2001.net

http://www.qld.liberal.org.au/

http://www.npa.org.au/

http://www.greens.org.au/qld/

http://www.qld.democrats.org.au

http://newspoll.com.au/flash10.html


APPENDIX B – NEWS ARTICLES

Cybercitizens make their voices heard

This is a transcript of PM broadcast at 1800 AEST on local radio.PM - Wednesday, January 24, 2001 6:34

COMPERE: Well, with five States staging elections this year and a Federal poll also to beheld, we've well and truly embarked on what's set to be a lengthy season of campaigns.And as more and more voters go on line, does this mean Australians can expect theinternet to play a greater role in the political fray?

Christopher Cush is the author of 'Cyber-citizen', a book about how the internet was usedduring the recent US election. As Rachel Mealey reports, he says that campaign wasmore notable for its internet failures than its success.

RACHEL MEALEY: Christopher Cush says political parties have a lot to learn about howbest to use the internet during an election campaign. He says thinking voters in theUnited States turned to the net but were dissatisfied by what they found.

CHRISTOPHER CUSH: I think a lot of the people who developed the electoral web siteshere in the States for the last elections were not ready to do it. And by that I mean that alot of the websites we saw were built around gimmicks and kind of simple games, andrecycling news that was widely available rather than focussing voters' attention on someof the really unique pieces of information that had not been available before.

RACHEL MEALEY: Christopher Cush says political parties would be well advised toremember this if they want the internet to be used as a campaign tool.

CHRISTOPHER CUSH: I think as people discover some of these useful pieces ofinformation that they will continually return to it as elections occur, and so I think theaudiences for useful pieces of information will grow.

RACHEL MEALEY: While internet technology has been readily adopted by the youngergeneration, Christopher Cush says it doesn't mean that that group could be targeted bypolitical parties.

CHRISTOPHER CUSH: The internet is such a self-selection medium, meaning you knowit is so self determined where you go for information, that I really don't see the internet asa very good tool for reaching people who don't want to come to your site anyway, or whoaren't already interested in your information. I just don't see that happening.

RACHEL MEALEY: He says election 2000 didn't deliver for internet users what waspromised and, he says, the so called 'chain of enlightenment' stretching from the worldwide web to the voting booth didn't eventuate.

In Australia that's already been learnt the hard way. Last year's Victorian electioncampaign heralded the beginning of the internet election era with the then Premier's ownsite, geoff.com.

Christopher Cush says name-based web sites in the US campaign were used more forparity than true campaigning.


CHRISTOPHER CUSH: And this was a place where people could be sarcastic, they couldbe funny, they could be irresponsible and it was on an area that no newspaper ortelevision station would dare compete with him. And so we really found that making funof candidates was a resurge in sort of a political tool in the United States that the internetgave birth to, and it was basically a tool that American citizens could use effectivelyseeing that they couldn't compete with ABC News or NBC News but they certainly, ifthey were funny enough, could put up a website making fun of a candidate that theydidn't like.

RACHEL MEALEY: It's something Australian politicians need to be wary of in thiselection year. The State election was called in Queensland yesterday but already anopportunistic computer buff from the Gold Coast has registered the domain name'peterbeattie.com.'

Nathan Gregory doesn't have any real reason for registering the name. He doesn't haveany ties to a political party and won't be voting in the election because he's a NewZealand citizen. He says he just came across the name and thought it could be useful.

NATHAN GREGORY: I was registering a domain name for myself and I got a little bitcurious as to what other sort of celebrity names were available and I tried to do quite afew and I put in peterbeattie and it came up as it was available.

COMPERE: Nathan Gregory, the new owner of peterbeattie.com, ending that report fromRachel Mealey.


Qld parties campaign to net voters

(http://news.ninemsn.com.au/sci_tech/story_7606.asp)23 January 2001

Queensland political parties and candidates are campaigning in cyberspace to net voters.

But voters could be hard-pressed to get much useful material, with most of the websitesnot working properly or needing to be updated.

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie is creating a website to promote himself for the stateelection, the date of which is expected to be called today.

But the site www.beattie2001.net was still under construction when checked today.

The site of One Nation breakaway party the City-Country Alliance (CCA) site, which hasa photograph of a kangaroo at sunset as background, has profiles of all its statecandidates, contact details for branches and an on-line membership form. But a link tothe profile of its leader, Bill Feldman, did not work when checked today.

CCA spokesman Rod Brown said the Internet would be a vital part of the party's statecampaign.

"We see it is as a way to put our message out unedited," he told AAP.

