“Come With Us On a Journey”
THE Australian is very angry with Australians. Crisis-infatuated from the get-go, the newspaper’s pandemic obsession is now becoming shrill, if not sinister. Its chief national reporter Tom Dusevic today targets the vaccine “hesitant” in a lengthy piece outlining ‘expert’ opinions on how to ‘nudge’ dissenters towards compliance. Part of the ‘problem’ is that the state is not using the creepy cattle-prods at its disposal:
Right now, there are fully fledged behavioural insights units in Victoria and NSW focused on improving customer needs, a key theme in state systems. These multidisciplinary teams are results-oriented, rather than academic, and try to nudge citizens to comply with laws. “Nothing changes until a customer gets a better experience,” is the NSW team’s mantra.
Canberra has a crack squad known as the Behavioural Economics Team of the Australian Government, an innovation by Malcolm Turnbull in 2016 to help all arms of the public service. A spokesman for the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet said: “BETA has not been involved with the government’s Covid-19 vaccination advertising or public information campaigns…”
[New South Wales infectious disease social scientist Holly Seale] says vaccination messaging and strategy will require tweaks. “Facts are important, but facts alone won’t necessarily lead to people moving forward. This is about getting people to come with us on a journey, explaining what vaccination means for them. Will it be so they can travel overseas? There’s no clear idea yet about that. People will need other nudges… maybe even incentives or reimbursement for their time.”
So many column inches and so many experts but at the snooty cafe where official propaganda and journalism meet, there is no understanding of something very simple. Namely, that an admirably sizeable number of well-informed Australians have made a choice about ‘vaccination’ based on an intelligent analysis of the alleged risk. They’re not coming on your journey and there is nothing you can do about it. Their actuarial reasoning is superior to this Nobel Laureate’s.