By Prince Kelly Udebhulu
The mass media are essential to the conduct of democratic elections. A free and fair election is not only about casting a vote in proper conditions, but also about having adequate information about parties, policies, candidates and the election process itself so that voters can make an informed choice. A democratic election with no media freedom would be a contradiction in principle.
But the paradox is that, in order to ensure that freedom, a degree of regulation is required. Government media, funded out of public money, should be required to give fair coverage and equitable access to opposition parties, for example. Media often may not be allowed to run reports - for example on exit polls or early results - before every vote has been cast.
The mass media – often referred to as just “the media” – are usually understood to refer to the printed press and to radio and television broadcasters. In recent years, the definition has perhaps become broader, encompassing the Internet in its various forms and other new forms of electronic distribution of news and entertainment, such as short message services to mobile telephones.
The prime concern is the right of voters to full and accurate information. But this is not the only right involved. Parties and candidates are entitled to use the media to get their messages across to the electorate. The media themselves have a right to report freely and to scrutinize the whole election process. This scrutiny is itself an important additional safeguard against interference or corruption in the management of the election. The electoral management body (INEC) has a crucial need to communicate information to the electorate – and to a variety of other groups, including the political parties and the media themselves.
The mass media are essential to the conduct of democratic elections. A free and fair election is not only about casting a vote in proper conditions, but also about having adequate information about parties, policies, candidates and the election process itself so that voters can make an informed choice. A democratic election with no media freedom would be a contradiction in principle.
But the paradox is that, in order to ensure that freedom, a degree of regulation is required. Government media, funded out of public money, should be required to give fair coverage and equitable access to opposition parties, for example. Media often may not be allowed to run reports - for example on exit polls or early results - before every vote has been cast.
The mass media – often referred to as just “the media” – are usually understood to refer to the printed press and to radio and television broadcasters. In recent years, the definition has perhaps become broader, encompassing the Internet in its various forms and other new forms of electronic distribution of news and entertainment, such as short message services to mobile telephones.
The prime concern is the right of voters to full and accurate information. But this is not the only right involved. Parties and candidates are entitled to use the media to get their messages across to the electorate. The media themselves have a right to report freely and to scrutinize the whole election process. This scrutiny is itself an important additional safeguard against interference or corruption in the management of the election. The electoral management body (INEC) has a crucial need to communicate information to the electorate – and to a variety of other groups, including the political parties and the media themselves.
It is a truism that the media play an indispensable role in
the proper functioning of a democracy. Discussion of the media's functions
usually focuses on their "watchdog" role: by unfettered scrutiny and
discussion of the successes and failures of governments, the media can inform
the public of how effectively its representatives have performed and help to hold
them to account. Yet the media can also play a more specific part in enabling
full public participation in elections, not only by reporting on the
performance of government, but also in a number of other ways:
i) Educating the voters on how to exercise their democratic rights.
ii) Reporting on the development of the election campaign.
iii) Providing a platform for the political parties to communicate their message to the electorate.
i) Educating the voters on how to exercise their democratic rights.
ii) Reporting on the development of the election campaign.
iii) Providing a platform for the political parties to communicate their message to the electorate.
iv) Allowing the parties to debate with each other.
v) Reporting results and monitoring vote counting.
vi) Scrutinizing the electoral process itself in order to evaluate its fairness, efficiency, and probity.
v) Reporting results and monitoring vote counting.
vi) Scrutinizing the electoral process itself in order to evaluate its fairness, efficiency, and probity.
These ways, which are essentially all aspects of
the right to freedom of expression guaranteed in Article 19 of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, apply at all times, and not only when there is an
election pending. But it is the very formality of the election process - the
fact that it is conducted according to procedures that are clearly set out in
law - that has stimulated the interest of those who are concerned with issues
of media freedom. How far media freedom and pluralism are respected during an
election period can be a fairly sensitive index of respect for freedom of
expression in general - itself an essential precondition for a functioning
democracy. Conversely, an election can be an ideal opportunity to educate both
the authorities in their obligation to respect and nurture media freedom and
the media in their responsibility to support the democratic process. Freedom of Expression must be practical as it is in theory
and principle during and after elections.
…to be continued
By Prince Kelly Udebhulu
You can tweet to @prince kelly75
No comments:
Post a Comment