|You are in: Talking Point|
Tuesday, 4 September, 2001, 11:01 GMT 12:01 UK
Should party political broadcasts be scrapped?
Party political broadcasts could be scrapped in favour of short advertisements in a bid to tackle voter apathy.
The broadcasts were partly blamed for exacerbating chronic voter apathy at the last general election.
The proposal to replace the broadcasts with short American-style election adverts has been greeted with scepticism by some MPs. Roger Gale, Conservative MP for North Thanet, said the idea represented the triumph of "spin and presentation over political substance".
In America, short election adverts are often criticised for adopting shock tactics and over-simplifying issues in an effort to catch the attention of voters with short attention spans.
Should political broadcasts be abolished? Would short US-style adverts encourage more people to vote?
This Talking Point has now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
David Stanley, UK
Simple question: why do politicians, if they claim to tell the truth - even as they see it - need the alchemists of the communication age to turn their base-metal policies, opinions and outpourings into the gold of some higher truth? Simple syllogism: advertising experts are there to bend the facts to fit something; politicians use advertising experts; therefore politicians seek to bend the facts.
Party political broadcasts are just an excuse for local
candidates to avoid canvassing.
R. Campbell, South Africa
Why not allow each party one half-hour of prime time - eg 8pm on a Wednesday - over all 5 terrestrial networks at the same time? Possibly some of the most effective broadcasts in recent years were Ross Perot's "infomercials" in the 1992 US Presidential election, and something like that - for the novelty value, at least - might actually get people watching. There would also be time to discuss and explain policies clearly - something you don't get in a 5 minute broadcast and certainly not in a 30 second commercial.
In 1997 I was 17, and very frustrated that, although I was more interested than most of my classmates, I couldn't vote while they could, because I was too young. I decided to get more knowledgeable by listening to Party Political Broadcasts on the radio. Well, that was a clever idea - I don't think. They were funny, certainly. They were beautifully witty - criticisms of their opponents! This told me nothing about how I should cast my vote - it was just as well I didn't have one, since I was so disgusted I probably wouldn't have used it.
I've been involved for the last year or so in my Students' Union, where we have a strictly-adhered-to rule that no candidate may mention another candidate in a negative way during publicity. I appreciate that this wouldn't be easy to enforce - but just doing it somehow would make a world of difference to me.
Let's have Positive Publicity!
Vince Summers, Scotland
These broadcasts would be worthwhile if they actually informed the viewer of the policies and intentions of the party in question, instead of being nothing more than an attack on their respective opponents. I would like to know why I should vote for a particular candidate/ party as opposed to why I should not vote for another.
Political broadcasts get low ratings for the same reason other entertainment does - because they're not entertaining.
Ben Ives, London, UK
End all advertised party political material - let the politicians get out there and talk to people again. Adverts = opium for the masses, to coin a phrase. The more 'seductive' an advert, the more you should distrust the message.
If you think politics is boring, try getting involved with an election campaign or joining a party or issue group. Educate yourselves! Try learning about how economies work, how the legal system operates, about taxation and health provision etc. Don't forget that even if you don't watch PPBs or vote in elections, somebody else will and there will still be a government of whichever colour, whatever you do. So don't tell me that politics is boring - how can it be when it concerns the running of the country? It is much easier to mouth off about how boring politics is than it is to have the courage to get involved yourself.
Chris Hann, USA (Brit)
If you want to end any resemblance of democracy start selling advertising US style where the person with the most money is selected. Most Americans would rejoice if they had the UK's system, the apathy is there because the same old rubbish is peddled every election.
End party political broadcasts? The best thing to do would be to outlaw political parties. That way, we will vote for people who represent us rather than a ideology dreamed up by some long-dead philosopher whose closest experience with real life was buying a coffee somewhere near his university-paid house.
30 seconds is too short. Give the candidates three minutes. Monotonous grey background, no music and all they should be allowed to do is talk. One pie chart allowed. It may sound boring, but if there is one thing that bores people more it is spin and glitz.
Most definitely YES!
Instead, let's have more Tom and Jerry. It's far more entertaining and has a greater 'reality' content.
If the broadcasts created apathy it was because of the politics, not the broadcasts themselves.
I'm not sure whether they should be scrapped or not. I would have to see how they develop after a far more important and pressing change - political promotion is now the only form of advertising in the UK which is exempt from the requirement to be legal, decent, honest and truthful.
Philip S Hall, England, UK
Thirty seconds of film would be able to convey very powerful political ideas - but it still won't make the couch potatoes get off their backsides and vote!
As a TV student I understand how television needs to be punchy and to the point, in order to catch a viewer's eye in the crowded multi-channel arena. However, this leads to massive simplification of any subject. It destroys the need for viewers to think about what they are watching and encourages them to be lazy as the marketing men pander to their desire of easy, relaxed viewing.
If someone's attention span is so short that they can only be kept watching for a 30 second advert I'd have to ask if they're the sort of people upon whom the outcome of an election should rest.
Alex Chiang, Australia
A "turn off" for viewers? What, do people have to be entertained at everything nowadays? What selfishness! Can't people tend to more serious things for just 30 minutes?
"American style" election adverts cause a degeneration of the issues down to focus group tested soundbyte partisan sniping and sheer propaganda, they're all imagery and hype, no fact is presented at all. They're the worst part of our electoral system.
Honestly, I'd rather have the longer format broadcasts. Too bad people are just plain too lazy to bother to watch or get involved in the process.
I love my country, but our political system leaves much to be desired. And I would rather the apathetic and ill-informed not vote, anyway. At least with PPBs there's an opportunity to hear an in-depth explanation of a party's philosophy. No one is forced to watch.
