The government and media

Introduction

            The relationship between the media and good governance is an important aspect of consideration following the increased interference of the government in the media. It is appropriate to examine the notion of good governance in light of the right to access to information. The last two decades has had an unprecedented spread of democracy around the world. However, the newly emerging democracies are short of the basic standards that define democratic rule due to the irregular voting procedures, corruption, and autocratic styles of government. The experiences in the last decades have shown that democracy is not one-way and viable democracy requires an accountable and efficient government embedded in the independence of its institutions. Similar to the political institutions, the media appears to lack the qualities that would qualify them to function appropriately in many democracies. The media should play a major role in promoting accountability and inclusive politics.

            The media is criticized for remaining too close to power holders since they cannot be effective watchdogs. Some advanced western democracies are experiencing crises of public communication and political legitimacy. However, the relationship between the media and good governance is more pressing in the transitional democracies where the relationship is disputed. The issue of government accountability should be addressed by understanding the relationship between the government, citizens, and the media.

            Voltmer (2010) highlights the role of the media in transitional democracies and how the media has shaped the direction of democracy over the years. According to Voltmer, although the media has had a crucial role in acting as a watchdog for the government and the politicians, media democratization remains incomplete and deficient. The government has also taken important steps to ensure that there is no interference. The author cites several reasons like the confrontations experienced between the government and the media dubbed as government interference in the determination of the media agenda and the institutions and principle of regulating the media. The article further explains that it took many years for the authoritarian governments to enact suitable media legislations making the media operate in a secure regulatory environment.

            Coronel (2003) explains that the media in the new and restored democracy has not achieved the truly perceived democracy. The media struggles to operate under stringent laws, monopolistic ownership, and the threat of police brutality. Democracy is in crisis due to the various threats from all sides. Despite the state constraints, it is challenging to sustain the authentic reporting in the media markets that have put a premium on the sensational and shallow reports. The media operates as proxies when rival political groups battle it out leading to divisive media reports. Other effects of the political rivalry include hate speech other than sober debate in the media, and suspicion instead of social trust. The result is public cynicism and democratic decay since the media cannot effectively play the role of watchdog.          

            The media ought to reveal the hidden vices and practices in the government offices that results to conflict between them. Thus, it requires the media to be assertive in their responsibility of deepening and advancing democracy for it to enhance its credibility to the public. The media has a unique role in informing the public what happens in the global arena without any preference or bias to particular details. As such, the government should not control media freedom since the practice keeps the public unaware of what happens behind the scenes. Working in a democratic and independent platform without any government interference helps to ensure that the government is in the check. The issues of corruption in the government and other public and private institutions can be better handled by having media freedom. There ought to be training mechanisms to ensure that journalists with different standpoints interact freely with each other to enhance the propagation of peace. Voltmer (2010) asserts that the democratization of the media is a magnifying glass through which the achievements and drawbacks of democracy in any government can be properly understood.

Research Question

Can media independence and democracy promote government accountability?

Thesis statement

            The media has always been misused by those in power to propagate hate speech and a platform for presenting false information to the public.  The restrictions that are in place make it difficult for the media to access the information that can be crucial to the public.

Examples to illustrate the thesis statement

            Various researchers and academicians have highlighted the influence of government interference to the media. The government ensures that the media operates in a restricted and controlled environment where it cannot relay accurate and authentic information to the citizens. Without reliable information, it would be challenging for the citizens to use their voting power effectively. They would also not be aware of the problems and issues that require active consideration beyond voting. The media are the major source of information and act as an important link between the government and the citizens to ensure government accountability and social accountability (Bennett & Lawrence, 2008). The government has various programs to the public in regard to government policies, political activities, and the actions by political officials.          As such, the media ought to provide forums that allow public participation by the civil society actors, opposition parties, the independent experts, and the public to express their divergent views. The media should operate as an independent institution to the government to provide a system of checks and balances to control the political officials and hinder the abuse of power. The need to have media freedom ensures that it meets the expectations to act in the public interest and keep the government accountable.     

