Page 100 - An Introduction to Political Communication Second Edition

THE MEDIA AS POLITICAL ACTORS

did the post-1992 Conservative government, House of Commons
debates can become a significant factor in political life, and thus
their availability through radio and television can only be seen as a
democratic asset.

Debates and talk-shows
Another format in which the broadcaster can provide a platform for
the exchange of political views is the structured debate programme,
exemplified by the BBC’s Question Time on television and Any
Questions on radio. On these programmes an impartial chairperson
presides over a debate between four participants, usually grouped
into, broadly-speaking, right, left, and centre (though non-politicians
are also included). The ‘public’ makes their contribution by asking
questions which the panellists must answer, prodded and shepherded
when necessary by the presenter. Here, one might argue, the liberal
democratic role of broadcasting is found in its purest form, mediating
between the public and its politicians, providing the former with
access to raw political discourse, and providing the politicians with
a channel of direct access to the people.
Of course, these formats have always been strictly controlled, with
panels, audiences and questions carefully selected so as to minimise
the chance of extreme positions getting on air, or of excessive
confrontation between participants breaking the mood of polite,
parliamentary style debate. But as social deference has declined in
recent years, and citizens grow used to treating their politicians like
equals, traditional debate show formats have come to be seen as
rather tame and excessively rule-governed. In America, meanwhile,
the rise of the ‘confessional’ talk-show has shown a new approach.
In response, the British schedules have seen a growth in the number
of more lively, unpredictable talk-shows, as well as the reform of
established programmes like Question Time. In the latter case,
audience members are now invited to speak more freely than they
once did, and to ‘vote’ at the end of debates. The chairman (at the
time of writing, David Dimbleby) intervenes on behalf of the audience
more aggressively than was traditionally the case, embarrassing the
sometimes reluctant panellists into going beyond political ‘waffle’
and answering a question with some degree of clarity and directness.
New programmes like You Decide and the People’s Parliament seek
new ways of organising public debate on television so that it is both
informative, educational and entertaining. Although they have had
varying degrees of success, all such experiments are valuable attempts,

83