"Our relations with the mainstream media have improved but the mainstream media byand large is not interested in the detail - they are headline people. "We can put the detail(of policy) on the Internet."

Liberal MP Santo Santoro, who holds the inner-north Brisbane seat of Clayfield, has hisown personal website, complete with a photo gallery and pitch for campaign donations.

The photo gallery includes a picture of Mr Santoro with new US president George WBush - but the caption is misspelled "Gorge W Bush".

The Queensland National Party website when checked today was last updated inNovember 2000. The only information on candidates was an outdated list of mostlysitting MPs who had been re-endorsed.

The Queensland Labor Party site has even less information, with reports from the statesecretary from last year, historical facts about the party and a list of MPs, still includingthose who have resigned over rorting allegations. A link to audio recordings of partyspeeches did not work when checked today.

The Queensland Liberals' site is up-to-date with a list of current candidates and mediainformation from this month.

The Queensland Greens website is also current, with a list of candidates, campaignissues, media releases dated from this month and a message about the state election.


Title Body politic learns to stand on web feet.

Author Amanda Keenan

Source Australia

Date Issue 10/01/01

Page 6Inside a small, crowded cafe in downtown Joondalup yesterday morning, OppositionLeader Geoff Gallop flicked the switch on one of the Labor Party's key election campaigntools its revamped website. The internet is being embraced across the political spectrumas an invaluable weapon in the battle for votes.

The Liberal Party is promising to launch its overhauled site soon, the National Party willunleash its new website in a high-tech extravaganza on Friday and the Greens andDemocrats acknowledge the impact of the medium and will update their sites dailyduring the campaign. One Nation, lagging behind, is still constructing its website butpromises to have it online shortly.

Dr Gallop said the website, at www.votelabor.org, was "an important initiative" and aneffective way to spread the Labor Party gospel to the masses, particularly youth.

Liberal Party state secretary Peter Wells said the party's website, to be launched soon,would not be a key facet of the its campaign, but simply another form of communicatingto the voting public.

One Nation state treasurer Gerry Kenworthy said the internet would play an essentialrole in the party's campaign strategy and would provide an alternative to mainstreammedia coverage. The site would feature leader Pauline Hanson's maiden speech, partypolicies and profiles of the endorsed candidates.

The Democrats' website will be updated regularly during the campaign and allows peopleto make donations over the net. State president Mark Reynolds said the net was"definitely" an important campaign tool.

National Party state director Jamie Kronborg was particularly enthusiastic about therole of the internet, especially in communicating with constituents living in rural areas.

"(The internet) is a major priority, a key part of our campaign strategy, on equal billingwith television," he said.

Mr Kronborg said the site, to be launched at the end of the week, would prove an effectiveand relatively cheap way to get the party's message across.

Greens co-convener Karl Haynes also acknowledged the internet as an

important medium.


Title Pollies cast a wider net.

Author Dennis Atkins

Source Courier-Mail

Date Issue 26/12/00

Page 23

As Australia gets ready for a bumper election year, politicians are naturally turning theirminds to ways they can reach out to an electorate that is becoming increasinglyfragmented and segmented.

Politicians already exploit the new niche media opportunities, such as cable televisionand radio markets that were once thought to be the antithesis of successful campaignvehicles.

John Howard's media machine, which is slick and formidable, keeps the Canberra pressgallery well fed with the torrent of prime ministerial words that come out every week.After his reshuffle he did his usual busy round of engagements, including the ABCcurrent affairs programmes, Channel Nine's Today show, as well as commercial radio inQueensland and New South Wales.

Howard also makes regular appearances on the FM radio stations around Australia,although the transcripts of these appearances are not released in Canberra or posted onthe otherwise informative prime ministerial website. But these FM spots do allowHoward to reach a segment of the audience other media do not reach - the youth market.

Another increasingly important way to reach young people is using the Internet,something most Australian politicians are still coming to terms with. But if the recentpresidential election in the US is anything to go by, this source of news and informationwill play a greater role in next year's election than anyone might have previouslyimagined.

Respected Washington-based opinion pollster, the Pew Research Centre, has just releasedthe results of a national survey on what part the Internet played in the 2000 presidentialpoll. Conducted in October and November, the poll of more than 4000 Americans trackedtheir use of the Internet and has been measured against a similar survey held during the1996 election season.

The research report said that Campaign 2000 "firmly established the Internet as a majorsource of election news and information".

