A seemingly innocuous message sent to some Australians has revealed some apparently sneaky election campaign tactics.
A survey was recently sent to residents in the Sydney electorate of Wentworth and the Melbourne seat of Goldstein asked pointed questions about two independent MPs, Allegra Spender and Zoe Daniel. It came through as a text message from Intelligent Dialogue — yet no company or charity is registered to that name.
Independent candidates and transparency advocates have called it a “push poll” — an election tactic that attempts to sway people’s opinions. Here’s why.
Not just any text message
The survey mentioned only two party candidates by name; Liberal Party members Ro Knox (Wentworth) and Tim Wilson (Goldstein), and teal MPs Spender (Wentworth) and Daniel (Goldstein), as well as the Labor, Greens and One Nation parties.
The survey posited to would-be voters that: “[Allegra Spender/Zoe Daniel] is a Teal MP who receives significant funding from Simon Holmes à Court, a billionaire investor. Some people are concerned that it makes her and other teals less independent. Do you agree or disagree?”
Simon Holmes à Court is the founder of Climate 200 and his father Robert was Australia’s first billionaire, but is not one himself, rather, a multi-millionaire.
The poll stated that Spender was a Teal MP, rather than independent, that she received money from a billionaire rather than a millionaire. Source: Supplied
The political funding Climate 200 provides is crowd-funded by the community and not by an individual backer. While the organisation does have several wealthy donors, its November 2024 donation statistics show an average donation of $95, with 88 per cent of donations under $100, according to The Guardian.
Push polling often uses text messaging to send surveys to voters. Source: Getty / Tom Werner
Mark Davis, secretary and director at the Australian Polling Council, an association of polling firms, confirmed that Intelligent Dialogue was not a member of the council.
And because Intelligent Dialogue is not registered with the Polling Council, it’s not obliged to obey the code of conduct that states council members must be transparent regarding the details surrounding their polls.
A Liberal Party spokesperson told The Guardian: “The Liberal Party has nothing to do with this survey”.
For its part, Climate 200 has also been accused of push polling in the past. During the 2023 NSW election, it was accused by Liberal Party director Chris Stone of using telephone polls to portray Liberal candidates in a negative light. It defended it as a “widely used and accepted polling technique”.
Liberal candidate for Wentworth Ro Knox told The Australian in February that polls commissioned by Climate 200 were “lacking credibility” as they were “conducted by a Labor-aligned polling company”.
Logan Leatch, chief of the organisation behind the poll, Yabbr, said in the same article the poll was “conducted in accordance with The Australian Polling Council”.
Leatch also said: “Yabbr provides services across the political spectrum, and does not have any party affiliations”.
What’s the deal with push polls?
A push poll is a campaign technique disguised as an opinion poll. It uses leading questions and suggestions to ‘push’ a voter to view an issue or a candidate negatively, often under the guise of a marketing survey.
It was pioneered by former US president Richard Nixon in the 1940s, when voters were asked the question by anonymous callers over the phone, “Did you know that Jerry Voorhis (Nixon’s 1946 opponent for a seat in Congress) is a communist?” — which was untrue.
President Richard Nixon is said to have pioneered push polling in the 1940s. Source: AAP
It has been used in several elections since; in 2008 Jewish voters were asked if they would vote for former US president Barack Obama if he was supported by Hamas — again a false insinuation.
“I think the most powerful strategies are sprinkling doubt,” said Dr Frank Mols, senior lecturer in political science and international studies at the University of Queensland.
Is push polling legal?
South Australia and the ACT restrict misleading political advertising, which push polling can fall under, while the Northern Territory banned it altogether for being ‘anti-democratic’. However, it’s legal federally.
Mols says push polling can be effective by asking questions that make candidates appear more popular than they are — or by encouraging voters to question politician’s acts or intentions.
“[It makes voters ask], there’s something happening there — we don’t know quite what it is — but something is untoward,” he said.
And Mols believes the “undermining” of Hilary Clinton through the — where she was found to be using a private email for official public communications — was key to spreading doubt into voters’ minds and Donald Trump’s eventual success in that year’s US presidential election.
“It was so effective because you didn’t need to say what was in those [leaked] emails or what was happening. You just had to say, well: there’s something that needs investigating.”
‘Ethics pushed into the background’
Mols believes it’s a tactic that Australian political parties may use ahead of the 2025 federal election.
“I would even argue that in this country, the major parties would be equally inclined to use those strategies if they knew it worked,” Mols said.
“Because in the enthusiasm — in the fanaticism of wanting to win an election — ethics get pushed into the background more and more by both parties.”
With the election looming, Mols said voters should be mindful about who engages them.
“If they’re serious, legitimate marketeers paid by a marketing company, they would have no trouble explaining to you how it works and who they work for.”
Mols said users should also be aware of social media groups that use similar tactics.
“Groups have a vested interest in spreading fear amongst the electorate … made to look like it’s a community initiative,” he said.
“We need to sort of wise up a little bit.”
