The media has been used as a link between the British political system and the British public. For the past few decades, the role of the media has grown rapidly. There has been a growing concern with the media's affect on politics after cameras were introduced into the Commons around the late 1980s. Many critics are afraid of the influence that the media has on political policy, especially during elections where votes can be gained through the imagery the media creates for a specific candidate.
Nevertheless it is clear that the media is able to influence the public people, who are of course the ones who elects the MPs. As mentioned before, the media is a strong weapon for candidates who are running in an election that nowadays are using the media to their advantage in gaining more votes and in winning elections.
As for another influential media, the newspapers, which usually presents views through editorials, comic strips and other types of means that are easy to understand and are able to reach to the minds of the readers. An effective political strategy has always depended on easy and memorable slogans and phrases aimed at promoting and justifying the politicians' political policies. And of course politicians have used this strategy effectively by exploiting and taking full advantage of the most influential factor, the media.
Today the news and events around the world are being covered so rapidly that everything involving the media has now become a profession that one could consider as a career. The media is so powerful that even just a slightly missed wording of a speech and be wrongly understood and would be heard of all around the world in just minutes. From this, politicians have grown to learn that the media is not just the public voice but also a voice that waits to gossip about them whenever they make the wrong move.
Of course, with hundreds of daily newspapers the government have come up with an idea to deal with them. They have established governmental agencies that secretly support a type of media in order for them to be able to have some control over what the public receives and understands about in modern Britain.
Moreover, the non-supportive nature of the media makes sure that politicians can not totally control the media but can only use it as tool influence the public's perception. Not only can the media create a positive image for someone but it also has the power to destroy a reputation, too. Not considering the obvious intentions for media exploitation by politicians there have been many examples of undesirable political exposure. These examples give us an idea of how quick and sharp the consequence of political events can be influenced by the media.
In Britain, however, politicians are highly concerned with the difference between intrusion and freedom of the press. There is a thin and vulnerable border dividing 'personal' life and 'political' life. So when and where can the line of privacy be drawn?
Editors of many newspapers realize that political scandal sells their papers. However, most press would like to remain on friendly with the politicians in order to gain co-operation. Politicians know that positive media coverage gains them popularity in the eyes of the public and therefore they can expect success in the election. However, negative coverage will have certainly the opposite effect. As a result of these conflicting perspectives there has been much debate surrounding the two. This raises the question of what is the limitation of the idea of freedom of the press?
Britain's laws and regulations are well known to be very strict.and many believed it to be a good thing because privacy is pretty much protected. However, there is a belief that these laws are not enough and stricter precaution should be taken, in order to protect those citizens 'hunted' by many of the media.
The media in Britain does not have to remain neutral on political issues meaning that they can criticize however they want really. In contrast, in broadcasting they have to remain politically neutral. Politicians are more worried with the press because there are not a lot of restrictions on the writing words that can really endanger a politician's reputation.
Finally, the role of the media in modern British society anything but small or minor. It causes huge effects on the British politics. The public is willing to believe what ever the media says. They have no intention of investigating the reality themselves. Instead, the public goes straight to the media for answers. Even with all its negativity and political downside. The media reminds the public that they have the right to their freedom of speech and that they are able to express their own beliefs and that they have the right to know what is going on in the government. As funny as it may sound but the media can not survive without the government and the government can not survive without the attention of the media either.
Bibliographies
-
Allen, Robert C. Channels of Discourse: Television and Contemporary Criticism.1987.
-
Entman, Robert M. Democracy Without Citizens: Media and The Decay of British Politics.1989.
-
Hollingsworth, M. The Press and Political Dissent: A Question of Censorship.1986
-
Irwin J (3rd ed) Modern Britain Routledge1994
-
Keith, Michael C. and Krause, Joseph M. The Radio Station. Boston: Local Press, 1986
- http://britishspin.blogspot.com/
