Political Journalism and its Effect on Public Interest - Article Example

Your name: Course name: Professors’ name: Date Abstract Politics plays a major role in the society. This paper examines the relationship between politics, media, audiences and public sphere. It will explore how different modern Australian political media programs are viewed, comprehended, and used by the audiences. The paper will argue the general notion that political journalists have failed to reflect reality of the audience and that media does not represent the interest of the general public. Political journalists should employ the media to bring to the people valuable and legitimate news to the public. Most people argue that the role or responsibility of the political journalist is less fundamental to the public sphere of the democratic process. They are judged with regards to their honesty and accuracy on the news they deliver and whether the debate they bring fourth are in line with the nation’s interest. Many commentators and political journalists play a vital role in mediating and stimulating debate, and can, therefore, contribute positively in advancement of the nation’s democratic process. Journalists are sometimes presented as strained between one quest for the audience and weight of the public opinion and, on the other hand, they are portrayed as villains of the contemporary political communications. Thus, they can weaken the public interest in the politics and weaken the democratic ideals. Ultimately, this paper will discuss if political journalism in Australia represents the public interest. Introduction Political journalism has played and will continue playing a vital role in the relationship between politics, audience and the public interest. There are a number of assessments of the role of the media in the society. Most people recognize the importance of the journalists in shaping the way people think. They also influence the society and individuals on personal choices. It is agreed that journalists and the media play an important role in the society. The obvious ones are: gathering and dissemination of information; education; transmission of cultural and social values; and entertainment (McNair 1999, p.56). Political journalism is mostly involved gathering and dissemination information mostly related to the politics of the day from the government, organizations and various players in the nation’s politics. These roles involve a number of characteristics, for instance, information function of the journalists and the media include generation of social and political ideas that shapes the priorities and policy agendas. In disseminating this information, they can be responsible for mobilization and inspiration of social and political groups. Their role involves accountability as they monitor and sometimes criticize bureaucracies, governments and social institutions. The discussion emphasizes the role of political journalism in providing the society with news based upon views that can be expressed, analyzed and decisions made with regards to social and political issues. The arguments of this paper present the perspective that the role of political journalism in the society is not only to inform the public, but also to illuminate and clarify on the information they provide. In this way, the political journalists will act in the best public interest. Effect of media politics to the public Media politics entails a system of politics where individual politicians strive to gain office and conduct politics in the office, via effective communication through mass media to reach the public. In so doing, they involve the journalist who also are actively engaged with them while collecting information. The principal actors of media politics are the politicians, journalists and the public. For the politicians, their objective is to employ mass communication to establish and mobilize public support in order to win the elections and have their programs enacted once they are in office. For the journalists, their objective is to produce massive stories that attract enormous audience. For the citizens, their objective is to monitor the politics and ensure the politicians become accountable on the basis of less effort. These objectives of the different players constantly cause tension as they interact together. Politicians want the journalists to be a neutral conveyor of their press releases and statements. However, the journalists would prefer to make a journalistic contribution which is distinctive to the news (McNair 1999, p.80). They do so by means of investigations, scoops, and news analyses. These means are detested by the politicians. Journalists want the big story and care less about what the politicians wants. However, if journalists were to give the public only the news that the politicians want, then journalism would be less satisfying and lucrative than it is presently. On the other hand, the public wants to monitor the politics and with minimal effort hold the politicians accountable of their action. They want to monitor the way the politicians handle funds and if they have programs that can be beneficial to the society. They want to monitor the politicians and the government officials on how they go about with their work and analyze whether they follow the constitution. The public tends to get the political information it wants since there is a surfeit of journalists and politicians vying for the public attention in a competitive market (Matthews & Brown 2012, p.815). The inherent behavior of a politician’s need to control the content of news and combination of the needs of journalists to make independent contribution to political news creates far-reaching distortions and tensions. The coverage that the politicians seek is fairly obvious. They want to create favorable news that pleases the public. They do so by attempting to take actions and develop campaign agenda that are very compelling, and the journalists will feel obliged to report them to the public as news. On the other hand, they avoid situations where it is difficult to regulate what gets reported to the public. For example, they would attempt to avoid news conferences. They want to be associated with competence, popular policies, honesty and likability (Lester & Hutchins 2012, p.659). When journalists fail to report on the other side of politicians, the public fails to get all the information. Sometimes the political journalists are not competent on their research and end up reporting news that is detrimental to the society. They may report rumors that cannot be proved. This causes tension especially to the public who have to deal with the news as they interact and carry on with their daily schedules. The public goals The public wants hold the politicians accountable and elect leaders who will be in line with what they want. Citizens are busy with their daily routines, and they are sensible to recognize and appreciate that, their chances to impact on politics are minuscule. Therefore, most people will minimize their involvement in the electoral process. They hope for a positive result yet they fail to put significant effort on the process. They do not have the time to study effectively the candidates to participate in the election or governmental appointment (Renner & Lynch 2012, p.141). Thus, most people will tend to ignore politics