Obsessed with the trivial Could it be that Prime Minister Julia Gillard ''is not getting through to the electorate'' because the press is obsessed with the trivial, instead of promoting a substantive debate on the policies of both parties? Ministers appear on radio and television programs and the questioning revolves around leadership challenges instead of policies, and the press chases Kevin Rudd around with riveting footage of him trying to roll up a sleeping bag and uttering inanities in shopping centres, despite the fact that he does not have the numbers to challenge for the role of PM. Prime minister Julia Gillard visits the Adelaide Farmers Market. Credit:David Mariuz Could it be rather that we are being badly let down by an opposition that can offer only unquestioned three-word slogans, with a leader who refuses to appear on TV or radio programs that might require explanations about those policies, and media that focus on trivia and opinion rather than factual reporting? It seems the editor puts the blame solely on the Prime Minister's ''failure to enunciate a narrative or a strategic vision for the nation's future''. We deserve better. Wendy Madex, Seymour

Constant search for instant solutions The suggestion that by stepping aside Julia Gillard would allow political debate to become policy based is itself another example of the search for instant solutions to complex issues that bedevil Australian political debate. No matter who is leader of the Labor Party or the Liberal Party, the focus will continue to be on personalities, not policy. If the Labor Party were to replace Gillard with Rudd, does The Age really think the Liberal Party would switch to a debate on policy and that Labor would ignore Tony Abbott? And even more pie in the sky is the idea that the media might suddenly decide to report policy rather than personalities. Illustration: Ron Tandberg. Rod Scott, Launceston, Tasmania



And your responsibility? What responsibility does The Age (and the media generally) take for the ''vacuum in policy debate'' used to justify calling for the Prime Minister to stand down? What responsibility does it take for the decision to progressively replace professional analytical journalism with pages of predictable and unashamedly partisan opinion from the likes of Amanda Vanstone and Nicolle Flint? What responsibility do journalists themselves take for not pursuing questions that would stimulate policy-driven debate? Even simple ones like asking Mr Abbott to tell when and by how much the price of electricity would go down after the carbon tax is abolished. He was able to predict its instant impact, so its abolition should be no more difficult. Yes the immediacy of the ''new'' media presents challenges but newspaper journalists still have the most important advantage of all - time to think.

Vic Rowlands, Leongatha Yes, please stand aside I would like to ask The Age's editorial team to stand aside so that vigorous, policy-driven democratic debate and journalism can flourish once again. Frank Di Sario, Viewbank Coverage poles apart

The Age has focused on polls, polls, polls, and an obsession with the ALP leadership. Compare coverage of Denis Napthine knocking off Ted Baillieu with the coverage of Gillard toppling Rudd. A fortnight of ''it had to happen'' versus a three-year campaign of negativity, culminating in Saturday's headline. As a result, Australia is headed for an Abbott-led government with its pro-wealthy (opposition to the mining tax) and anti-equity and anti-fairness (opposition to the Gonski reforms) approach, despite many voters being ignorant of what the Coalition really stands for. Liz Schroeder, Thornbury Leading language If The Age is serious about ''policy-driven democratic debate'' why does it headline an article about an inquiry into discrimination in the workplace with leading language ''Gillard renews gender push'' (22/6).

John Donnelly, Yackandandah Voting on gender lines How appropriate that the call for Gillard to stand aside should be flanked by the report headed ''Gillard renews gender push''. It underlines the nation's wholesale disappointment with the use of the gender card that would have the nation vote on sexual lines. The Prime Minister's latest pitch for the female vote smacks of hypocrisy given its flagrant disregard of the Human Rights Commission's heavy criticism of its refugee detention policies. Perhaps the commission should also have had its opinion sought on the indiscriminate dumping of 80,000 single mothers onto the unemployment benefit. A further embarrassment has been the US-inspired Women for Gillard creation, headed by Bill Shorten's wife, a daughter of the Governor-General.

Sadly, many would echo the sentiments of The Saturday Age for Ms Gillard to step aside, but few observers see her focusing on anything other than her own survival as leader, regardless of the consequences for her, the ALP or the nation at large … let alone those women who might still entertain hopes of succeeding her. Brian Haill, Frankston Country not ready Julia, you gave your all - and a whole lot more - in your three years as PM. You introduced reforming legislation that the Coalition under Australia's second-longest serving PM and longest-serving treasurer failed to do. You, Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan prevented Australia from slipping into decline during the global financial crisis. But in an Australia that's become increasingly narcissistic, miserly, media one-eyed, pessimistic and constantly seeking instant gratification, I agree with the editorial - it's time for change.