The Pew Centre reports that almost one in five Americans used the Internet to get theirelection news, up from just 4 percent in 1996. Among regular users of the Internet, athird went online for their political news.

The other significant finding was that at the same time as the use of the Internet forpolitical information is ballooning, a growing majority of people are going to establishedmedia sites to find out what they want to know.

CNN's allpolitics site is the most visited (one in four political Net users went there). Thepredominant demographic group to go online for politics was young people - those aged 18to 29 were more than twice as likely to use the Net for political information than anyoneaged over 50. The results also showed that those with tertiary education were more likelyto log on, and that more men than women used the Internet to seek political news.

Of the websites used by people looking for political information, the news media ratedmost highly for usefulness - almost 60 percent of those who used CNN's site said it washelpful, and the Wall Street Journal had the best response of any of the online newspapersites.


Campaign websites on the other hand were visited much less frequently - just 8 percent ofonline users logged on to any politician's home page, and less than a third of those whospecifically use the Net for political information visited them.

The most ignored websites were those of the two major candidates, Al Gore and GeorgeBush: just 6 and 7 percent of users reported going to the Democrat and Republican sitesrespectively.

The Pew Centre has concluded that people are increasingly using the Internet for theirpolitical news because of the convenience involved.

"Not only do most election news consumers cite (convenience) as their top reason for goingonline for (political) information, but also 45 percent of all Internet users say theyencounter election news inadvertently, when they have gone online for other purposes,"said the Pew Centre report.

The report also emphasised the growing importance of online information for peopleseeking to make a decision on who to vote for.

"With more and more Americans turning to the Internet for election news, there is strongevidence that what they learn is making a difference in how they vote," said Pew.

"Younger voters, in particular, found online information to be influential." While moreAmericans used the Internet to gather information during the campaign period, televisionwas the overwhelmingly popular choice on election night to watch the results - more than80 percent used TV to follow the unfolding chaos.

Four years ago, most Australian politicians would not have known what the World WideWeb was, if asked. Now many have their own home pages which range in quality fromuseful and interesting (very few) to completely useless (the vast majority).

While the latest US research suggests these politicians' home pages might be lessvaluable than many think, the importance of the Internet itself as an information sourceis increasing.

Making yourself Web-friendly is going to be just one more requirement in the comingelection year.


Title Databases come to the aid of parties.

Author Lenore Taylor

Source Australian Financial Review

Date Issue 21/07/00

Page 17Imagine you are a political backroom strategist, plotting an election campaign. In onehand, you have a plan to spend millions of dollars on television ads. You are not sure whowill end up watching them, or exactly what is occupying their minds, so you keep the adsgeneral. In the other, you have a strategy to also advertise to voters about exactly thosepolicies in which they have a direct personal stake your first homeowner's rebate to peopleabout to buy a home; your environmental credentials to committed greenies; your newchildcare subsidy to parents of young children.

And at a fraction of the cost.

It also ties in with a strategy to replace or supplement costly direct mailouts with e-mailstargeted according to your database of each voter's interests. Internet professionals saythis is exactly what the sophisticated marketing databases on the net can offer, or willsoon offer, to political parties. The Liberal Party and the ALP already have their owndatabases based on the electoral roll and additional information gathered from votersurveys and other sources.

The Liberal Party's former national director and now manager of the giant Packer-owned Acxiom data warehouse, Andrew Robb, has said its information is not available forpolitical use. But there are many other databases that would be for sale if the partiesneeded to add to their files.

Televised and print political ads are subject to strict Federal Government regulations.So are the postal mailouts to specific voters using the database information.

But internet political advertising or email is subject to none.

A paper written by the Australian Electoral Commission says the AEC "considers"electronic ads should include the same identification of those responsible as print andtelevision advertisements and should comply with the same requirements to be truthful.But it readily concedes there are no legislation and legal precedents to back this view.

The federal director of the Liberal Party, Lynton Crosby, says the party does plan toexpand its use of the net and fully agrees that the electoral act needs to be updated to takeaccount of new technologies. He cautions that, despite Australia's relatively highpenetration for internet usage, the profile of an internet user does not necessarily matchthat of the swing voters whose attention is most keenly sought at election time.

"In the end, it's just another communication tool, and what will count is not the tool butthe message," Crosby says.

A spokesman for the ALP said Labor also supported legislation to ensure online privacyand the appropriate authorisation of all online electoral material.

He said the ALP national executive had last year passed a resolution

forbidding MPs and staff from "broadcasting unsolicited mailings". The ALP wouldalways get permission before including a voter on an e-mail mailing list, he said, notingthat most evidence indicated that voters were unimpressed with unsolicited e-mailsanyway.