and would prefer to use their time with their families or perhaps watching other programs on the TV. There are varieties of other news apart from political news. These include consumer news, entertainment news, medical news, and sports news among others. Political news given by the political journalists is fundamentally about leadership selection and policy making either by the government, politicians and organizations (Coleman 2011, p.42). So what do the rationally ignorant citizens require from the political news and information they consume? Rational citizens want to monitor the political events and keep tabs on benefits checks and tax bills. However, they don’t want to dedicate much of their time on it. Therefore, rational voters or citizens do not require a lot of details. They do not want massive information and analysis, nor do they require encyclopedic news reports on the public affairs. They do not want to waste much of their time on the politics. However, the political journalists sometimes have news reports that a detailed with full context about all the aspects of the public affairs. Sometimes they do not break down the news to the public. Therefore, they end up clogging the public a lot of news while the rational citizen would have settled for what is only relevant (Norris 2001, p.243). The rational voter or citizen would only focus on the news that requires attention. As a political journalist would assume, most people don’t offer careful considerations on political news as their power to affect such events is small. However, despite this, politics have an enormous effect on the general public. Depending on the person who wins the election, taxes may be raised or cut, Medicare benefits and policies may be slashed or expanded, country can go to war, etc. on this light, the politics of the day affect the general public more than the effect of the public to the politics. Role of political journalism Today, despite journalism propensity for sensationalism, superficiality and sleaze, the notion of the political journalists as guardian of public interest, as a watchdog, and as a channel between the governed and the governors remained deeply ingrained. However, the reality is that journalism and restored democracy they enjoy, do not measure to the ideal. Often they are hobbled by monopolistic ownership, stringent laws and sometimes, threat of force (Tingle 2011, p.59). The state regulations are not strictly the only constrictions to the delivery of political news. Serious reporting is sometimes difficult to maintain in the competitive media markets as they put premium on the sensational news. In addition, journalists are sometimes employed as proxies in the ‘fight’ between political rival groups. In this case, they sow divisiveness instead of consensus, suspicion instead of social trust, and hate speech rather than of sober debate. Therefore, in this light, they contribute directly to democratic decay and political cynicism. On the other hand, the political journalism has been able to stress their roles in deepening democracy. The investigative reporting by the political journalists has in some cases lead to the ouster of government officials and corrupt governments. This has made their role as been credible and effective government watchdog and elevated its credibility in the public. Their investigative reporting has led to the growth of media culture that enhances disclosure and openness that has elevated the democracy in Australia (Megalogenis 2010, p.17). The elected government officials and other officials in the public sector are now more accountable as the journalists are always on their neck. The education and training of political journalists, the manuals that aid the reporters with appropriate research tools, and the awards given for investigative reporting has assisted in creating independent investigative journalists that further aid in the democracy. Democracy always requires active participation of all the citizens. The media via the journalists should ideally keep the citizens engaged in the governance business by educating, informing and mobilizing the public. In Australia, effective journalism has been employed as the an effective instrument for promoting democracy in the grassroots by airing the local political issues, offering alternative source of public information on official channels, and addressing linguistic and ethnic diversity (Metcalfe & Gascoigne 2005, p.414). Political journalism has played an important role due to its interactivity and the freedom from the state control. Effective political reporting has helped build social consensus and peace, without which the democracy is threatened. They can offer warring mechanisms used for mediation, voice and representation that can settle differences among the governed and the governors peacefully. Unfortunately, some political journalists have failed the nation by taking sides. Thus, reinforcing prejudices and muddling the official facts and peddling only half-truths (Turner 2009, p.421). Some NGOs advocate “Peaceful Political Journalism” which seeks to promote major reconciliation via a careful reportage that is responsible in giving voice to all the sides in the conflict. They, therefore, aim at providing and representing the divergent views. Thus, they have led to propagating and promoting peace journalism. Political journalism can play a more positive function in a democracy. However, there must be an enabling environment that not only allows them to do so, but also monitor and regulate their reportage to reduce malpractices. The public sometimes trusts the media so much that they would believe most of the news that get reported. This can be detrimental to the society especially if the news affects them directly. There have been reported cases of hate speech that has been propagated by the political journalists. If the public receives such news, some of them are ignorant, and they would further propagate the news to their friend and family. If not controlled, some of this news may affect the society negatively and further assist in political hatred and divide. In this light, journalist should be strict and responsible with what they air to the media. Before any investigative news is disseminated to the public, it should be scrutinized and verified by relevant sources to ensure it is correct and would not affect negatively the public (Kuhn & Neveu 2013, p.69). This is why as much as the political journalists would want to be independent; they require working directly with other players to ensure they air the correct news that is free from bias. To ensure the public interest is protected, the journalist require requisite skills necessary for in-depth reporting that the nation requires. There should also be strict mechanism structured to ensure they are held accountable to the entire public. Such mechanisms would ensure professional and ethnic standards are upheld at all times. Political journalism independence is guaranteed if the media organizations are viable financially, free from intervention and bias by the state and the media owners, and operate efficiently in a competitive market. The media should also be accessible to a wider segment in the society as possible. Australia is a culturally and linguistically diversified state. It has members of the public from different regions of the globe. Therefore, efforts should be thrust towards protection of the press rights, building media capacity, enhancing accountability and democratizing the media access (Flew 2009, pp.93-94). Political journalism shapes the opinion of the public. However, they are often manipulated by varying interest groups in the society. In such cases, the public interest is not represented by their reporting. The journalist with help of their media companies can promote democracy and other public interests by educating the citizens especially on voting, promoting constructive tolerance among various groups in the society, protecting the human rights, and making sure the government is accountable and transparent. However, the same journalists and the media can sow division, fear and violence. Instead of advocating democracy and interest of the public they can be biased and further contribute to democratic decay especially in new and developing democracies. The race among the media houses for the market share and audience can degrade the quality of the investigative reporting. Moreover, unethical journalistic processes without professionalism that is normally associated with the influence from the media houses and the state contribute to the inability of the political journalists to fulfill their democratic role. Contemporary democrats are inclined to praise of the press. Despite the contemporary political journalism role in the propensity of superficiality, they are seen by many as effective democratic tools. Thus, contemporary democratic theories escalate the role of political journalism and media in ensuring governments, and political individuals are held accountable of their actions. It is argued that governments cannot be held accountable of their actions if the public is ill informed of their actions in their institutions. The watchdog function of the journalists is the guardian of public interest by warning the citizens against the politicians and government officials doing harm to them by either embezzling state funds or employing poor institutional and financial strategies. Effective and fearless watchdog is critical in both new and old democracies where institutions can be toppled by political pressure. Where the institutions are powerless against the mighty politicians or are corrupt themselves, the media through political journalists are often left as the only institution to check against abuse of power. This requires they play a very heroic role in exposing legislators, magistrates and government officials despite the risks involved. When they appropriately do this, the public interest is protected. Some political journalists exhibit these characters and effectively aid in the role of protecting the public interest. Corrupt politicians and government officials have often been exposed by heroic journalist who risks in order to expose them. Consequently, protecting the interest of the public. Political journalists also play a vital role as a link between the governors and the public as they offer a platform for public debate that effectively lead to more superior decision and policy making. The citizens are drawn to the public sphere where they can monitor and even challenge the decisions and policy made by the governors of the nation. They provide a platform where the public can interact with the government officials and scrutinize them (Metcalfe & Gascoigne 2005, p.413). These goals a long way in promoting a culture where the community can activate inquiry on some of the public issues. The media also assist build a tradition and civic culture of debate and discussion which is not possible in an authoritarian rule. These structures play a very instrumental role in preventing financial irresponsibility, corruption and underhanded dealings in the public offices. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) advocates addressing these issues to aid in the development of the nation. They advocate the media via the political journalists to provide information to the public so that the citizens can participate fully and meaningfully in the social and political life. This ensures most citizens can assert their rights since they are informed and know what is happening in the nation’s politics. If the citizens are ill-informed of the happenings of the nation, they cannot make the correct decisions especially in a national election. Conclusion From the discussion above, political journalism seems to represent the public interest. However, it is not free from bias from both the media owners and the state. Constructive political journalism in Australia has led to popular empowerment, national reconciliation and poverty reduction in some cases. As discussed, effective political reporting has helped build social consensus and peace, without which the democracy is threatened. They offer warring mechanisms used for mediation, voice and representation that can settle differences among the governed and the governors peacefully. However, unethical journalistic processes without professionalism that is normally associated with the influence from the media houses and the state contribute to the inability of the political journalists to fulfill their democratic role. References Coleman, S 2011, Representation and Mediated Politics: Representing Representation in an Age of Irony, in Kees Brants and Katrin Volmer (Eds) Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy, Pp.39-56. Flew, T 2009, Democracy, participation and convergent media: Case studies in contemporary online news journalism in Australia, Communication, Politics & Culture, 42(2), pp. 87-109. Kuhn, R., & Neveu, E 2013, Political journalism: New challenges, new practices, Routledge, London. Lester, L & Hutchins, B 2012, Soft journalism, politics and environmental risk: An Australian story, Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism. 13 (5), pp. 654-667. Matthews, J & Brown, A 2012, Negatively shaping the asylum agenda? The representational strategy and impact of a tabloid news campaign. Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism August 2012, 13 (6): pp. 802-817. McNair, B 1999, The Media as Political Actors: An Introduction to Political Communication, 2nd Ed, Routledge, London, pp.73-90. McNair, B 1999, The political media: An Introduction to Political Communication 2nd Ed, Routledge, London, pp.47-72. Megalogenis, G 2010, “We Need to talk about Kevin” and “Vox Populi” in Quarterly Essay No. 40, Trivial Pursuit: Leadership and the End of the Reform Era”, Black Ink, Melbourne, pp 11-30. Metcalfe, J., & Gascoigne, T 2005, Science journalism in Australia, Public Understanding of Science, 4(4), pp.411-428. Norris, P 2001, Cares Less? Cynical Media, Cynical Public? A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Post-industrial Societies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 233-254. Renner, T & Lynch, G 2012, A Little Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing: What we know about the role of the media in state politics, Rowman & Littlefied Publishers Inc., New York, pp137-155. Tingle, L 2011, “They’re an Angry Mob” Quarterly Essay No 46. Great Expectations: Government, Entitlement and an Angry Nation, Black Ink, Melbourne, pp 50-64. Turner, G 2009, Politics, radio and journalism in Australia The influence of 'talkback'. Journalism, 10(4), pp. 411-430. Read More

