1. John Singleton, “Labor’s Hard Sell,” The Independent Monthly, April 1990, pp. 3-4.
2. Leon Gettler, “John Singleton is expected to join Fairfax board,” The Age, December 26, 1991, p. 5.

1.
John Singleton, “Labor’s Hard Sell,”
The Independent Monthly, April 1990, pp. 3-4.

JOHN SINGLETON devised the ALP’s election campaign advertising. In this insider’s account he explains how the ALP exploited the credibility weaknesses of Andrew Peacock, covered up the government’s own poor record — and sold itself to the swinging voter.

I thought it was pretty funny last year when the Liberals spent millions of dollars showing John Howard standing behind a picket fence with the requisite number of children. Good, I thought. The more money they waste now the less they’ll have later.

It seemed even more of a waste of money when John Howard got removed from behind the picket fence and was replaced by Andrew, but without wife and kids it all looked a bit silly.

No details were spelt out but we were told that there was an answer and the answer was Liberal. We sat around and cracked the inevitable jokes about whatever could the question be and then waited for something sensible to happen.

It didn’t.

Our final brief for 1989 in sombre tone by ALP boss Bob Hogg and the “Seeing Eye Dog” research company ANOP (so named because they believe in keeping me in the dark until there’s about one hour to come up with an answer.

The brief is printed here in full:

ANOP debrief (December 19, 1989)

Swinging voters are sick of empty statements, cliches, hollow promises, no substance, “mudslinging”, just attacking and criticising the opponent, personal attacks.

They want:

— genuine, direct, straightforward messages

— realistic, achievable promises

— positive, constructive messages, some hope — they don’t want too much gloom, doom and admission of mistakes.

Swinging voters are a hard audience — they are cynical and would really like a new, fresh alternative. They are really concerned about Australia’s and their own economic circumstances. And they are genuinely concerned about the environment.

They will not be taken in by glib promises and they will see through superficial statements and vote-buying behaviour.

It will be harder for Labor to win the next election than it will be for the Liberals.

Success will depend on the state of the economy, the economic outlook and what Labor has to offer.

“Offer” means SOMETHING NEW, NOT MORE OF THE SAME.

The key is to convince swinging voters that Labor deserves more time, that it is the better choice for the future of Australia and ordinary Australians.

Basically it was saying that we had no chance unless there was a miracle or the Liberals stuffed up entirely.

The only thing we had going for us was Hawke. Oh, and one other thing — Peacock.

We tested hundreds of ideas that might get us off the hook. All failed.

We tested one slogan and one statement for the Liberals. It was spot on. Marginals voters loved it. Hard-core Liberals loved it. And worse, even real Labor stalwarts agreed with it. We put it away in a safe place and waited for them to come up with something similar.

Here is the slogan and strategy in full: “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. SEVEN YEARS OF HARD LABOR”.

Here is the political stance and statement the Liberals should have had the brains to get close to:

In seven years the ALP has driven the families of Australia backwards at a horrifying rate. Home ownership is no longer a great Australian dream but the great Australian nightmare as interest rates reach heights that are similarly out of control.

We must give back to the families of Australia incentives to work, incentives to save and incentives for us all to realise the great potential of the greatest country in the world. It is not a difficult job, it simply means changing the government’s priorities from throwing away money on those who don’t need it and giving it to those who need and deserve it most — the Australian family.

We believe in the return of the Australian dream. We believe there is an answer.

Something along those lines would have made it harder for us. If not impossible. When people are really hurting, for whatever reason, you just shouldn’t be able to win.

When the Liberal campaign was announced we waited to see how close the Liberals would come to the correct campaign.

Would it be “enough is enough, time for a change?” And then it came: THE ANSWER IS LIBERAL.

None of us could believe anyone could be that dumb. Except me.

I had always thought Tony Eggleton was no good at politics. He’s good at drownings. When he announced Harold Holt had gone fishing permanently he did it with style.

If anyone could stuff it up it would be good old Tony and he came through.

Political advertising is like a gigantic one-day sale. You lose on that day and your shop is closed for another three years. And yet here was the total insanity of it all.

Andrew looking very sincere asking these people equally sincere questions and then saying there was an answer and apparently he thought it was him. The press ads were even worse.

