91Èȱ¬

If you took a photograph of John Bercow to Bromsgrove High Street, how many people would be able to say who he was?

It could equally be John Denham and Dunstable, John Hemming and Haverfordwest or pretty much any of those politician johnnies and your pick of Britain's pedestrian precincts.

It is a traditional journalistic stunt to demonstrate people's apparent ignorance of politics by asking random members of the British public about some currently prominent member of the House of Commons, as though only recognition of the latest Westminster obsession can demonstrate the electorate knows what is going on.

There is a serious point here, though. As we approach an election, how confident can we be that those individuals who bother to turn out will have the foggiest idea what is at stake?

In the USA, many states spell out the responsibilities of voters, as well as their rights.
In , and , for example, citizens are told that they have a duty to "be informed about the candidates and issues on the ballot".

A study of voters in the 1964 British election by Denis McQuail and Jay Blumler reported:

"It is not only voting, but also the attempt on their part to acquire information about some of the problems facing the country, that electors regard as a duty. Even if this sentiment tends to lie dormant between elections, an imminent campaign will draw the attention of voters to the roles they are supposed to fulfil as citizens and thus encourage a measure of 'obligator' information seeking."

For many voters, I suspect, the idea that they have "a duty to keep informed" is laughable. In Bromsgrove High Street, like most other places, the voter is the customer and the candidate is the snake-oil salesman.

It is down to the politicians to convince a consumerist electorate that it is worth parting with their valuable Xs.

This attitude wouldn't matter if electors were, nevertheless, informed of the key issues upon which the candidates stand. The evidence, though, is not encouraging.

This week, as part of their social trends release, the that fewer people read a newspaper these days.

With the help of the . I have assembled this graph showing 25 years of inexorable decline in the proportion of the adult population which reads a daily newspaper (free-sheet or otherwise).

That traditional newspapers are in decline is hardly a story to hold the front page. We know that people are increasingly getting their news from other sources, particularly from the internet.
confirms the theory in the US where the internet appears to have overtaken papers as a source of news.

British internet news sites, including this one, have seen rapid growth over the last few years, but there must still be a question as to whether people are consuming more or less news overall.

It has never been easier to be in touch with the latest headlines: huge news factories churn out breaking stories around the clock on television and the internet.

For those wanting to dig deeper, party policies, analysis and debate can all be found at the click of a mouse.

But if British citizens take their "duty to be informed" seriously one might expect to see a spike in newspaper sales, TV and radio news audiences during election campaigns.

In fact the evidence is the opposite. During the watershed 1997 election, the 91Èȱ¬'s Nine O'clock News lost nearly a third of its audience when it added an extra 15 minutes of special election coverage each weeknight.

Elections are not an audience winner. Internal 91Èȱ¬ research has found: "very few people felt there was too little election news, whilst a significant minority felt there was too much".

It would seem that politics is a turn off. A quick glance at the general election turnout over the last 35 years reminds us how the even more basic "civic duty" of casting your vote has declined.

Partly, this may be a consequence of a more managerial and less ideological politics. Voters may feel less concerned about taking part if they believe, not unreasonably, that the policies on offer from the potential victors look remarkably similar.

It may reflect cynicism and distrust of the political elite. "They are all as bad as each other" is a common explanation for staying at home on polling day.

Perhaps the news media is at fault. An international expert on press and public policy, Professor Wolfgang Donsbach, .

"There can be no question that journalism itself has contributed to its declining reputation by succumbing to sensationalism, tabloidization, and public relations. The profession is not only a victim but an actor in this process. But the problem is that, in contrast to most other professions, challenges to journalism are challenges to democracy! When the public is less interested in civic news and when the quality of the news is on the decline, the basis for informed public discourse is undermined."

There is a third party which might want to do a little soul-searching: the electorate itself. I doubt there are many who would suggest every citizen should recognise a picture of John Hemming MP from 10 paces, but there is an argument for stressing that being a voter is both a right and a responsibility.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?