Page 185 - An Introduction to Political Communication Fifth Edition
P. 185

Intro to Politics Communication (5th edn)-p.qxp  9/2/11  10:55  Page 164





                                                 COMMUNICATING POLITICS
                             example of this effect, Mr Heseltine’s announcement in 1983 that his
                             government would be spending some £1 million of public money on anti-
                             CND propaganda generated numerous headlines for the peace movement
                             and significantly raised its profile as a legitimate participant in the nuclear
                             debate. While an innovative approach to communication and media man-
                             agement permitted the peace movement to gain access to news media, official
                             responses to that access reinforced its visibility and authority. The Defence
                             Secretary’s ‘cultural capital’ was transferred, in part, to a competitor.
                               It would be misleading to suggest, however, that the peace movement came
                             anywhere near to dominating the debate as mediated by broadcasting and the
                             press. First, the defence establishment used its privileged access to intervene
                             at key moments in the peace movement’s campaigning. I have described in
                             detail elsewhere how governmental news management ensured that coverage
                             of a major CND demonstration held at Easter, 1983 was ‘framed’ by stories
                             about the Soviet threat (McNair, 1988), a rhetorical device which throughout
                             the ‘new Cold War’ was routinely presented by journalists as objective fact
                             rather than contestable assertion. The presentation of an anti-nuclear view-
                             point was consistently contextualised by a wider ‘reality’, that of the threat
                             nuclear weapons were supposed to protect us against.
                               Second, the content of ‘peace movement news’ was typically lacking in
                             explanation and analysis of the anti-nuclear argument. While journalists
                             undoubtedly gave extensive and often sympathetic coverage to the people
                             involved in demonstrations, there was rarely any attempt to examine the
                             detail of their case, or indeed its validity. As was noted earlier, the very nature
                             of news militates against considered analysis of events in preference to
                             coverage of the epiphenomenal, easily graspable aspects. In this respect the
                             peace movement, like other pressure groups (and political actors in general)
                             found it difficult to have its arguments, as opposed to its existence, reported.
                             One should qualify this observation by noting that spaces were occasionally
                             found in current affairs and in-depth news programmes of the type provided
                             by BBC’s Newsnight and Channel 4 News, for detailed articulation of the
                             anti-nuclear perspective.
                               As the East–West confrontation eased in the late 1980s, culminating in
                             the ‘end’ of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the peace
                             movement withered away. In terms of governmental decision-making,
                             historians will probably judge that the movement had negligible impact. In
                             the end, cruise missiles were installed in Europe, Britain commissioned the
                             Trident submarine system and the US government pursued its desired nuclear
                             weapons programmes. There was, however, a public debate about these
                             crucial issues in the 1980s, where there had been practically none in the
                             1960s and 1970s. The communication strategies and campaigning activities
                             of the international peace movement can reasonably take the credit for
                             forcing that debate, and requiring NATO governments to consider public
                             opinion, where they had not been used to doing so before.


                                                            164
   180   181   182   183   184   185   186   187   188   189   190