Australia has reverted to a form of conservatism and negativity that discounts too easily what a great job you've done in holding together a minority government, legislating important changes, being a brilliant-performing parliamentarian and a dignified stateswoman, and toughing it out. You took over at a time when Labor faced a wipe-out under Rudd. But please step aside with dignity now. The numbers are not in your favour. Don't allow the prime ministership to be handed to Abbott without a fight. He's not what many Liberal voters want anyway. There are Liberal voters who will swing. And there are Labor voters who will stay. But not - it seems - while you still lead. Susan Watson, Paynesville Party political broadcast The Age crossed the line from being a newspaper to being a party political broadcast. Amazingly, the editorial praised the Gillard government while demanding the Prime Minister resign ''for the good of the country''.

So what has the PM done to deserve this? Acted corruptly? No. Been incompetent? Not according to your editorial. No, she should resign because she is unpopular. And why is that, exactly? It wouldn't have anything to do with three years of unremittingly negative newspaper coverage would it? The editor then claimed that the problem was that the leadership race was preventing the media from covering the issues. Surely the editor decides what goes in your paper, not Gillard. Newspapers do not get to decide who is the PM. Greg Young, Murrumbeena Record informal vote While your editorial fairly laments the lack of policy debate, the electorate's choices are between a rock and a hard place regardless. Labor under Gillard is flawed by her lack of integrity. Labor under Rudd is flawed by his record of undermining. The Liberals under Abbott are flawed by his unrelenting negativity and absence of policy. The Greens are flawed by their dogma.

The one certainty is that there will be a massive protest vote at the election. Voters will declare a pox on all their houses. While the informal vote in the lower house at the last election was 5.5 per cent, the highest in 29 years, the informal vote is set to smash all records at this election. Rex Brown, Wye River It is our choice The call for Gillard to step down is anti-democratic. The Age, in its hand-wringing exercise of fear at a Coalition victory, thinks that yet another undemocratic removal of a PM is a solution. As in 2010, a palace coup in 2013 removes (yet again) our democratic right to vote out a bad PM and bad government. So please, let the government run its course, let us vote on the choice before us and let democracy have its day in the sunshine. Neil Stott, Shepparton

Union stooges v business stooges On one side we have a party of union officials interested only in feathering their own nests and led by Ms Gillard. Their only likely alternative leader is a demonstrated failure. On the other side we have a party of big business stooges. Where is the vigorous, policy-driven democratic debate going to come from if Gillard does stand aside? Roger Riordan, Hampton I won't risk all this

I'm amazed at the hysteria of the media. I couldn't care less who leads Labor. What I'm interested in is whether the economy is good. Yes, inflation, unemployment and interest rates are all low. Is the carbon price a good thing? Yes. Do we want a good national broadband network or a second-rate one where you pay up to $5000 to get connected? Is the disability insurance scheme good? Yes. Will Gonski help educate our children to give them a better chance in life? Yes. Will we risk all this? I certainly won't. Bruce Cooke, Shepparton A new weekly column? Two weeks ago I wrote a letter suggesting how the paper could create debate. In essence, from now until September have a column from a minister on ''ideas and policies that matter'' within that portfolio, and alongside, with equal space (even if it is blank) the policy from the LNP opposition. You never know, the Coalition might provide some policies for your readers to digest, which is surely the point Daniel Flitton was trying to make (''Engage the nation'', Insight, 22/6).

Keith Murray, Mount Waverley And another thing... Politics A new baby boom? Let's hope they're all male. Females are not welcome or respected in most countries. And tell Australian girl babies not to go into the military or politics. Myra Fisher, Brighton East

I realise the media has to do what it has to do to sell its product. But if you really want debate about policy, start reporting it, ask the hard questions and forget about the personalities. John Dixon, Kilmore It is the Prime Minister's job to introduce policy and get it through Parliament. It is a newspaper's job to lead the debate. Whose job are we talking about? Colin Martin, Beaumaris The only thing more absurd than Quentin Bryce swearing in Kevin Rudd as PM would be swearing in her son-in law as PM.

Fabio Scalia, Windsor Don't be fooled, people. There is no crisis. Gillard and Labor are tanking under orders from Washington. Tim Hartnett, Mont Albert North The Age's editorial writers should have called on Kevin Rudd to finally put up or shut up, rather than calling on Julia Gillard to resign. Malcolm McDonald, Burwood

Reward a saboteur like Rudd? A man driven by his ego: not policies, not the party, not the people. Great idea. Bridget Carbines, Fitzroy North Other matters The story about the Commonwealth Bank's financial planners belongs in Naked City, rather than BusinessDay (''Boiler Room'', 22/6). Lawrie Bradly, Surrey Hills

Tony Abbott may imagine our ''north as the next frontier'', but has he considered the ''droughts and flooding rains''? Ewa Haire, Moonee Ponds Click here to submit a letter to the editor.