A big Q and a big A. Get it?

The Q is for questions. The A is for answers.

One of these nice tight rigid formats that mean the agency can go to sleep along with the electorate.

The Liberals were so impressed with technology they even spent money being on air within an hour of the campaign launch saying there was an election and it was important.

Wow.

We knew people didn’t think the election even started before the Great Debate so we kept our powder dry while they did their dough cold.

The Liberals policy speech was slick, glib and empty. One hundred per cent wrong.

The prime minister’s policy speech was straight, simple and substantial. Correct.

We waited for the ads that hurt but they just didn’t come. Andrew got snubbed off the commercials. Hewson came on and looked and sounded good. It was just a pity he didn’t say anything. Fred Chaney had a go but no-one knew who he was or what he was talking about.

And then it was back to Andrew and more and more press ads that look like the old ads you saw under the lino in old holiday homes.

In the meantime we split the TV ads into various looks and jobs. Our campaign strategy never changed from back in December.

Here it is:

IMG_20130102_194046

We kicked off with a 60-second commercial on the environment. Beautiful, touching stuff. And real. Then straight after the policy speech (where Andrew didn’t know the questions, let alone the answers) we ran four prime ministerial 30-seconders.

Then we reminded the electorate of the Liberals’ negatives. A 60-second commercial with Andrew saying the Liberals would have the best health policy in the world before Peter Shack unfortunately said, however, not this decade. Then another with Peacock’s actual wages policy: Who’s to know?

Then back to prime ministerial policies. The more they hid Andrew the more we brought the prime minister to the forefront with:

  1. The wages promise.
  2. The superannuation promise.
  3. The dignity-of-work statement to target their hard stance on the dole compared with our train-and-retrain attitude.

We used professional futuristic computerised graphics as scene-setters. But still with our prime minister telling it like it is and will be. Promises, but affordable.

We still waited for the other mob to do something half-intelligent. But, apart from the National Party forgetting the words of the national anthem, nothing of note happened.

Then we started to sell the future. Education. Science.

Unbelievable, we were pegging them back. Week by week. Day by day. The prime minister looked and sounded more confident every day.

The treasurer refused to take a backward step and gained respect as he shrugged off every punch like unnecessary and unwanted flies. On the other hand, Peacock looked more and more like a man struggling not to drown. Howard tried to keep the smile off his face. Only Hewson was getting anywhere and the Nationals were dead in the water. Maybe Tony Eggleton could have announced that.

Then it became clear that the rout would be confined to Victoria and Perth. We had actually hit the front everywhere else.

Now the job was to take the risk on increasing the primary vote of the Democrats and Greens to shore up their preferences. We asked them to compare specifically the two major party alternatives in two areas only: the environment and leadership.

With Don Chipp’s full knowledge I filmed his radio interview with Bob Hawke in which Chippie said that “the Democrats should never run in the House of Representatives” (see you later Janine) and that the Democrats’ second preferences “should go to the party with the best policy on education, health and the environment”. He didn’t have to say anything else because we already had an 80/20 lead in those areas.

I know Don spewed a bit because I edited out some bits he would like to have left in. But Chippie also knew I’d play it that way no matter what he may have said politically.

Plus, we even put into the commercial a rolling typescript that looked to me — by strange coincidence — like a message from the electoral office. It was the most important ad of the campaign.

Script:

(Short flag opener. Rolling words)

Announcer voice over:

Think about it.

Will the Democrats and Greens play a creative or negative part in Australia’s future?

There is little doubt the Democrats and Greens will hold the balance of power in the Senate. The decision to be made by Democrat, Green and Independent Voters is who will govern the country? Labor, or the Liberals and Nationals. That’s why preferences will count in the House of Representatives.

The choice for Democrats and Greens is crystal clear. A Liberal/National government would mine Kakadu, build uranium enrichment plants and dismantle Medicare. The Liberals/Nationals stand for just about everything that the Democrats and Greens oppose.

But the real choice for Democrat and Green voters is who you want to be the prime minister of Australia — Bob Hawke or Andrew Peacock?

If you care about the environment, if you care about the future of Australia, your preference choice must be Labor. Put the Liberals and Nationals last.

