Why is the ‘Yes’ Voice campaign failing so badly?

I think people are ignoring a massive cultural and socio-economic oversight. People are voting no because they are against it, they a resentful for the amount of time and money spent on this issue while they are struggling to pay bills, mortgage, school fees, groceries etc.

A reluctant, resentful voter will always vote negative. It’s as simple as that.

The people who have positioned this as the most important thing in the lives of ALL Australians are the ones to blame for its failure.

The industry really needs to reflect on how they performed on this very important moment. And that the best ad of the campaign was not done by an agency, just a couple of mates for free

At last an opinion piece that makes some sense. Albeit again with personal bias built in. But it was far too complex in its analysis.

It’s really simple. The Yes camp treats voters like children.
So called progressives are crap at marketing because they tried to play the moral card. You should just vote yes because it’s the moral thing to do. That was the sell – this is the right thing to do. Don’t question it. No need for details. Just shut up and do the right thing. And if you don’t support it you are a racist. That was their marketing. That’s not selling it. That’s treating people like they are children. Don’t question why just do as I say.

‘Morality’ has nothing to do with it. It’s about changing the fundamental structure of our parliament for less than clear reasons and outcomes.

Think about the arrogance of the YES camp marketing. This is the constitution we are talking about. It’s not just some law that can be repealed via an act of parliament if it doesn’t work out. It’s very arrogant and ignorant on their part to not treat voters like thinking adults who have rightful concerns about changing our most fundamental legal document.

I’m amazed the yes vote is as high as it is given the attitude of the YES side.

I remain hopeful that the polls that have been so woeful in recent elections are similarly off the mark now.

The yes campaign had no failings other than the proposition. It had all media, all valuable air time and newspapers’ supports, industry, you name it, it had time to explain.. It had this gift, and still couldn’t get it over the line. Nothing more unbalanced, relative to the no vote , in resources available for its promotion .
The proposition is what killed it, and that’s good given the $3–$00m spent on this. The referendum results will show what an informed thinking and careful population has decided.
And a certain small percentage of people voted no just to stick it up the overly condescending , let me think for you, types that populated the Yes Campaign.

Some good points here.
Vote Yes or vote no. Just don’t vote No because you’re scared of the boogie man and don’t vote Yes because you think you’re not allowed to if you’re a good person. I am a YES but I can imaging scenarios that one may vote no…haven’t heard anyone use them though.
Big problem is there are No supporters who are too far right to want to see our indigenous peoples progress or supported so they won’t be swayed if that’s the intention.
The other sociological problem is that “othering” plays into the hands of the protectionist right. Re-enforcing we are helping them, or they deserve this, or this will be good for those poor people often has the opposite effect to creating empathy.
You don’t have to have read Hegel or Canales to understand this, but we wrongly presume the government and associated people will spend the money on people who can identify this and then apply it directly to the communication strategies.
Tony makes a good point about our sense of fairness and this is the first part and what so obviously should have been the key strategy. Add to that an underlying sense that creating assistance for a section of Australian society is a norm we do for all subsets of society and a necessity if we are to create the society we say we are and want – for god’s sake, how do we allow ourselves to give up. And finally, what the big difference is in this beautiful country of cross cultures – all cultures that make up this country are protected by virtue of their original homeland (UK, Italian, Indian, Chinese, Colombian), except one…our own. The homeland is here and we all should feel a responsibility to protect its many forms.

You’re right, people are emotional in their decision making. It’s also proven that they’re highly irrational. I’ve no doubt appealing to the national DNA of ‘Fairness’ would’ve helped move the needle. But perhaps the Brexit leave campaign had it right. Hijack the social outrage machine, and show big scary numbers. I’m sure the cost to the economy of not supporting the indigenous community will be substantial over time. Now stick that number on a bus and shout about how it could be invested into Aussie sports! Boom!

Fear and hate trump compassion – sadly it’s as simple as that

It quickly became clear that the issue for the yes side to address was the “ I don’t understand how it will work” response. And Dutton and co splashed kerosene on that fire. The Yes side decided a feelgood fest and door knocking strategy would do the trick. What was needed was a good old fashion product demonstration. Show don’t tell. A tv scenario showing showing a remote community with a truancy problem— and a govt funded program that isn’t working. Say that. SHOW the community meeting with their Voice rep to suggest ways of making the program effective—or suggesting other ideas gained from their unique insights into the problem. SHOW the rep going with no grievance to Canberra and holding meetings with the bureaucrats. SHOW how the suggestions opened up new solutions— which help stop the waste of current solutions. Show it and Australians will understand it— the key issue that needed to be addressed.

Look at the sponsors of the The Voice… mining companies, Qantas…

Without bipartisan support, Yes was unsellable. There has never been a successful change to the Constitution without bipartisan support and Albanese’s belief he could ignore all the lessons from the previous 44 referendums was reckless and delusional.