Page 159 - An Introduction to Political Communication Third Edition

COMMUNICATING POLITICS

the latter’s image as a bumbling, ignorant cowboy to that of an
attractive, electable candidate. Gore, by contrast, emerged from the
debates with a reputation as a timid, pedantic bore.
The live debate format encapsulates the great dilemma of free
media for modern politicians: the massive exposure which it
generates can win elections (this, for example, has become the
received wisdom about John F. Kennedy’s narrow victory over
Richard Nixon in the 1960 campaign, which he won by only
17,000 votes). It can also lose them over such a simple matter as a
slip of the tongue.
Britain, in contrast to the US, has not developed a tradition of live
debating between candidates for the highest governmental office,
although each passing general election campaign is accompanied by
calls for such debates from the challengers. British prime ministers,
Labour and Conservative, well aware of the dangers debates
can throw up, have taken the view that one of the privileges of
incumbency is to refuse to participate in such an uncontrolled
spectacle. The assumption here is that there is more to be gained by
playing the role of a dignified statesperson, operating above the
glitzy presidentialism of the debate format, than could be lost by
being seen as aloof and inaccessible. That said, in June 1994,
following the death of Labour leader John Smith, the three
candidates for the succession – Tony Blair, Margaret Beckett and
John Prescott – debated live on BBC’s Panorama programme,
the first time such a debate had ever been broadcast on British
television. And in 1997, prodded by Labour’s media managers
(confident of Tony Blair’s ability to perform well) the main parties
came closer than ever before to agreement on the terms and
conditions of live debates between the party leaders. In the end they
backed off, for reasons which remain unclear. Some speculated that
Labour, having initially supported the idea of a leaders’ debate,
took the view that with a huge lead in the opinion polls it was
not worth risking the kind of disaster experienced by Carter, Ford
of Dan Quayle when the latter famously, and foolishly, compared
himself to John F. Kennedy. Others claimed that it was the Tories,
fearful of how their leader, John Major, would perform against
Blair, who stymied the negotiations. For whatever reason, there
was no leaders’ debate in 1997. Nor was there in 2001, to the
disappointment of many commentators.
It should of course be remembered that in Britain, unlike the US,
the Prime Minister and his or her principal challengers are seen
debating live on television most weeks of the year. Prime Minister’s

138