The electoral act is one example from the politicians' own backyard of the huge array offederal laws and regulations that are going to have to be rewritten to deal with theemerging possibilities of new technologies. The recent brawl over legislation to govern


digital television and datacasting technology was essentially about just this point. In thatcase, the Government tried to preserve the status quo and the existing regulatoryframework in the medium term, but it is not a long-term solution.

The internet industry is now trying to head off any possibility that a similar fate willbefall the "streaming" of video and audio over the net. But the delivery of many otherservices could also be so transformed that existing regulatory frameworks will berendered obsolete. Regulation of the financial services industry, to take one example, islikely to come under strain as new providers mushroom over the net.

"Providing financial services will become very competitive, but the boundaries observedtoday between markets and between institutions could quickly disintegrate," the Wallisreport said back in 1997, recommending that a financial regulator should monitor newtechnologies to make sure consumer protection and other industry practice keep up withthe change.

In the rewriting of the broadcasting laws, the politicians ignored bitter complaints thatin protecting the old it was unfairly limiting the possibilities of the new. Capital Moveswonders whether the limitations on the use of new technologies will be so onerous whenthey finally get around to re-writing the Electoral Act.


Title Internet gives us all a mouse that roars.

Author Mark Latham

Source Sunday Mail

Date Issue 14/05/00

Page 15Are you disillusioned with Australian politics and the quality of public debate? Don'tgive up yet, the solution may be at your fingertips. American political guru Dick Morrisforecasts that the internet will change politics forever, returning political power to whereit belongs in the hands of the people.

Representative democracy is about to be replaced by direct democracy.Australian politicshas always worked on the basis of people electing politicians to represent their interests inparliament. But in recent times this representative system has become riddled withpublic distrust, broken promises and phoney expectations.

People have disengaged from modern politics, sick and tired of a system founded on point-scoring instead of problem-solving. Morris sees an answer in the internet. As he writes inhis new book, Vote.com: "We don't have to wait any more for the next election to expressour views while parliament makes decisions for us.

"We don't have to wait on a call from a pollster to speak our piece. We are going to taketo the internet and tell our representatives what to do whenever we damn well feel likeit".

Across society the internet is wiping out the middle man. It connects consumers directlyto businesses and service providers and puts people in contact with new sources ofinformation. The same process is about to happen in politics, reducing the power ofparliamentarians.

One in four Australian homes is on the net, with a further 10% expected to join eachyear. We seein certain to follow the US trend to internet democracy.

Initially, this will take the form of special polls, as people express a view on particularissues. Public participation on the net will influence decisions of the political system.When most homes are connected to the net, direct democracy the results of internetvoting will automatically pass into law.

In local government, for instance, this process will determine the outcome of localplanning and environmental controversies. Instead of state parliament deciding whetherto limit the number of poker machines or to ban smoking in restaurants, these matterswill be determined by the electorate. Instead of the federal parliament deciding whetherto toughen the censorship laws or to apologise to the Aboriginal stolen generation, thedecisions will be made by a majority of internet voters.

My parliamentary colleagues will be horrified by this prospect. Many will be spitting outtheir cornflakes in disbelief. But their discomfort is exactly what the electorate wants.

Democracy can be revitalised only by opening the system to public participation. Internetdemocracy seems a logical change. It will re- engage people in the political process.Politics will no longer be based on apathy and superficial campaigning. Politicians willneed to post detailed information and policies on the net, addressing a host of issues andaudiences.

This system will also wipe out traditional opinion polling that has taken a lot of thepassion and meaning out of politics. The pollsters talk to only a tiny number ofAustralians. In telephone surveys people do not get to express a detailed opinion or thestrength of their feelings. Statistical sampling methods turn these off-the-cuff views into"public opinion".


The internet, by contrast, is based on mass participation and passion. People need to feelstrongly enough about an issue to log-on and have their say. It is only a matter of timebefore representative democracy fades away.

If Dick Morris is right, it will be swept away by the internet revolution.

* Mark Latham is the federal Labor backbencher for the NSW seat of Werriwa.


Title Sausage sells sizzle for Libs on Internet.

Author Tom Allard

Source Sydney Morning Herald

Date Issue 15/04/00The Liberal Party has been urged to ignore the disastrous experience of jeff.com - Mr JeffKennett's ill-fated Web site - and go online at the next election to win the minds, andwallets, of Australia.

