«« Пред. | ОГЛАВЛЕНИЕ
Appendix
Further issues relating to the regulation of free political broadcasts by political parties
Tensions often arise between the broadcasting networks, on the one hand, and the political parties, on the other hand, about the amount of time they must make available for political broadcasting. Commercial stations stand to lose money from their advertisers if too many advertising slots are used up for political broadcasts. Moreover, that fact that TV sets can often be operated by remote control means that viewers will be tempted to turn to another station as soon as a political broadcast comes on the air.
A further issue is the length of the time slots allocated for political broadcasts. If a political party is given a total number of minutes of free broadcasting time during an entire campaign, it will want the maximum flexibility about how long each broadcast should be. If political broadcasts are to be `serious' and to provide the opportunity for each side to present its policies and its leaders in detail, then each transmission needs to be relatively long. However, the advertising experts advising parties normally feel that a large number of short `spots' are more effective than a small number of long programmes. The following regulatory issues therefore arise:
1. Minimum length of free political broadcasts
In Britain, where the two main parties are each entitled to five free TV broadcasts lasting ten minutes during an election campaign, they have tended in recent campaigns to schedule broadcasts of only five minutes even though they have therefore had to `waste' the other five minutes allotted to them. The British parties are not permitted to pay for broadcasts to supplement their entitlements to free time.
It has become a matter of doctrine among professional advertising advisers that members of the public are bored by political broadcasts that are long. On the other hand, the broadcasting regulators have been unwilling to permit the parties to trade five slots of ten minutes each for ten slots of five minutes or for fifty slots of one minute. The civic argument against short advertising spots is that they encourage ever shorter `sound bites,' a `dumbing down' of political discourse, and negative campaigning.
As far as the minimum length of time slots for free political advertisements is concerned, examples from other countries are as follows: in Germany, slots are of 150 seconds. In Turkey, parties must use their portion of time in slots of at least two minutes.
2. Simultaneous transmission of free political broadcasts on all TV channels or on all radio channels
If it is assumed that members of the public will switch to another channel as soon as a party political broadcast commences, it is possible to prevent this by ruling that the same political broadcast must be shown at the same time on all the main channels. The remote control thus provides no escape for the politically-apathetic viewer. (Electricity authorities and water authorities have occasionally remarked on the increase in the number of cups of tea or of visits to the nation's bathrooms during such `no escape' periods.) This regulation nevertheless causes considerable technical problems for the broadcasters. If one channel is in the middle of a long programme (such as a film) at the time required to show a political advertisement, it will be difficult to accommodate the requirement without drastic changes to a whole schedule of programmes. Largely for this reason, the requirement of simultaneous transmission has been abandoned in Britain.
3. Production costs of free party advertisements on television and radio
Even if two parties are given the same number of minutes of free broadcasting time, the system may still work to the advantage of the wealthier party. A well-financed party will be able to spend money on preparing elaborate and costly film clips and will be able to employ some of the most experienced and costly advertising advisers and film-makers. By contrast, poor parties may be able to do little more than use their time slots for face-to-camera recordings of party leaders.
Arguably, the contrast between the production costs of rival parties may undermine the fairness principle on which the idea of free election broadcasts are based. If this is seen as a problem, possible solutions are (a) to provide money or facilities to each party to assist in the production of their broadcasts, or (b) to ban the use of filmed materials and to insist that all the parties use their slots for simple, face-to-camera broadcasts.
An example of the latter solution is adopted in Turkey. On free TV broadcasts, male and female speakers must wear suits and males must also have ties. Only the Turkish flag and party emblem can be seen in the background.
«« Пред. | ОГЛАВЛЕНИЕ
| 
