Australian media outlets clash on how to read US election results
Australian media outlets saw the US midterm results through very different political views. Some outlets framed progressive candidates as extremist threats.
Australian newspapers led on the US midterm results on Thursday. Australian newspapers reported the same facts through sharply different frames.
The Age called it "Capitol punishment". The Herald Sun called it "Donald lame duck".
Both outlets focused on Trump's losses. News24, by contrast, called newly-elected Michigan senator Abdul El-Sayed a "far-left extremist".
Host Sharri Markson said his victory was "crushing and terrifying". She warned that "western civilisation" and "capitalism" were "crumbling".
El-Sayed, a former health official, describes himself as a capitalist. His platform includes universal healthcare and reining in monopolies.
The split shows how Australian media outlets saw what they wanted in the same election night.
- Michigan senator
- El-Sayed's position won
- Sharri Markson
- News24 host
Why it mattersIt shows how the same political event can be framed in different ways. One outlet called it a democratic win. Another called it a threat to civilisation. It depends on which Australian outlet you read.
AustraliaAustralian viewers and readers get radically different stories about the same US event depending on which news outlet they follow, highlighting the role partisan media plays in shaping how Australians understand global politics.