One of the key backers of jeff.com, Sausage Software's chairman Mr Gil Hoskins, told theLiberal Party conference yesterday that every Government MP should set up acommunity-based Web site while the party should consider a mega "political forum" site.The forum site could double as a fundraiser, he said. Corporations would be happy to"banner" or advertise on such sites, which can attract millions of "page impressions" fromvisitors each month.

"It could become a legitimate fundraising wing of the party," he said.

Mr Hoskins was talking to a lunch held by the Internet committee of the Liberal Party,which is developing proposals for the next election. The chairman of the committee, theSouth Australian Minister for the Information Economy, Mr Michael Armitage, said theUS experience showed the Internet could also target a new type of political donor - theaverage voter.

"It's absolutely evident in the US that it [the Internet] was an enormous source ofuntapped funds," he said of Senator John McCain's Republican primary campaign, whichraised million of dollars from small donations.

The Internet would also be a powerful new way of "inter-relating with the community",sharing information with voters and a new tool for polling that would be far moresophisticated than the yes/no questions of traditional polls.

Mr Hoskins saw the potential for the central forum site - to which the sites of the MPswould be linked - to become a huge database of email addresses, a cyber dossier oninterest groups and political opinion. While burnt by the jeff.com experience that isgenerally regarded as being a contributing factor to the losing campaign for Victoria lastyear, the Liberal Party views the Internet as the campaign tool of the future.

"The key thing about jeff.com is that we can't be really sure if the

Internet succeeded or failed," said Mr Armitage.

"If it had been called victoriangovernment.com, it could have been the most sensationalthing ever".

But Mr Armitage said the lessons had been learnt. Future Internet sites would have tobe more community-based, he said.


Title Votes lost with poor Net image.

Author Selina Mitchell

Source Australian

Date Issue 29/02/00

Page 55The online age of political campaigning may be here, but it is still in its infancy, even inthe Web-savvy, campaign crazy United States. Despite strong and sometimes costlyefforts, would-be US presidents are failing to portray themselves as Web and technologyfriendly. For the first time the Internet has become a campaign and information tool inthe presidential race.

The Arizona Democrats are expected to hold the first-ever binding Internet vote, allowingmembers to vote online in the presidential primary. Candidates are sending duelling e-mails to each other and even out- going President Bill Clinton has given his first fullyonline interview.

The research community has also become involved, with US-based Forrester creating anInternet Policy and Regulation group. The researcher's brief is to analyse government'srole in the development of the Internet economy and the impact of technology ongovernment administration and electoral politics.

But its first report notes the immaturity of politics on the Web. The US presidentialcandidates' highly-publicised Web sites are not helping their causes. They arecumbersome and poorly designed, the review says.

And the Web site of Republican Senator John McCain, www.mccain2000.com, often notedfor its online fundraising success, is the lowest rated of the leading four candidates.

"Despite high press visibility, the candidates' poorly designed Web sites undermine theirefforts," the Forrester brief says.

"Their sites suffer from cumbersome navigation, a lack of key functions, and poorsynchronisation with contenders' offline activities. This hinders their ability to get theirmessage out to voters, capitalise on TV exposure, and position themselves as Net andtechnology friendly".

The sites did not exploit the interactivity of the Net. They were not laid out effectively,and did not offer visitors the ability to find out where the candidates were appearing inupcoming weeks, it says.

Forrester graded the Web sites of the top four leading presidential candidates: BillBradley, www.billbradley.com, George Bush, www.georgebush.com, Al Gore,www.algore2000.com, and John McCain.

With possible scores ranging from -48 to 48, Bush's site received the best of the poorresults, scoring 8. Gore's came second with a score of 5, Bradley scored -6 and McCain -11. The sites were assessed based on their overall capabilities and their specific ability tomeet voters' goals to give money, volunteer, sign up for an e-mail on campaign activities,understand each candidate's stand on the issues, and find out where he is appearing onthe campaign trail.

On McCain's site, the navigation and over-reliance on separate pop-up windows made itvery difficult to complete basic actions, Forrester found, and it was often not available.But, even so, McCain collected $1 million in online donations in the 48 hours after hisprimary victory in New Hampshire. The report concludes the candidate still makes thesite: "Candidates have to make a connection with the voters before they can capitalise ontheir sites.


"The fanciest, most expensive site will not energise a campaign that does not strike achord with voters".

Forrester believes that the increasing use of the Web by voters and candidates in the 2000presidential race has set the stage for a debate on online voting.

"Internet voting experiments will increase at the state and local levels over the next fouryears, but wholesale use is at least eight years away," a review of online voting concludes.

