Are the British media a barrier to the development of good public policy? In recent weeks, two influential voices have argued that it is.
In the Guardian, Polly Toynbee put the extreme case. The British press, she wrote, are ‘the worst in the West’. She concluded that: ‘The media are in danger of making government by any party impossible.’
Charles Clarke, former home secretary, was more balanced in a speech to the Royal Television Society on politics and the media. The ten years following the election of New Labour have, according to Clarke, vastly increased the media’s sense of their ‘own importance and power’. It has been a decade of ‘media pomp’.
Some of his complaint is directed at the hounding of ministers and others (he declares a personal interest). He has noticed how many times the prime minister has simply concluded that the media require a resignation and must be given one.
But, even more seriously, he attests that media power has ‘altered’ government policy, for instance on Europe, crime, tax and media regulation. And that the media have unbalanced good government. As one Downing Street official put it to me early in the life of the Blair government: ‘If only we could invest as much resource in policy work as in effective presentation.’
Most journalists react to this charge with amazement. They tell of the hard-nosed tactics of New Labour figures such as Peter Mandelson and Alastair Campbell. And they are incredulous that a government, with such a large parliamentary majority and so adept at media management, should itself feel traduced by newspapers, radio and television.
But Clarke’s is a serious charge from someone who has been part of government at the highest levels. It deserves a serious answer.
I don’t doubt that much of the modern media could be improved. It is sometimes difficult to find the thought-provoking programmes, or to discover where events are being properly analysed. In a frantic fight for audience and to cut costs, many media outlets now work at their limits. The priority is often to fill the space and to get noticed. Frequently, issues of quality and reflection are pushed into second place.
And the media have changed a great deal. They are now 24 hours a day and, to all intents, global. As Clarke says, they thrive on slips and gaffes. They prefer stories on personalities to discussions of policy. According to Clarke they have ‘changed the style of politics’ and relegated the importance of Parliament.
He has a point. Too often, interviewers appear to be bored or disenchanted with their interviewee even before they start talking. And the perennial ‘briefly please’ is a barrier to decent debate.
And it is true that the changing media have had an important impact on the whole of our society. As we know only too well following the release of hostages from Iran, all significant organisations now need competent and expert media relations professionals to survive in this 24/7 cut-throat media environment. The much-maligned ‘spin-doctors’ have their uses. Few major companies, government departments, lobby groups, charities or anyone else can afford to be without them.
But does this really mean that the media are changing government policies? Or making Britain ungovernable?
Clarke’s examples are instructive. On Europe, it was in fact the Treasury under Gordon Brown that kept Britain out of the euro, and Parliament could well have done so if the Treasury had failed.
Similarly, the government’s crime policy has frequently been led from Downing Street by the prime minister. Part of this was about persuading voters that Labour could be trusted on the issue.
Equally, there is plenty of evidence that the policies reflect the real views of Tony Blair.
On tax, too, there has actually been quite a lively debate over the past decade within the political parties about the appropriate balance between direct and indirect taxation, and the role of tax in redistribution or funding a growing public sector.
There have been plenty of instances as well when government has decided on a policy path against the advice of much of the media. And some issues, such as the reform of local government finance, the advance of road-pricing or House of Lords reform have been blocked simply by political disagreement or by political inhibition.
One irony is that Clarke’s own political progress in recent months might give the lie to his thesis. On his website, he has posted a series of articles and speeches that attempt to set out a forward path for his party.
I’m left with the feeling that other politicians too easily use the media as an excuse. The real failings often lie with them.
