Australia's major media outlets have largely relied on personal anecdotes from young investors to criticise the government’s modest tax reforms, including tweaks to negative gearing, capital gains tax, and measures to curb trust exploitation.

The coverage reflects a tendency to favour stories that appeal to older readers, particularly those over 65, who represent a significant portion of the media's audience.

While these tax reforms are designed to modernise the system and reduce long-standing imbalances that favour older, wealthier investors, the media’s portrayal focuses heavily on complaints from younger investors, often exaggerating the impact.This approach, Bernard Keane argues, prioritises narrative over evidence, presenting individual grievances as if they were systemic issues.

The article critiques the way the mainstream press selectively amplifies certain voices to generate controversy, while offering little data-driven analysis of the reforms’ broader economic or social effects.

The piece highlights the tension between intergenerational equity and media coverage, suggesting that the reporting often perpetuates boomer privilege by framing minor policy adjustments as major hardships for younger investors.