Challenges Faced by Parties in Setting Political Agendas - Report Example

Challenges Faced by Parties in Setting Political Agendas Introduction Technology has become a very important factor with regard to the political agenda in almost any political system. This is especially so where the political system is a democratic one. The media is the most important technology with regard to setting the political agenda. This is because the media reaches a lot of people, most of whom (the masses) the only source of information is the media. The print media was the first mass media to have this role, but by the mid of the 20th century, this changed and radio and television became the new mass media which affected the way politicians are made. The media Of course, the media offers numerous challenges to political parties with regard to setting their agenda. The main issue is the fact that that the media and political parties may not always have the same attitude and impression on the same issues. The political parties may be trying to look at an issue and try to develop a solution for it, blue the media focus on other issues will move public interests towards these other issues. The political parties can only make agenda which are in line with the public, not only for the purposes of campaigns and elections, but also for the purposes of fulfilling their democratic responsibilities of carrying out the mandate given to them by the public, according to the will of the public. The media can also be used by political parties to influence the attitude of the media. For instance, according to Miroff (205)1, over 80% of Americans alleged that there existed weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. This was inspired by the massive coverage of this topic by the mainstream media. Incompetent journalists driving the agenda The media affects the political agenda, yet the journalists are not educated on political science and policy making. The mass media cannot tell between the issues which are more important and those that are less important. Of course, even the issues the media may choose to focus on are also important, but it is always important to have a hierarchical order of importance. The media always set the tempo and the political parties almost always have to follow and in this case, the political parties may not have the freedom to set their political agenda based in what they think is important. Journalists can feed the public with information that is not complete or accurate and this sets the attitude of the public about certain issues in different directions. Needless to mention, the attitude of the public and their belief affects the way political parties make their decisions and how they set their agenda. By having the mass media being the main source of information, it becomes challenging for political parties because they have to contend with disagreeing public whose knowledge about certain issues is incomplete. Of course, sometimes the media will focus on an issue based on a selfish interest (Koch-Baumgarten & Voltmer 164)2. The media, especially in the democratic countries is made of private for-profit organizations and to them; they sell the information to the masses. The media wants to get the most attention from their audience and, regardless of how ethical media houses are, sometimes the choice of focusing on a certain issue is based on some selfish interests rather than what is important. This gap between the aspirations of the media and the political parties always pose a big problem to political parties. Of course, the political parties can work with the media in order to produce the best results; this however in most cases leads to some ethical situations because the media is supposed to be free of political influence. According to Schechter (227)3, if the media can set the agenda, they can also set a counter agenda and this means that they can create a rejection of any political agenda created by politicians. The media has a very powerful effect with the people. They inform the people, what they say is gospel truth. In this regard, political parties and governments have to deal with this kind of a situation. This is especially in cases where the media focuses on a propaganda issue and fails to focus on the issues that matter and hat can be of help to the people. A good example of this is the issue of the Obama healthcare in USA. General distrust between the media and the government (political parties) One of the main issues that the political parties will always face with regard to agenda setting is the distrust they get from most private media houses. Most media houses have a general attitude that politicians and the political parties they represent are always up to no good. This distrust leads to the media always seeking for ways to disprove and discredit the agendas brought up by the political parties. This in itself is a very huge setback for agenda setting for political parties. The same distrust exists between the masses and the government and therefore the masses are more likely to side with the media. This presents an even bigger problem for the political parties. The fact that the media has instance access to information also mean that they influence policy making because most policy makers have to depend on the media for such information, such as information regarding terrorism (OHeffernan 38). Opposition from opposing parties When agenda setting becomes competition between parties, interest of the masses is thrown out of the window (Levinson, Woodruff & Parker 264)4. There are some factors which make agenda setting such a contended issue between, or among policies parties within one political system. That is, each political party wants to have a unique, but superior agenda that will sell them to the public. This has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantage being that the political parties are likely to ignore some important issues, just to discredit the other parties (Pakulski & Krsnyi 97). When the other party is doing this kind of maneuvering in order to discredit its opponents, issues come out. At this juncture, the media also play a very important role. This is because the opposing parties can and do use the mass media to attach each other’s policies and agenda. With these wars on the mass media platform, the political party is likely to face much more challenges in setting its agenda