There are still many hurdles to overcome. The Arizona Democratic Party's plans toconduct its presidential primary online have been challenged in court by the VotingIntegrity Project. It believes online voting would disenfranchise minority and low- incomeindividuals, who are less likely to have Internet access. A hearing is scheduled before theprimary in March.

But once technical problems and administrative issues are resolved, America's democraticprocesses will start to change, Forrester predicts. Candidates will shift their attention toelectronic government and draw more voters to government sites.

E-voting will spur the use of more sophisticated security mechanisms, such as biometricIDs and digital signatures, which will in turn spur confidence in electronic commerce.This, in turn, could shape wide- ranging legislation. Similar debates on online voting arebeing held in Australia, but political scientists warn that our complex and compulsoryvoting system cannot be compared with the US.


Title Political surfers take causes online.

Autho Sascha Hutchinson

Source Australian

Date Issue 19/10/99

Page 59The time when the Web will play a critical role in Australian politics is not far away,according to Ramin Marzbani, principal analyst for www.consult. But, Marzbani says,the referendum Web sites currently in operation will have little effect on the outcome.

"We will start to see a real impact, not in the next federal election,

but the one after that," he says.

"Then the Web will be all about advertising. Right now it is about communication". "Interms of people online, they are mainly high-income, highly educated people, and they arelikely to vote yes anyway".

Senator Kate Lundy, shadow minister assisting on information technology, set up asurvey on her Web site inviting comment from people who are too young to vote in theupcoming referendum, about whether they approve of the proposed changes to theconstitution.

"I found many young people had very strong opinions on this issue and were frustratedthat they did not get a vote,' Senator Lundy said.

Her site was not only attracting pro-republican youth, but they were the majority,Senator Lundy says. Young people with varying opinions visit her site because it is theonly way to publicly air their views, she says.

Although her online survey does not provide a complete and accurate analysis of youngpeople's views, the Web is proving to be one of the few ways that Australia's youth canparticipate in the debates that surround them, she says.

Senator Lundy also created a survey of international opinion on her Web site. That hasreceived a few dozen hits, she says.

Kerry Jones, executive director of Australians for a Constitutional Monarchy (ACM), saysbeing on the Web can only be of benefit. ACM features in two Web sites its own NoRepublic site, and the official no-case site. Jones says having ACM on the Web will affectthe outcome of the referendum.

"People are using the Web more and more.

Young people are crying out for information, and this is a great way to get it," she says.

"I don't feel a threat from the yes case Web sites, because I feel they are very scant oninformation and avoid justifying their arguments".

Like Jones, Peter Bennett, campaign manager for the No Case Committee says the Webis an important source of information.

"Information about this issue in the community is scant," Bennett says.

"Both public research and research conducted by us would indicate that people arehungry for information.

"It is in our best interests to ensure that people are informed, because the more informedthey are, the more likely they are to vote no".

Yulia Onsman, liaison officer for the Australian Democrats, also says the Web is a usefultool.


"It makes information more readily available. The effect of the Web is underestimated bya lot of people," she says.

"I think it will impact on the outcome of the referendum.

"If people are looking for information and they can't access it from home, they have to goout and look for it.

"With our Web site, we are able to communicate more quickly and more effectively".

Senator Lundy's opinion is similar.

"The Web provides the opportunity for people to look for detailed information aboutquestions they might have," she says. "It provides the layers of argument to do that".

Although Bennett says the referendum Web sites will not impact greatly on the outcome,he is convinced the Web is an increasingly important resource.

"Not only have we set up the Web site, we are also using banner ads on Web searchengines," he says. "The Web site address will feature in all of our advertising".

In 1996, the Australian Computer Society's named Senator Lundy Australia's mostcomputer-literate politician, and in November 1998, she was nominated by magazineinternet.au as being one of the 20 most influential people in Australia, with respect to theInternet.

She used a comment from a visitor to her Web site in a speech to Parliament onNovember 11.

www.katelundy.dynamite.com.au

www.voteno.com.au

www.republic.org.au.


Push towards e-democracy for NSW

(http://www.barryofarrell.com/edemocracy.html)24 September 1999

Australia’s oldest Parliament should lead the nation in applying new informationtechnologies to increase participation and interest in the political process.

Speaking at a conference on political communication, NSW Deputy Liberal Leader BarryO’Farrell called on the Parliament to trial E(lectronic) Democracy.

“Recent elections, including Victoria’s, have been characterised by protest votes fromindividuals and communities feeling isolated from Parliament.”

