By Marc-François Bernier
Journalism Program Coordinator University of Ottawa
mbernier@uottawa.ca
Posted in The Law, March 2, 2007
An election is the surge in media and political machines that fuel the strategy to take advantage of certain weaknesses of voters that we are, who often prefer to be seduced and entertained rather than rigorously and seriously informed of the issues on which our future.
For those who still take seriously the electoral exercise and believe that journalists have an important role in informing citizens, this election may still be disappointing. Every campaign involves three groups of actors: the candidates (and their entourage), journalists and the public. Unfortunately, research and many critics argue that candidates and journalists are so obsessed with each other that they often forget the audience. It is therefore appropriate to have the media to the eye, a few critical exercise customary in Quebec.
To start this little guide, here's how the media should act in order to force political actors to respect the right of voters to intelligent debate, honest and substantive.
Their first challenge will not be complicit vicious and petty attacks on each other. By refusing to play this game, they will force the candidates to find better ways to talk about themselves.
Another challenge will be to serve constantly the public's right to quality information, forcing candidates and their strategists to demonstrate the veracity of their claims and reality of their commitments. This critical work may be substituted for the dissemination of sarcasm, quips and personal attacks on political adversaries who share the same interest, however, not to justify their own claims and commitments.
Also in the spirit public service, it should prevent political actors to intoxicate us with impunity statements under cover of anonymity, anonymous sources are a powerful way of misinformation. Do not forget that political organizations trying to influence, if not to manipulate public opinion through the media and many journalists resist lure of little scoops or recovered quickly contradicted publicly by the same people who have quietly slipped to reporter's ear.
Intellectual rigor should convince journalists not to disseminate the results of surveys methodologies doubtful, while the concern of substantive discussions should limit the number of polls on voting intentions. These polls are certainly the spice of racing and action in stories, but they are low in octane democratic. It is in this regard welcome the decision of the Société Radio-Canada does not control the polls on voting intentions (there have been many other anyway) to focus on substantive discussions.
other hand, the media should document the issues important to citizens in reliance on competent and neutral sources. This is even more relevant to news channels continues, where too often obliges journalists to fill airtime with about repetitive approximations and questionable assertions because they do not give them the time to check everything before going on air.
In terms of diversity, it would be appreciated if the media, especially electronic media, are more imaginative in their choice of guests to present us with different perspectives, marginal, or even provocative. Similarly, we hope they spare us the pervasiveness of pseudo experts in everything and anything which is hidden from us too often partisan acquaintances.
The list could go on, but the command is already very ambitious. Some, disillusioned or perhaps more lucid, say too ambitious.
indexes distrust
To supplement this small media voter guide seriously, here are some clues that should lead us to distrust the media interest because (the media, the journalists, etc..) Can easily override the public interest.
should be wary when a reporter from the television or radio is more interested in her wordplay as by the substance of its stories that tell us nothing about the commitments of the candidates and their reasons to propose to voters. And when a journalist, especially the press, reports the comments of anonymous sources, let us know that, most often, he lets himself be used by those who want to manipulate public opinion to make better use partisan.
Similarly when, after television interview or radio, we seem to know more about the journalist's opinion on that of his guest, there is a serious indication of an intention not inform us, but to persuade us.
Moreover, we must have the wisdom to grant reflex no credibility to the journalist who spent several hours in a county, but claims nevertheless tell us what is really the shape of the local campaign. Most often this is based both on a misunderstanding of the premises and on the persuasiveness of some political organizers.
course, we all have our biases and partisan preferences. This greatly influences the critical eye that we put on the work of journalists and media coverage daily. This sometimes leads us to expose ourselves and complacently repeated messages that we like and reject those who are too easily shocked. Should learn not be a behavior of self persuasion. Instead, it is to face the facts that undermine our beliefs and destabilize us.
should therefore eventually be wary even of the beliefs we have, we have for they also point to contaminate our common sense, as stated by French sociologist Edgar Morin.
French website for analysis, criticism and scientific research on journalistic practices. 
0 comments:
Post a Comment