and policies. Internal wrangles While the party is facing competition from outside the firm and criticism from the media, internal competition from the members is also another issue. Selfish interests are another issue that affects political parties with regard to agenda setting. Every political party is made of individual politicians most of who are ambitious and are looking to advance their careers. This poses a big problem to the party because these internal competition means that the party will not be able to have the desired unity to make its political agenda. Internal competition especially when not well handles can give both the media and the rival political parties a chance to attach the party. Political agenda setting is a process that is based on political unity within the firm. With regard to political agenda, there is always no one agenda that is absolutely the best. For any political party get the media on its side as well as the public about that their agenda is the best, the party would need everyone in the party to have high levels of unity. Versatility of political agenda One more challenge that political parties face is the fact that political agenda always seem to be geared towards solving issues which don’t have a definite problem. This leads to two major issues which must be considered in order for the party to have a firm ground with its agenda setting. One factor is the issue of opposition and rivalry from the other parties. Because there are no definite solutions to issues, the rival political parties are able to easily discredit the party’s and come up with their solutions5. This is a big problem because it means that a political party will not be able to create an agenda that cannot be criticized or discredit. In fact, with regard to agenda setting, the number of possible agendas to solve a certain issue is as many as there are thinkers. Every individual can come up with a different solution to problems and these problems can always be argued to be the best, or worst, depending on who is considering it. Not agenda is perfect Police parties also have to face an issue of the fact that they can never hope to create an agenda that is fool proof and perfect. The fact that their agenda will have some weaknesses means that their agenda can be attacked and discredited by opponents and the media. This means that the political party will have a hard time being able to convince the people that their agenda is good and will solve the issue it is directed towards solving. The imperfection of agendas also means that there is likely to be some disagreement within the party as different members may feel that there are better solutions for problems. Budget constraints Budget constraints definitely affect the way a political party will fair in their political agenda setting. Needless to mention, political parties are not profitable businesses in that they don’t generate any income from their endeavors. In most cases, these parties have to depend on donors and supporters with regard to getting funding. Running a political party is very expensive and in most cases, these political parties depend on huge donations from rich people and the corporate world. While in many countries there are some regulations and standards to make sure that these donors don’t have vested interests in the party and that the public interest is considered, the truth is that these donations affect the way the parties will form their political agenda. Parties have to create political agenda that is in line with the expectations of the donors (OHeffernan 38). This is risky in that these donors are just a few people or organizations and basing the political agenda on their needs and interests is unfair and undemocratic because their interests are not necessarily the interests of the masses. With regard to this issue, it has been argued that in most countries, the government is run not by politicians but by corporations who fund these politicians and their political parties. In cases where this is true, and these cases are many, the democracy of that country is undermined because the political parties and politicians may not able to make independent decisions which will lead to better solutions for the problems being faced by the masses. Different professions, difference career Although politics have become a career in the modern world, most politicians are not necessarily trained in political science. Anyone can be a politician and one does not been to be qualified in this area. This means that parties may end up with members who are not competent in the ways of agenda setting and this is a big challenge. In fact, many governments are trying to reconsider their political systems to see if some functions of the political parties and politicians can be replaced by technicians who understand these issues. When political parties get into power, most of the administration responsibilities land on the hands of politicians, yet these politicians may not be competent in the areas where they are assigned. In this regard, it is likely to find that the person running the education affairs of a state is not educated on that area. This creates some problems in a number of ways. First, these individuals are not likely to be able to identify the issues in their domain. In this regard, they are not necessarily able to develop solution for public issues which lie within their domain and this means that the political party will not be able to develop better political agenda. Works Cited Koch-Baumgarten, Sigrid & Voltmer, Katrin. Public Policy and the Mass Media: The Interplay of Mass Communication and Political Decision Making. London, UK: Routledge, 2010. Print. pp. 164. Levinson, Sanford., Woodruff, Paul ., & Parker, Joel. Loyalty: NOMOS LIV. New York City, NY: NYU Press, 2013. Print. Pp 264. Miroff, Bruce. The Democratic Debate: American Politics in an Age of Change. London, UK: Cengage Learning, 2014. Print. pp. 205. OHeffernan, Patrick. Mass Media and American Foreign Policy: Insider Perspectives on Global Journalism and the Foreign Policy Process. London, UK: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1991. Print. PP. 38. Pakulski, Jan & Krsnyi, Andrs. Toward Leader Democracy. New York, NY: Anthem Press, 2013. Print. pp. 97. Schechter, Danny. Media Wars: News at a Time of Terror. London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Print. Pp. 227. Read More