“Society is increasingly less trusting of politicians and equally more demanding abouthaving a direct say in decision making.”

“New information technologies, including the Internet, can be harnessed to both restorecredibility and increase citizen participation in the political process.”

Mr O’Farrell said Parliament should use the Internet to trial initiatives like:

• on line broadcasts of parliamentary proceedings;

• notification and explanation of legislation, regulations and issues before Parliamentand the results of votes taken;

• discussion forums to allow citizens opportunities to express views and raise questionsdirectly with MPs, including Ministers; and

• survey and polls on topical issues to gauge voter feedback.

“These initiatives would better inform people and give them a more meaningful role indecision making.”

“It would also ensure that MPs were subject to greater accountability.”

“Tomorrow’s Digital Citizen will be better informed and more inclined to want toparticipate in the democratic process.”

Mr O’Farrell said New South Wales should also examine the results of Internet voting innext years US elections and the current New Zealand trial of the system.


Title Virtual Politics

Author Julie Szego

Source Age

Date Issue 28/08/99

Page 3You’re sitting at home one night when the phone rings. Nothing out of the ordinary, justone of those irritating market researchers. You're too polite to hang up so you answertheir questions about your age, your childrens' age, your occupation, whether you haveprivate health insurance, where you shop and holiday.

Months later you receive a personal e-mail from your friendly federal member.Addressing you by your first name, he writes to draw your attention to his party's latestpolicy package, which includes childcare initiatives and private-health rebates. Heinvites you to discuss these issues further in his chatroom at a site near you.

You're shocked that a politician you've never laid eyes on can seemingly read yourthoughts. It sounds like a far-fetched scenario, but it's already happening in the UnitedStates.

The sophisticated technologies of the electronic age are transforming politics. In the USpoliticians have consumer databases, sophisticated software and online communities attheir command. Contact with them may be in cyberspace but the dialogue is up close andpersonal.

Like every other modern consumer item, virtual politics will be cheap, fast and tailored toindividual needs.

Australia has not yet reached this stage, although, if rumours are correct, it won't belong before parties can precision- target constituents in the same way.

But the Internet is already producing a profound change in Australian political culture.Two clicks of a mouse and you can meet Jeff's dog, read Jeffs diary, send Jeff a donation.This week the state Liberal Party launched its campaign website: www.jeff.com.au.

Labor's Internet campaign, on the other hand, is being run from its regular site -www.vic.alp.org.au -and is rather plainer than Planet Jeff with its video game andcatwalks. Labor's site proclaims a commitment to a less "arrogant" style of leadership.

The Liberal site is updated daily and the public is invited to talk to the man himself. Thehome page has a daily quote from the Premier dumping on Labor: accusing it of having"no passion", claiming Labor's education promises alone will blow the budget surplus fornext year.

Neither the Liberal nor the Labor site raises the privacy issues that have been provokedin the US (of which more later). Visitors don't have to identify themselves and no data-gathering devices lurk in the shadows.

"The only time you have to put down your name is if you want to contribute to thediscussion, want a newsletter to be sent to you or want us to contact you," says CarolynGeurin of Sausage Software, the site designers.

Guerin agrees that the site marks a new concept of politics "Jeff Kennett is leader of thecampaign and it's setting up a concept people can grasp. Other political sites tend to becorporate and boring, but elections are fun things. Why have them dry and politicalwhen they're also a cultural event?".

Peter Poggioli, the Liberals' state director, also heralds the rise of the cybercampaign.

"Politics has changed over the last generation, people are less attached to political parties.


Politicians must use all avenues to communicate with sections of the population.".

State Labor MP Carlo Carli, who handles the ALP's Internet policy, agrees.

We no longer see the electorate as homogeneous;.it's broken up ...We have generationscoming through 'who are very sophisticated, who get their news from the Net, who grouparound particular issues. If we can't get at these people, we run the risk of alienatingthem.".

Despite the attention given this week to the Liberal website, Labor has probably beenmore active on the Net so far.

"We've made sure that trade unions, community groups and everyone we have goodrelations with are linked to our website," says Carli.

"Being on-line is a tremendous advantage. It means updates come faster, coordination issmoother. Documents such as press releases can get around instantaneously. We see theNet mainly as a means of getting our message across.".

Carli says the state ALP built up an e-mail list of thousands of names during last year'sdocks dispute.

During the last federal election the party's national website registered two million hitsand the campaign office received 40,000 e-mails, wrote former Labor Senator StephenLoosley in a Sydney newspaper last month.

