Back to top
Back to top

Two to one concur – Unregulated Political Comment Online Helps the Democratic Process

Online journalism and political blogging will be good for the fair conduct of the UK general election and for the democratic process as a whole, a group of senior media practitioners, bloggers and press freedom experts declared at the annual UK World Press Freedom Day debate. Following a spirited exchange it was agreed in a vote of more than two to one that, “Unregulated political comment online helps the democratic process”, (40 for the motion, 15 against, 1 abstaining).

Watch the full debate or the key highlights (complements of journalism.co.uk) in the sidebar.

On 9th April, at the annual debate, Sir Robert Worcester (MORI/Ipsos Group; University of Kent), Sunny Hundal (founder of the Liberal Conspiracy blog), Caroline Thomson (Chief Operating Officer, BBC), Professor Steven Barnett (University of Westminster), Paul Bradshaw (Birmingham City University) and Nicholas Jones (Author, ex-BBC) debated the future of democracy and journalism in the digital age. The torrent of arguments was skilfully moderated by the Chair, William Horsley (Chair of the Association of European Journalists, UK).Founder of MORI polling Sir Robert Worcester joined forces with Liberal Conspiracy blog founder Sunny Hundal to argue that while the internet will carry more openly biased comment and more character attacks than ever before, this should not tempt towards regulation of the online space.

Sir Robert opened the debate saying that the US-style First Amendment right to free speech should never be sacrificed in the face of regulation, and that the variety of arguments provided by the “speaker’s corner” of the internet benefited the democratic process. Hundal stressed that formal regulation is not required in the blogosphere as successful sites are those that practice self-regulation, and ultimately deliver accurate stories and reporting.

Sir Robert and Hundal were challenged by Caroline Thomson of the BBC and Professor Steven Barnett of the University of Westminster, who claimed that unregulated content alone can devolve into unstructured partisan opinion, leaving voters without an impartial voice to turn to. Blogging is often a distorting and trivialising force which merely provides an echo chamber for existing voices. The online space was moreover exclusionary to a large proportion of the population who were still not online.

It is therefore key to democracy and the democratic process that the unregulated space is accompanied by trusted factual content – so regulated, impartial, accurate content and rigorous analysis sits alongside comment, both informed and uninformed.

Also hotly debated was the arrival of online TV and radio channels which run to heavy political agendas without any regulation or legal requirements of fairness or balance. The ability of these online sites to influence the news agendas of the major broadcasters was seen as a trend which requires increased attention.

At the opening of the debate, Hannah Marshall was announced as the winner of the 2010 World Press Freedom Day Student Journalism Competition. Hannah, an MA student studying Media at Southampton Solent University, was honoured for her article on how new media can positively effect the UK election and the democratic process as a whole. Read Hannah's winning entry.

The UK National Commission Wales Committee hosted a World Press Freedom Day lecture on 9th April featuring Martin Shipton, Chief Reporter, Western Mail, on the theme "New Threats to Press Freedom". Find out more here.

The 2010 World Press Freedom Day London debate was organised by the UK National Commission for UNESCO and the Press Freedom Network, with the support of the Frontline Club and the BBC College of Journalism.

 

Written: 15/04/2010 , last modified: 15/04/2010

Back to top
Back to top

Regional and accessibility