Effect of media politics to the public Media politics entails a system of politics where individual politicians strive to gain office and conduct politics in the office, via effective communication through mass media to reach the public. In so doing, they involve the journalist who also are actively engaged with them while collecting information. The principal actors of media politics are the politicians, journalists and the public. For the politicians, their objective is to employ mass communication to establish and mobilize public support in order to win the elections and have their programs enacted once they are in office.

For the journalists, their objective is to produce massive stories that attract enormous audience. For the citizens, their objective is to monitor the politics and ensure the politicians become accountable on the basis of less effort. These objectives of the different players constantly cause tension as they interact together. Politicians want the journalists to be a neutral conveyor of their press releases and statements. However, the journalists would prefer to make a journalistic contribution which is distinctive to the news (McNair 1999, p.80). They do so by means of investigations, scoops, and news analyses.

These means are detested by the politicians. Journalists want the big story and care less about what the politicians wants. However, if journalists were to give the public only the news that the politicians want, then journalism would be less satisfying and lucrative than it is presently. On the other hand, the public wants to monitor the politics and with minimal effort hold the politicians accountable of their action. They want to monitor the way the politicians handle funds and if they have programs that can be beneficial to the society.

They want to monitor the politicians and the government officials on how they go about with their work and analyze whether they follow the constitution. The public tends to get the political information it wants since there is a surfeit of journalists and politicians vying for the public attention in a competitive market (Matthews & Brown 2012, p.815). The inherent behavior of a politician’s need to control the content of news and combination of the needs of journalists to make independent contribution to political news creates far-reaching distortions and tensions.

The coverage that the politicians seek is fairly obvious. They want to create favorable news that pleases the public. They do so by attempting to take actions and develop campaign agenda that are very compelling, and the journalists will feel obliged to report them to the public as news. On the other hand, they avoid situations where it is difficult to regulate what gets reported to the public. For example, they would attempt to avoid news conferences. They want to be associated with competence, popular policies, honesty and likability (Lester & Hutchins 2012, p.659). When journalists fail to report on the other side of politicians, the public fails to get all the information.

Sometimes the political journalists are not competent on their research and end up reporting news that is detrimental to the society. They may report rumors that cannot be proved. This causes tension especially to the public who have to deal with the news as they interact and carry on with their daily schedules. The public goals The public wants hold the politicians accountable and elect leaders who will be in line with what they want. Citizens are busy with their daily routines, and they are sensible to recognize and appreciate that, their chances to impact on politics are minuscule.

Therefore, most people will minimize their involvement in the electoral process. They hope for a positive result yet they fail to put significant effort on the process. They do not have the time to study effectively the candidates to participate in the election or governmental appointment (Renner & Lynch 2012, p.141). Thus, most people will tend to ignore politics and would prefer to use their time with their families or perhaps watching other programs on the TV.

Read More