New Zealand did away with these broadcasts years ago and the media don't even cover the main party conferences any more. Yet interest in politics is very high. Without legislation making voting compulsory there is an 85% minimum turnout (sometimes over 90%) in national elections.
Holding the vote on the weekend or allowing postal votes is far more important than having party ads or whatever.
It is not fair to compare a political broadcast with something like an advertisement of sorts. Politicians from all parties should be able to communicate to their people about their plans and actions.
Voter apathy in a single election cannot be attributed to the broadcast issue. It could be due to a number of other reasons. Democracy
cannot be and should not be globalised (read Americanised). UK and India have enough of wisdom of their own to run their system in their own way.
I strongly disagree about banning political party broadcasts. How else are we meant to find out what the parties offer?
Its not as if party leaders can tour around every single constituency. They could use their candidates but from what I have seen in my constituency West Ham (Tony Banks), candidates don't campaign that much!
Well, they do more to promote voter apathy that anything else.
Voter apathy exists because people have lost faith in politicians of all parties. They only want your vote at election time, and once they are in power they all completely ignore the wishes of the people who voted them in. Most people see Political parties as shallow, arrogant and totally deaf.
Party Political Broadcasts should be scrapped, but not in favour of anything else. Let the politicians earn our votes with their actions, rather than spin and TV campaigns.
I agree with Dean from Canada and Jeremy from the UK. Politics is not entertainment as people's lives and livelihoods are at stake. Politicians should earn their positions by their actions and not by the use of the media.
The idea of turning political broadcasts into advertisements is terrible. I believe that voting in an election is slightly more important than choosing a brand of toothpaste. Perhaps the rules for political broadcasts should be changed. The negative campaigning aspect of many of them has increased tenfold. Parties should be forced to talk about their own polices and achievements - not rubbish others'.
Democracy is not entertainment and entertainment is not democracy. The people of the USA have confused this issue and the whole world can see the results.
Richard Ormson, UK
Party political broadcasts have been blamed for the British voters' indifference in the last general elections. The plan to replace them with short U.S. style poll adverts might change people's attitude to some extent. But the real reason why people in many parts of the world are apathetic towards elections is simply because politicians have consistently failed to live up to their expectations.
Often, be it in the Third World or the rich industrialised West, politicians make all kinds of impractical promises before the polls only to forget them once the verdict is given. When the electorate is let down by their representatives in Parliament, they naturally tend to boycott the next hustings.
Will every party be guaranteed an identical airtime allowance, or will it be a case of the party with the most money gets the most airtime?
American-style ads are all about slating the opposition, "twisting" the evidence and finding dirt to dish.
Maybe the answer is to not have anything at all on the television from political parties, maybe then politicians might be more inclined to actually go into the prospective constituency and talk to the people?
Iain Alexander, UK
Not the most interesting viewing Party Political Broadcasts. Really the best time to make a drink. To combat voter apathy it is the nature of the politicians and their policies that needs to change. They always preach the same message, always the same arguments. It's dull. They are dull. Changing the medium will not change the content.
Boring though the political broadcasts are, I would hate to see them replaced with expensive adverts, because that would put our leaders completely at the mercy of corporations (even more than they are already).
In a word, yes. Apart from anything, they're extremely boring!
If the UK political parties start treating their electorate with such contempt, then not only would I refuse to vote - I'd probably emigrate!
Party Political Broadcasts only happen at election time - at most once a year. If people can't be bothered to watch them, they should be capable of changing the channel on their TV. If not, I'm not sure they should even be trusted with a vote!
Well, the electricity board would be glad to see the back of them, no doubt. Every time they are on there is a huge surge in demand as half the nation goes out to make a cup or tea.
Given that the US has an even lower voter turnout than we do (often less than 50% even for presidential elections), the idea that US-style political adverts could encourage more people to vote seems fundamentally flawed if not openly absurd.
As for political advertisements, America's voter turnout is much lower that Britain's. The short, nasty, "attack advertisements" which are so popular here encourage voter cynicism, not participation.
Patrick Morris-Suzuki, United States
The idea of moving even closer to the US system fills me with horror. What turns the electorate off faster than anything else is the negative campaigning and short US style ads will only encourage this trend. We don't want to hear why the other lot are so bad, we want to hear why a party deserves our support.
It would be far better to have several short political commercials like they have in the United States. Party political broadcasts are a real turn off for most viewers. They are tedious, charmless and lack all manner of wit. A minute-long commercial would force the parties to get straight to the point without forcing us to change the channel out of sheer boredom.
A distinct and proper choice between parties would "tackle voter apathy." Fewer self-serving politicians would help too.
Roger Gale, Conservative MP for North Thanet, said the idea represented the triumph of "spin and presentation over political substance". Der! Wake up Roger that was exactly what people thought when they saw the broadcasts for the last election. I'm not convinced adverts will be better, but they will be shorter. Alternatively they could start putting some substance in them, but then we'd notice there is so little to choose between them.
I think apathy is a symptom of a much greater problem - that people here in the UK take democracy for granted and therefore don't see any point in voting. Look at East Timor - I'll bet the turnout there was over 90%. Why? Because democracy is something they do not take for granted. Unfortunately, history suggests that apathy only really disappears during or after conflict situations.
31 Aug 01 | UK Politics
US-style ads could tackle turnout
29 May 01 | TV and Radio
Politics and freedom of expression
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Other Talking Points:
Links to more Talking Point stories
|^^ Back to top
News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy