Political Influence, Elections and Political Marketing

1. Political Influence, Elections and Political Marketing

2. Propaganda Defined • An intentional program of selected information used to advance a doctrine, ideology or practice • Three characteristics of the narrow definition • The Widening Definition of Propaganda

3. Four Sources of Political Influence • Constitutional and Legal or Regulatory Control • As a dominant News Source: influence and manipulate News Manufacture • As a buyer of Advertising: using economic clout over the media • Regulation of Media Coverage During Elections

4. What Democratic States May do (Policy Instruments) • Democratic states may: • Protect the Media in the Constitution • Censor the Media • Enact Freedom of Information Laws • Act as an Owner of Public Media ( like the CBC) • Make Laws on Foreign Investment ( daily press 20% cap) • Regulate Media ( Broadcasting) • “expect” media ( by using soft power) to responsibly regulate their own profession ( codes of conduct) • Tax or Subsidize the Media/Advertising

5. Political Control of the Media • By What Rules Must the Media Play? • How Accountable Should Media Be?

6. Legal Controls and Freedom of Expression • Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms • Section 2b) guarantees freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication • but Section 1 ( the preamble) states that: • The guarantees (of ) the rights and freedoms set out in it are subject only to such reasonable limits by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society

7. Constitutional Bottom Line: • Canada’s law does not guarantee absolute freedom of the media from State Control or Judicial Review by the Supreme Court of Canada • Freedom of Press is conditional • A delicate balancing act: • Between primordial State role in guaranteeing national security ( collective rights) and individual freedoms • Between individual/media right to FOE and ‘rightness’ of selective censorship

8. Constitutional Limits • What are the limits? • The Notwithstanding /PreambleClause ( section 1) if law can be demonstrably justified • Entrenches equality rights ( S. 15): • Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and benefit of the law withour discrimination…based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour,religion, ses, age or mental or physical disability • Multiculturalism :Section 27: • Consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians

9. First Legal Controls: Protections of National Security • Powers over security: imposition of acts to restrict civil liberties • When security threatened, State may censor to protect itself • Canada’s War Measures Act ( 1970); Alberta Law on Fair Information (1937): gagged the press on security grounds • In time of real or apprehended insurrection the State does have near absolute control: a throwback to the authoritarian model of the press • In 2001 Canada enacted the Anti Terrorism Bill ( Bill C-36) to respond to US pressure and an international convention to suppress terrorism after September 11, 2001.

10. Second Grounds: Social Cohesion and Domestic Security

11. Criminal Powers • State also introduces classes of criminal expression: • Incitement of ‘violence against state’ ( seditious libel) • Incitement of cultural genocide: S. 319 of the Criminal Code (1970): advocating killing of members of an identifiable group • S 117 : Prohibit willing spreading of false news ( fire!) • State may compel journalists to release their sources in a criminal investigation

12. Hate Legislation • S. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (1977) • Updated by the Anti Terrorism Bill ( 2001): prohibits communication which will expose a person or identifiable group to hatred and contempt • A number of countries have extensive hate legislation, censoring speech • Circulates around the notion of security again: the right of individuals and communities to live free from manifestations of hate and discrimination

13. Leading Case: Keegstra ( 1990) • Also: Zundel, Collins etc. under S. 319 (2) • Keegstra a teacher in Alberta who made anti-Semitic statements to students • Statements not in private • Statements not in any effort to generate discussion for public benefit ( instead, he advised students to accept his views and gave better grades to students who echoed his views) • Not trying to point out hateful things only to alleviate hate • Regina vs. Keegstra in Supreme Court of Canada ruled 4:3 against Keegstra • Then Chief Justice Dickson argued if Canada is a multicultural society, then the protection of multiculturalism justifies censorship in some cases

14. Political Control 3: NewsManufacture • Government is one of the biggest sources of news for the media • Media depend on governments for news • Governments depend on media to reach their voters and mobilize consent • On some matters, the Government offers the only source of news ( eg. In times of crisis SARS etc., or on economic productivity news from Statistics Canada

15. Media Protections: Freedom of Information Legislation ( 1982) • Protects citizens and media from arbitrary concealment of information during peace time • Freedom of Information legislation may compel governments to release information if requested by press or public– depending on terms and conditions of the legislation • Freedom of Information Ombudsperson may help • 30 years later, ‘apprehended insurrection’ grounds found false in the cabinet deliberations of the War Measures Act • Other cases: Pharmaceutical cases etc. • FOI helpful as long as there is a vigilant/investigative press

16. Induce Media to Set Up Standards to Self-Regulate • For Example: after the Kent Commission a set of regional Press Counsils was set up to hear complaints about bias or unfair news • The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council is another • The codes set out values with respect to press independence, prohibition of conflict of interest, fair comment, consistent with the Charter • ( SEE OVERHEAD)

17. Direct / Indirect use of economic clout • Governments are very large buyers of advertising: economic clout • As a consequence, newspapers or media may resist biting the hand that feeds them… private press may self-censor (eg. Resist coverage hostile to Bush’s invasion of Iraq) • Governments may potentially own/ produce news agencies (eg. CBC News and Newsworld) which compete for ad money with the private media sector– and keep it ‘honest’ • Governments may also potentially regulate competition of the industry (eg.News) but have not done so in Canadian printed press or have done so rarely in TV ( Lorimer,p. 47.)

18. Regulation during Elections • Political Advertising is strictly regulated • Amount spent is capped: subject to appeal • Proportional to popular vote of parties • Commentary must observe Equal Time to all parties recognized by the Chief Electoral Officer • Complaints on Political Bias must be heard by Press/Broadcast Councils

19. Rationale for Regulation of Election Spending and Speech • Studies in the US find a direct relationship between amount spent on a campaign and electoral success: • Money buys votes • Incumbent politicians have an advantage • Canadian legislation tries to establish a level playing field among challengers and incumbents • Sets threshold on spending low enough for entry • Values minority expression ( proportionate to votes) and guarantees it a space in comment

20. Conclusions • 1. Canada’s legal framework for media aspires to social responsibility model but is lighter on press than on broadcasting • 2. Freedom of Press is not as absolute in Canada as in the US: balanced with responsibilities • 3. There are four main avenues for State/ political control/influence over the press during peace time: • 4. The largest political effect of such influence is ideological– framing for voters what is important or not in democracy • 5. The rise of Anti Terrorism legislation has carved out large areas for democratic states to withhold information, exercise censorship/ in the name of democratic propaganda

21. Sources • A. Fleras, Mass Media in Canada. 2003. pp. 90-96. • John Keane, Media and Democracy 1991 • Paul Nesbitt Larking, Politics, Society and the Media: Canadian Perspectives 2001 • Samuel V. LaSelva,” Pluralism and Hate: Freedom, Censorship and the Canadian Identity” in Interpreting Censorship in Canada, K. Petersen and Allan C. Hutchinson. 1999.