PAPERS WITH EGG ON THEIR PAGES

GERARD HENDERSON
1,326 words
16 March 1993
Sydney Morning Herald
11
English
Copyright of John Fairfax Group Pty Ltd

ONE thing is for sure. It's been a bad month for (most) prophets. Once upon a time the role of political journalists was to report politics. Not any more. These days the distinction between reportage and opinion is becoming increasingly blurred.

Moreover, as the coverage of the 1993 federal election indicates, quite a few journalists have taken to fortune-telling with a vengeance.

It is unclear just who was first out of the stalls in the journalistic soothsayers' stakes.

But the Herald's Alan Ramsey was a strong early contender. On January 30, 1993, he predicted that in Victoria "only one Labor gain is likely, maybe even none at all".

He later became more specific - prophesying a comfortable win for John Hewson.

Another brave early front-runner was Tom Burton of The Australian Financial Review. On February 22 Burton wrote that "with all senior media commentators talking down Labor, the contest is now on to see who will be the first publicly to write Keating off".

Quite a challenge, to be sure. Then, lo and behold, Tom Burton won his own contest.

On February 26, after looking into his crystal ball, Burton confidently declared that it was time to "now accept John Hewson is going to easily win the March 13 poll ... by a majority of over 20 seats".

Burton was still confident right up to election eve when he wrote that"Hewson could enjoy a majority of up to 19 seats provided there is no late swing against him". This is a bit like saying that St George will win easily next Sunday - provided the opposing team does not score a number of late tries.

However, Ramsey and Burton were in good company. Kerry O'Brien compered both of the Paul Keating/John Hewson debates with skill and fairness.

He made but two errors. The first was to refer to the Prime Minister and his alternative as "Paul" and "John". The second was to take the Nostradamus option.

During the course of the second debate O'Brien told the Prime Minister that he had a "second to none" chance of losing on Saturday. He later went on to predict a Coalition win "with a margin of around 14 seats".

Paul Kelly, the editor-in-chief of The Australian, would be well advised to heed the warning implicit in the title of his recent book The End of Certainty. Last week he threw ambiguity to the winds by predicting a "narrow Hewson win".

And so it went on. Among those members of the Canberra Press Gallery predicting a win for John Hewson were Paul Lyneham (11 seats), Wallace Brown(eight seats), Jim Middleton (by a minimum of four seats), Michael Gordon(five seats), Paul Bongiorno (between three and 15 seats) and Geoff Kitney, Dennis Grant, Mike Taylor, Russell Barton, Pru Goward and Glenn Milne (all unspecified).

Some were more cautious. The likes of Laurie Oakes, Michelle Grattan, Niki Savva and Laura Tingle showed some hesitation before tipping a narrow Coalition win. Wrong - but humbly so.

Then there were the few who got it right. As far as I can work it out, only three called the correct result - Amanda Buckley, Peter Charlton and Christine Wallace. They were also into prophecy. It is just that on this occasion - to use the terminology of the New Testament - it was done by Paul Keating so that the Buckley/Charlton/Wallace prophecy might be fulfilled.

I know there are some false prophets in the land who claim that they got it right. Beware before you accept their special pleading. Bob Ellis declared on Channel 10's Meet the Press on Sunday that he had predicted a Labor win by nine seats. Well, so he did. But he is also on record as foretelling an ALP majority of 25 with the added bonus of John Hewson losing his seat of Wentworth.

And then there is the Quadrant editor, Robert Manne.

Today Manne is teaching at large about the lessons to be learnt from the Liberal defeat. Last Friday he told ABC Radio National's Ramona Koval that if he had to "put his house" on the result he would bet his abode on John Hewson. Robert - stick to the horses.

All this makes Australia's best known prophet - the psephologist Malcolm Mackerras look good. But not too good.

Mr Mackerras started by predicting an ALP majority of 13 seats but changed his mind after a stockbrokers' lunch. He soon changed again.

John Hewson was another to foresee the election results by courtesy of revelation.

Shortly before the poll he declared: "I think financial markets are saying it looks like we're going to win; the stockmarket is saying it looks like we're going to win."

The problem here is that the chaps and ladies of the markets had been basing their judgments on the expert prophecies of Alan and Tom and Paul and Kerry.

When you look back on the soothsaying, the individual who emerges with his reputation least tarnished is the former Rugby League star Wally Lewis. Lewis refused the Courier Mail's attempts to join the soothsayers' stakes, opining that "it will depend on how many people are scared of the GST". Good advice that.

Now I will let you on a little secret. I determined some time ago that John Hewson would not win. "How so?" I hear you ask (assuming, of course, you are still reading).

Well, some time ago I asked my wife.

She argued that someone as lacking in political skills as Dr Hewson could not carry a 15 per cent GST policy and defeat someone as politically smart as Mr Keating.

I remained uncertain - until John Hewson started campaigning on the beach.

The fact is that whenever Liberal leaders get photographed on the sand they are invariably headed for disaster. Witness Harold Holt (missing, presumably drowned), John Gorton and Andrew Peacock. Forget about the grass.

The lesson for all Liberal leaders should be "keep off the beach". John Hewson didn't.

So it is not surprising that he has led the Liberal Party to its worst defeat in half a century.

But I didn't become a prophet - despite quite a few invitations.

Nor did my wife - she took the Wally Lewis option. Next time around the members of the Canberra Press Gallery would be advised to do likewise.

They should also observe more carefully the work of political cartoonists -most of whom called the result correctly.

At least the media's role in the 1993 election campaign should have had the unintended consequence of demythologising some of the media conspiracy theories.

Take the print media for example. There is no doubt that newspaper and magazine publishers would have been hard hit by the combination of a 15 per cent GST and a rise in the company tax rate (from 39 to 42 cents in the dollar) which was part of the Fightback | package.

Even so the overwhelming majority of newspapers supported the victory of the John Hewson/Tim Fischer coalition.

On the Friday before the big event editorials from Perth to Brisbane carried thousands upon thousands of words urging a vote for John Hewson.

The only exception was Sydney's Daily Telegraph Mirror.

There are two possible scenarios to explain the result. Either swinging voters don't read editorials telling them how to vote, or they do read them but are unmoved.

In either case the newspapers did not emerge all that well from last Saturday's encounter. Nor did their political correspondents.

Still I guess the best and brightest in the Canberra Press Gallery will escape any embarrassing fallout. Journalists are judged by quite different standards from those whom they report. To borrow a phrase from the film Love Story (which made the late Liberal leader Billy McMahon cry), political journalism means never having to say you're sorry.