Proof that Prime Minister Julia Gillard has misjudged the public mood on WikiLeaks: today’s Essential Report found more than half of voters approve of the release of diplomatic cables (33% approve; 20% strongly approve), compared to a quarter who expressed concern (14% disapprove; 11% strongly disapprove).
Support for WikiLeaks was, not surprisingly, highest among Greens voters (80% total approval) but still strong across party lines — 55% of Labor voters approve in total compared to 51% of Liberal/National supporters. Disapproval ratings were the same (30% in total) across both sides of politics.
Had Gillard been talking to a US audience, she would’ve been on safer ground. In a Washington Post poll conducted on December 9-12, 68% of those polled — say the WikiLeaks’ exposure of government documents about the State Department and US diplomacy harms the public interest. Nearly as many — 59% — say the US government should arrest Julian Assange and charge him with a crime for releasing the diplomatic cables. Nearly a third of those aged 18 to 29 say the release of the US diplomatic cables serves the public interest, double the proportion of those older than 50 saying so.
In the UK, a Guardian poll asked “Should WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange be tried for espionage?” 87.9% of respondents said no.
A CNN poll of British opinion found that more people agree than disagree that WikiLeaks was right to release the cables, by 42% to 33%. The remainder, 25%, don’t have a position.
As for Gillard’s initial response to the WikiLeaks cable dump — she used the word illegal — the Australian Federal Police announced on Friday:
“The AFP has completed its evaluation of the material available and has not established the existence of any criminal offences where Australia would have jurisdiction …”
When Essential Research respondents were asked about the government’s response, 46% were critical (27% disapprove; 19% strongly disapprove) compared to 32% who approve of Gillard’s rhetoric.
Looks like Gillard should leave the overblown hyperbole to that master of outlandish statements — US Vice-President Joe Biden.
I’d suggest you stop wasting all this huffing and puffing on whether Gillard misread the public.
We hopefully vote for our politicians to not be quite so poll driven – at least not this sort of poll. And I would be stunned if any government actually came out in support of what Wikileaks is doing – it might be popular and for the greater good, but hardly what governments would be seen to support.
By the way, the AFP said “where Australia had jurisdiction” which doesn’t actually rule it out as being illegal which is all Gillard said. Mind you there is every chance it isn’t illegal anywhere but that’s not the point you were trying to prove with your AFP reference.
“Had Gillard been talking to a US audience, she would’ve been on safer ground.”
Thats just the point, Gillard was talking to an American audience, the one in the US embassy. It’s called diplomacy.
A sad indictment on journalistic standards. For months Gillard is criticised for being poll driven, now she’s criticised for not parroting what any competent observer could have predicted Australian polls would say.
To top it off, we’re told, shock horror, she was wrong to talk about it being illegal because it broke no Australian laws. Does the author really believe actions which take place on non-Australian soil CAN’T be illegal if they break no Australian law? That presumably make the rest of the world virtually crime-free paradises?
The differing poll results in the various countries is as much a reflection of how the mainstream media in each country cover the story as anything else. In the US, the media is more or less a mouthpiece for the government line; alternative views and evidence are seldom given decent coverage. In the UK there are a number of alternate news outlets such as the Guardian and the Independent that are more progressive and provide access to the other side of the story. In Australia we have a highly concentrated media which in the main systematically under reports on environmental and social justice issues or in many cases show a distinct bias towards the right (ie the mainstream policies pursued by both major parties).
In all three countries we have a majority of people who are disinterested or just ignorant of the issues that shape their lives and those of people everywhere. Their news comes from the profit driven, entertainment based media whose main aim is not to inform but to profit from the news. Climate change denier “Lord” Monckton gets more coverage in the Australian media that renowned climate scientist James Hanson gets. That says it all.