The Liberal-National Party coalition government of Australia is under intense political fire. Not only that, their campaign emails looked almost identical to messages the AEC was sending out. Voters in several influential electorates are making their displeasure known. This has been particularly true in the Victorian federal electorate of Jagajaga and the Sydney suburban marginal seat of Bennelong. Recipients like former recipients Peter Magor and Darrell have lamented how deceptive these communications are.
You emailed an unbranded e-letter to Peter Magor, constitent of Jagajaga. It came with a reply-paid envelope addressed to “LPA NSW”, the New South Wales branch of the Liberal Party. Numerous confused recipients reported that they first believed they were being sent an official postal vote application form from the AEC. This large misconception was caused by this unclear branding. The email only compounded the confusion with an included unsubscribe link. Clicking on it instead unexpectedly took users to a Canadian Liberal Party website meant for aggregating Canadian postal vote information.
Confusion and Misleading Communications
Darrell, another local interested recipient from Bennelong, wrote to similarly lament the confusion created by the email. I mistook it for an official AEC letter as it was unbranded,” he explained. Noting that people with limited English proficiency can’t understand the subtleties of language, he urged more precise guidance. They thus stand to be more easily misled by deceptive communications.
“You might have people whose command of English isn’t that great — perhaps their command of English isn’t good enough to pick up nuances in language, so they just get taken in by the sort of potentially misleading communications.” – Darrell
Unsubscribe Under the Spam Act, political parties are not required to provide recipients with an ability to opt out of their email blasts. This has compounded states’ fears of the ethical issues involved in collecting and sharing sensitive personal information about voters without their clear consent.
“They do not need your consent to send it, and do not need to include an unsubscribe,” – ACMA
Critics of the ruling Liberal Party say that their policies misinform voters. They do raise very serious concerns about privacy. Information the email requested included personal information, like phone numbers. Access to this data would allow political parties to better target their outreach efforts during primaries, general, or otherwise.
Political Parties and Data Collection Practices
Technologist and former attorney James Patto underscored the chilling effects that such a practice, as envisioned by the Liberal Party, could have. He argued that gathering this data supercharges the micro-targeting capabilities of political parties. This tactic is particularly useful since it helps them reach more narrow demographics.
“This collection of data inevitably makes the targeting of individuals by political parties more effective, and ultimately, that’s what they’re looking for.” – Mr Patto
Political insiders have admitted that similar practices are common on both sides. As one senior Liberal described it, “I don’t think anyone would be surprised to learn political parties pull these kinds of moves. This announcement lays bare that data mining is the primary tactic used by both sides to supercharge their electoral operation.
In a statement, the Labor Party’s spokesperson on elections confirmed that only legal obligations governing postal voting have been observed. Yet, they did not refute having engaged in the same practices. As a result, postal voting is an essential component of the way our democracy functions. It ensures that each and every Australian is able to exercise their democratic right and civic duty by voting.
Community Concerns and Election Integrity
Community members such as Peter Magor have told us they do not appreciate being sent unsolicited emails from political parties. Mr Magor said he found it irritating, “I’m irritated. It’s unsolicited – I don’t ask for it.” His complaints are a window into a deepening voter angst when it comes to receiving unexpected politics and political attacks.
“If the people are creating the rules, they’re going to give themselves little get-out clauses,” – Mr Magor
The AEC had also previously warned about the serious risks of unsolicited postal vote applications. Voters need to consider who they trust their data with, and who they don’t. This need is particularly acute as election campaigns begin to intensify.
The impacts of such misleading communications are especially acute in electorates with multicultural populations, like Bennelong. Darrell mentioned that the majority of the residents are from cultural backgrounds that tend to be linguistically isolated. This current reality has rendered them much more vulnerable to predatory political tactics.
“It’s quite concerning because we’ve got a large Chinese-Australian demographic (in Bennelong),” – Darrell
As political parties intensify their campaigns ahead of the March 2024 elections… It will, hopefully, lead to renewed conversations around ethical communication practices and protecting the privacy of voters. These recent misadventures with duplicitous emails underline the need to bring transparency to political communications. These examples, more importantly, highlight the need for accountability in communications tactics.
