Introduction

In democratic societies, the media is the public’s chief source of political information. Mass media’s influence extends to the politically important frame of public opinion. This is especially true during elections when public opinion on political parties becomes very sensitive during public appearances. The media’s ideal role is to “disseminate the full range of political opinions, enabling the public to make political choices and enter the national life.” The media is the communication bridge between democratic governments and the public but neither put direct pressure or influence on the media. More liberal countries have a media that acts as more of a watchdog of the government than just the supplier of information. The media’s role allows for the public to be a direct part of their government, the policies being undertaken and the way they can implement those being passed. In reality, however, the media has played several other roles as well.. By creating false realities the media does away with its role of ensuring transparency. A role that only the media can fill. Governments and politicians are notorious for manipulating the media to their advantage especially the media’s hunger for ratings.
Most scholars classify mass media into two types: information rich and information poor. The former are intellectual elites who exclusively seek information from elite media services. Politicians also pay close attention to information rich media for their coverage perspective and prominent public issues. Information poor consists of the media utilised by a majority of the voting people who are completely reliant on it for political and social information. Politicians often to communicate directly with their voters.

Discourse

German sociologist, Habermas, a German sociologist, defines mass media, “as a space for public discourse which must guarantee universal access and rational debate in society.” However, in reality, the free market competition alters television channels’ motivations to suit the needs of their advertisers and influential politicians.
The leap in technology with the invention of the internet compounded the relationship between the media and the government. The birth of social media has brought in many new players with varying influence: telecommunications firms, regular citizens, politicians, nongovernmental organizations, software providers, activists, and governments. This new leap also expanded the society’s communication ability through social networks and blogs thus making it an influential player. Despite this new direct link between the voters and politicians many still debate over the role and requirements of the media for a democratic society.

Today, the most potent tool of political communication is the television. With the internet, it has given birth to new political realities in a new virtual environment. Television has managed to capture the audience’s imagination like never before and political drama is in the center of it. With this spotlight it also brings in more transparency especially exposes about behind the veil political maneuverings. The other side of this coin brings distraction from debate on serious political issues with politicians using the media to create an image to sell to the people.

Internet

The internet, meanwhile, has expanded not only the reach of the media but also its size. New journalistic sources have given rise to new kinds of competition and has propelled the extent of the media’s influence. The internet does debilitate television’s ability to shine the spotlight on entertainment news. However, it has allowed for access to all kinds of information, initiating instant two way communication and allowed for lower barriers to access.

Events presided or attended by politicians always have media coverage that shows them governing or discussing the publis’s issues with the. While offering little to no useful information, such media events shovel political showmanship on the audience. The Clinton administration was well known to use such media events to increase their President’s likeness and approval ratings. By adding a slice of entertainment to politics, governments often distract the people from more real issues.
Iyengar, in his research into news and its influence on the media noted, “Their explanations of issues like terrorism or poverty are dependent on the particular reference points furnished in media presentations.” He found that it is in the media’s framing of the news where the people draw their understanding of a serious political issue.

McCombs and Shaw conducted research into the media’s news agenda setting ability during AMerican elections found that,: “The most significant effect of the media was its ability to organize our world for us. The news media are stunningly successful in telling us what to think about.”

Karl Manoff experienced the same results in his essay exactly ten years later and noted, “One of the major problems of today’s journalism is that the press is allied with the state. The press is a handmaiden of power and American politics. It reports governmental conflict only when conflict exists within the state itself.”

Journalism’s objectivity has been found to be deeply rooted within the system and the status quo. The 1988 American presidential election saw reporters striking the ire of the voters against politicians rather than acting as the bridge between them. This mean that the public’s understanding of the democratic process was diminishing alarmingly. While the media offers plenty of critical analysis it fails to offer with that a means and chance to take action. Without fostering public dialogue it removes the public from their role in the political process. During election time, the media shifts its focus from ensuring transparency and dissemination of information to nitpicking about the issues within political parties and the lives of those elected to lead. This also causes smaller political parties to suffer fatally in the polls due to reduced media coverage.

Debates

Political discourse is often looked over for entertaining explosive debates and arguments. The media’s motivations are often dictated by commercial logic that reinforces the globalization perspective of broadcasting. In some European countries like Germany and Denmark the democratic-corporatist centralised media system allowed early development of press freedom and and professionalism. Italy and France however have polarist-pluralist media systems where the media is elite-oriented with low circulation and television dominance. While the United Kingdom and Switzerland foster media systems that retain the journalist's dominance over the politicians during news shows.

After the analysation of over 30,000 features done on the ruling Danish government over the past 20 years of radio found that the media’s critical coverage had a direct correlation with a decline in the government's approval ratings. The government’s direct access to the media acts as a double edge sword in the sense that not all coverage for the government is good coverage.

Ashworth and Shotts studied the effect of an effective responsible media on the possibility and probability of elected officials pandering. From a theoretical model based on game theory principles it was found that accurate media commentary and focus on political issues would make it less probable for politicians to pander to the public. This freedom would also lead to the politicians making better decisions in favor of the public without a hesitation of being vilified by the media for risky ones.
Arthur J. Heise defines the media’s role as that of a “public management function. “Many in the news media could agree that they are not covering the affairs of the state as fully, as penetratingly and as aggressively as they might”.

Ideally, media analysts are unprejudiced and viewers act rationally to their best interests in response to news despite some outlying incidents of ‘yes-man’ politics by the media. This would make the relationship between the media and the government a close direct one. The media must then connect all parties regardless of their size or history with media houses to all the voter population.

But commercialization and technology have also allowed mass communication models to function independently due to the very rules of the former. This highly politicized world’s media also allows for politicians to venture into newer arenas of direct access to their voters. Despite this economic logic, the media does not always respond effectively to the democratic process’ requirements. This has led to the worrying conclusion that the media has eroded the worth and importance of political communication institutions by undermining their day to day functions.

---

Part 2 of this article will be published later tonight so stay tuned!

If you enjoyed this article please resteem, upvote and follow me @naufil