            The chances for successful watchdog journalism are more restricted in the emerging democracies where the interdependence between politicians and journalists is overshadowed by the legacy of suppressing and censoring the old regime. The political leaders find it hard to accept an adversarial press that demands public justification of the policy decisions and the conduct of politicians. Frequent clashes characterize the relationship between the media and the government in the new democracies. There are various factors that affect the quality of information obtained from the media.

            Political reporting has been restricted in certain ways to ensure that some information does not get the light of the day and reach the public. The media depends on the official, publicized, and the readily available information to inform the public. The practice makes it challenging to have a comprehensive investigation conducted to expose the hidden corruption cases and government malpractices like loss of funds and misuse of public resources (Voltmer, 2010).

Counter arguments

            There are various researchers who criticize the increased media involvement in government-related affairs. They claim that the media lacks the moral authority to gain access to government information. Some of the information may be sensitive, and the media cannot act as investigators to the government cases. Others could argue that the media should not be allowed to gain access to all the information since some individuals would handle it inappropriately. There exists an apparent tension or contraction between the idea of media accountability and the freedom of the press. The obligation to produce certain goods and follow particular quality standards restricts the degree of media freedom in making choices. However, the libertarian theorists and many journalists deny any such obligation citing the argument that it threatens the independence of the press and allow government interference. According to Walter Lippman, the press should not be a political institution and has no stake in organizing public opinion forums. Other scholars have contradictory views that press freedom is a right existing for a particular purpose and is justified by the effects it brings to the society. However, it is important to highlight that the people in power can misuse the media accountability, hence necessary to be responsible for the consequences (McQuail, 2003). The media tend to quote politicians in their news rather than the civil society groups, and other entities since the validity of the information from politicians are difficult to establish.

Opposition to the thesis

            The media fails to effectively play the role of watchdog and ensuring government accountability due to a symbiotic relationship between journalists and the politicians. Each side benefits from their counterparts and journalists claim that it gives them access to government officials and sensitive information.

            The success of watchdog journalism and media independence can only be guaranteed if the media organizations are not interfered with by the state, are financially stable, and operate in a competitive environment. According to Coronel (2003), the unethical journalist practices and the use of media corporations by different xenophobic interests make it unable to fulfill its democratic role. However, the issue of media accountability cannot be ignored since excessive freedom can have adverse impacts on the nation. Some controls are necessary to ensure that the media is accountable to everything they report. According to Besley, Burgress, and Prat (2002), the freedom of the media without restrictions can result in other unprecedented problems. The media cannot be independent without restrictions on certain practices and regulations. The government has a major role in safeguarding the rights of the citizens without infringing the access to information but also has control on what information to provide. In most instances, the media suffers more due to the restrictions making it challenging for the public to gain access to accurate information.      

Conclusion

            The principle of media accountability does not only entail restrictions and obligations but also calls for measures to strengthen the independence of the media from the government. It also ensures that the media provides access to information. The role of the media has been described as normative regarding how they should perform. However, the use of normative perspectives does not give the reality of the daily political reporting. The media can fulfill its democratic role and does not live up to the ideals due to its reliance on the official sources. The media ought to be given considerable freedom for it to play the role of government watchdog effectively.

 

References

Besley, T., Burgess, R., & Prat, A. (2002) Mass media and political accountability: World Bank

Coronel, S. (2003) The role of the media in deepening democracy, NGO Media Outreach

Denis McQuail (2003). Media Accountability and Freedom of Publication: Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Voltmer, K. (2010). The media, government accountability, and citizen engagement: Public Sentinel: News Media and Governance Reform, Washington: World Bank, 395.

Voltmer, K. (2013). The media in transitional democracies: John Wiley & Sons

W. Lance Bennett & Regina G. Lawrence (2008) Press freedom and democratic accountability in a time of war, commercialism, and the Internet. In The Politics of News: The News of Politics, eds.              

Sherry Roberts is the author of this paper. A senior editor at MeldaResearch.Com in college research paper services if you need a similar paper you can place your order for best essay services online.