This page is intended to be a little more serious than the pub. Please write in about the issues of the day, your work, your opinions, or anything...

Vote for joe

by hpp

We've all heard the theorising about the communications explosion leading to more direct democracy. You know the theory - we'll all be able to vote online, or by telephone, on the issues of the day directly rather than relying on our MPs to vote on our behalf on the basis of their own convictions - or, more often, the way their party whips tell them to.

Personally, I'm not convinced. In theory it sounds great - truly representative government, with anyone who has any interest in an issue able to express their view directly and getting rid of all the politics of sleaze, lobby groups, party funding and personal influence. But the practice would be a nightmare. You only have to look at the tabloid telephone polls to see that.

For those of you who've not seen a tabloid in the last few years, let me tell you what these polls are all about. A potentially emotive issue arises - say a paedophile murders a child, or the price of petrol rises. Your tabloid editor hears of it and decides to leap on the bandwagon. The story gets splashed over the front page, and continued on pages 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, with the facts carefully selected and presented to maximise the sensation and the emotional impact on the reader. If a politician can be quoted saying something populist (about as hard as finding a Catholic Pope or bear poo in the woods), so much the better. A soundbite from an expert may also be useful, although anything longer might undermine the case the editor's trying to build. Stick a short, hard-hitting editorial comment and an outraged op-ed piece from a Correspondent in as well, and you've whipped your readership up into the indignant frenzy where they're champing at the bit to vent their spleen somehow - then...

You pose the question. Something stark, leaving no room for sitting on the fence, admitting any kind of mitigating circumstances, shades of grey - a simple "yes" or "no" is all that's needed. Something that presents the issue in its clearest possible terms. Something like:

"Do you think the disruption caused by the fuel shortage is a price worth paying?"

Perfect. Guaranteed to trigger the required kneejerk reaction in the frenzied readership, who duly pick up their phones and dial the 0898 premium rate number displayed conveniently underneath, without bothering to ask themselves what the price is, who ends up paying it, what the possible alternatives are, or any of those difficult and, frankly, unimportant-just-right-now questions. And the following day the tabloid editor can publish the overwhelmingly one-sided result, claim solidarity with the righteously indignant citizens, launch a campaign to keep the frenzy going - and, not least, pocket the 0898 premium rate profits.

Maybe I'm cynical. But I believe that the kind of emotional, unthinking response these phone polls provoke is not a sound footing for effective government. I don't argue that the existing system of government makes for perfectly coherent decision-making with no inconsistencies; but direct democracy without properly informed decision making will multiply those contradictions - there are too many people who want to have their cake and eat it. And the democracy we'd have would be hardly any more real, I suspect - we'd still have the media telling us how to vote. The problem is, they'd have far more influence on the individual decisions than they do now. And do you really want unelected media magnates running the country?

Earlier topics

Tony Martin - right or wrong?

too much porn