Loosley quoted ALP National Secretary Gary Gray saying "by the time of the nextelection ... the ALP campaign will have 100,000 contacts on our e-mail list".

But for Carli the Net's biggest effect is on local politics. In his electorate he scansdatabases to identify voters with Italian surnames and send them personalised e-mails inItalian, trying to raise issues he thinks may interest them. He also tries to link up withlocal activists on issues such as road closures and the City Link tollway. It intrigues him"how localised these groups on the Net actually are". But Carli's use of databases isprimitive compared with US politicians.

Wrestler Jesse Ventura was elected Governor of Minnesota last year;. he used a $600website to organise volunteers. Billionaire Steve Forbes, who hopes to wrest theRepublican Presidential nomination from favourite George W. Bush, is running a lavishvirtual campaign that mobilises supporters into "e-blocks", "e-Neighborhoods", and an "e-National Committee", according to a July article in the US weekly, The New Republic.

Forbes uses the Net for advertising, sponsorship and fundraising. His website is run byfive full-time staffers. He uses artificial intelligence programs and databases to predictthe sort of policies that may, for example, appeal to a professional woman with twochildren and private health insurance. The process is called "psychographics'. Instead ofstandard polling techniques, maverick pollsters pose a few questions to thousands ofpeople found on consumer marketing databases.

Software sorts the personal characteristics of respondents and builds a detailed profile ona person: age, income, family status,.ethnicity, even magazine subscriptions. Individualscan then be targeted through e-mail with extraordinary precision.

Such scenarios worry Victorian Liberal MP, Victor Perton, who describes invasion ofprivacy as "the biggest human rights issue in the Western world".

"Your chances of getting mugged, for instance, are minimal but the chances of someonein the private sector building a profile on you is almost 100 per cent.".

Perton thinks governments should impose limits on their data gathering activities. Yethe doubts that the Forbes strategies will take off here as Australian sensibilities aboutpersonal privacy are stronger than in the US.


Perton says state Parliament has introduced data protection legislation so personalinformation provided to authorities such as Vic Roads won't end up on a campaigndatabase.

"I don't want to write to my constituents and have them wondering how do they knowthat about me?' You want them knowing you got the information through conversationswith them.".

Another sceptic is Michele Levine of Roy Morgan research. She says that whileAustralian business has been practising data mining for some time, it's unclear to whatextent political parties are following suit. She warns against seeing these trends as aradical break from traditional techniques of political research.

"There's no magic in this, ultimately it's still about geography ...In Victoria it's still allabout (finding out) what people talk about over dinner.".

John Stirton of AC Nielson agrees that reports from the US should be treated with care.

"Some of the time, it's simply a ploy to impress their own donors and people with allthey're doing. They'll be a lot of psycho-babble but it's not necessarily all thatsophisticated.".

In his book, Open Australia, published this year, Federal Labor MP Lindsay Tannerproposed that the ALP have branches in cyberspace. Tanner already has his ownchatroom, with 120 subscribers.

He says the discussions generate so much information he finds it hard to keep up. Anarchive of past forums at his chatroom show people talking on such diverse subjects aswomen in Afghanistan or the potential value of hemp as an alternative to paper. Tanneris one of many to raise the possibility of an "electronic democracy". But others aresuspicious.

"New technology might give you a new set of communication tools.… but I think it's amistake to think there's a separate world in cyberspace where things happen differently,"says John Rimmer, the first executive director of Multimedia Victoria.

He acknowledges that the web at least provides more ways "in which people can talk backto politicians". But the political figures who use the Net most may be activists. Globalcampaigns such as the mobilisation against the signing of the Multilateral Agreement onInvestment show that the Net is a natural ally of the techno-savvy agitator.

It is also the domain of the young, and especially people whom Dave Sweeney, anti-Jabiluka campaigner for the Australian Conservation Foundation, calls the "bluehaired,orange-tracksuited ravers" who thrive on the spontaneity of the technology.

And, clearly, it's the young that www.jeff.com.au seeks to woo. Is Jeff Kennett's websitejust a populist vote catcher, a calculated attempt to get Netsmart, or a real shift towardelectronic democracy for a party that until recently never much appealed to the young?Knock on his virtual door and ask him.

This Publication:

RBR 2/01 E-Democracy and Election Campaigns: Recent Case Studies fromUSA and Developments in Australia (QPL Feb 2001)

Related Publications:

RBR 1/01 E-Voting: Elections via the Internet? (QPL Feb 2001)