Just think about your preference vote.

Then we showed the prime minister and Hazel with kids and talked of their future resting with our decision. In the meantime the Liberals stuck rigidly to their campaign which was wrong at the start and pathetic at the finish. But rigid. The election which was almost impossible for us to win or them to lose was now on a knife edge. And that’s the way it turned out.

To actually lose votes in NSW, Queensland, Northern Territory and South Australia and Tasmania and to pick up such a tiny per cent of the massive vote losses of the ALP in Victoria and Western Australia is extraordinary political negligence.

They had the wrong leader. In an election based on economic competence, the leader should have been John Howard.

For Hawke’s historic role he can thank, in order — himself, Hazel, Paul Keating, Graham Richardson and his born-again trees. The best organisation of any company I have worked for under Bob Hogg, Geoff Walsh and Craig Emerson. The world’s best political researchers, Rod Cameron and Margaret Gibbs of ANOP.

And the Liberals.

***
2.
Leon Gettler, “John Singleton is expected to join Fairfax board,”
The Age, December 26, 1991, p. 5.

Mr John Singleton, a long-time friend of the former Tourang partner Mr Kerry Packer, is set to join the board of the Fairfax newspaper group.

The advertising chief, who has worked for the ALP on the last two election campaigns and the 1988 New South Wales election, confirmed that he had been approached a week ago by a Tourang director, Mr Brian Powers, who is an executive with the San Francisco investment group Hellman and Friedman. Mr Singleton said the position would be “one of the more satisfying tasks around”.

“I’ve just about made my mind up. I can see a lot of enjoyment; I can’t see any downside in it,” he said. “If I’m going to do it, I’ll do it for a couple of years and I’ll do it conscientiously and make a contribution.”

Mr Singleton, who has worked with Mr Packer and who has described Australia’s richest man as an “old mate”, said the media’s treatment of Mr Packer during the Fairfax auction was unjust but predictable and understandable.

“I felt sorry for Kerry, the way he was portrayed,” Mr Singleton said. “I think Kerry Packer was treated most unfairly. I think that’s basically because he looks so awesome. If you know him, he’s a terrific bloke 90 per cent of the time. The other 10 per cent of the time, he is awesome.”

Apart from his marketing skills, Mr Singleton saw his role as that of a “conduit” between the Fairfax board, employees and management. “Having earned the respect of Hellman and Friedman and Conrad Black, I think I can represent the views of the journos and the management in a way that will be advantageous to Australia.”

Mr Singleton’s association with the ALP is through the NSW Right faction whose members include the Prime Minister, Mr Keating.

The same man who founded the right-wing [sic] Workers Party and conceived the controversial anti-socialist television commercials endorsed by the then Premier of NSW, Sir Robert Askin, during the mid-1970s, was award the $4 million account for the ALP federal election campaign in 1987.

He then picked up the contracts for the NSW ALP in 1988 and was reappointed for the 1990 federal election.

Mr Singleton said his ALP connections should not be of concern.

One thing I’m not is a party hack. I’ve worked for the ALP, I’ve worked for the Liberal Party, I’ve worked for the National Party, I’ve worked for Joh, I’ve worked for Bob Askin.

I’m a salesman and I happen to think that the last elections I’ve worked on, I really think the best option was the ALP but I’m not a member of the party and I’m not contracted to the party. For example, in NSW I’ve a much closer relationship with (the NSW Liberal Premier) Nick Greiner than I do with (the ALP and Opposition Leader) Bob Carr.

I did have a moral obligation to work with the ALP as long as Bob Hawke was Prime Minister, which he is now not, and whether Paul Keating and I work together in 18 months’ time will be decided by Paul and Bob Hogg and myself. At this stage, there’s no commitment.

However, he ruled out the prospect of switching sides and pitching for the Opposition Leader, Dr Hewson, in the next poll, claiming this would be unfair to colleagues in the ALP.

But if I thought the Liberal Party was a better alternative for Australia, I certainly wouldn’t be working for the ALP. I haven’t come to that conclusion yet.

He dismissed concerns about his political and commercial associations having the potential for editorial interference.

I’ve been involved in the media for a long, long time and I’ve seen people try to influence some pressure, and I’ve never seen it done successfully.