Many self-described centrists see themselves as independent thinkers, but their political views often reflect the assumptions and narratives of the media they consume, writes Matthew Peel.
HERE'S A DISTINCTLY 2026 Australian phenomenon: someone declares themselves “not left or right, just sensible”. Then, without a hint of irony, they repeat the previous night's commercial news bulletin word‑for‑word.
This isn't Centrism. It's a media habit wearing a disguise.
Across the country, the self‑proclaimed “centrist” label has become a social survival strategy. But most people using it haven't contrasted competing arguments. They aren't pragmatic thinkers who've read widely across the political spectrum.
They are, in practice, people who watch or read only corporate-backed news – maybe Sky News After Dark, 7 News, perhaps, a taste of ABC Drive on the way home – and then confidently announce that they “just call it as they see it”.
They firmly believe they have the monopoly on common sense. But common sense, in this context, isn't a product of independent thought. It's a feeling. And that feeling has been manufactured.
We've all heard it: a friend or family member insists they're too sensible for the shouting match. Then, within minutes, they regurgitate a near‑perfect transcript of last night's news headlines — negative gearing outrage, the supposed environmental destruction of renewables, union “thuggery”. They don't know they're repeating drip‑fed narratives. They genuinely believe these are their own conclusions.
But let's be blunt: these people are not centrists. Not even close. They have never looked into what a centrist actually is — historically, philosophically, or policy‑wise.
And here's the kicker: in Australia's concentrated media landscape, that commercial news diet is often the only thing they consume. They mistakenly believe The Project or the ABC are progressive platforms — another corporate line they've swallowed without question. They have simply absorbed a narrow, billionaire‑backed information flow and mistaken its boundaries for the entire playing field.
Why does this matter? Because the “centrist” label has become a shield that lets people bypass the hard work of political consideration. When you say “I'm a centrist”, you don't have to justify your sources. You don't have to explain why you never read or listen to anything outside your usual bubble. You just get to feel superior – calm, reasonable, above it all – while parroting the exact talking points that serve the status quo.
In 2026, this isn't harmless. Rents are crushing young families. Groceries are a daily stress test. Climate instability is no longer a future warning. And the “common sense” middle, the one so many feel safely perched in, isn't an objective anchor. It's a boundary line drawn by media monopolies that profit from keeping you comfortable, uninformed and convinced you've figured it out on your own.
The truly uncomfortable truth is this: if your entire political worldview comes from one flavour of commercial news, you don't have a political philosophy. You have a media habit. And calling that habit “centrism” doesn't make you an independent thinker; it makes you a loyal consumer oblivious to your servitude.
So next time someone tells you they're a centrist, ask them gently: What have you read or watched this week that challenged your usual sources? What's your definition of left‑leaning or progressive media? If the answer is a blank stare or a defensive shrug, you're not talking to a moderate. You're talking to someone who has outsourced their thinking to a commercial news bulletin and called it common sense.
The middle ground isn't wherever your remote control lands at 6 PM. Real centrism, if it exists at all, requires seeking out discomfort, not avoiding it. It requires knowing what both poles actually argue, not just the version fed to you by a single corporate lens. Until then, “I'm a centrist” is just a polite way of saying: “I stopped listening, but I'd like the credit for still caring.”
The majority of self‑proclaimed “centrists” should stop mistaking familiarity for wisdom and accept the “common sense” label for what it is: a very convenient ignorance.
Matthew Peel is a physiotherapist with an interest in the importance of critical thinking, exposing media bias and promoting progressive policy.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License
Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.
