Elections and watchdogs
The media’s role as a forum for competing political views and actors who vie for power to offer alternative ideas builds the country.
IN today’s democracy and political life, the media and journalists are fundamental to the protection and promotion of transparent and accountable democratic processes, including those concerning national election.
This is often called the ‘watchdog’ role.
So in order for citizens to make informed choices at the polls, the people must have accurate, timely, and reliable information.
The media also empowers the people to ask whether politicians are playing by the rules, why they are engaged in unfair and corrupt practices, having unfair influence on the legislative process and making unrealistic promises. If people cannot ask, watchdog journalists should seek to have them answered.
Therefore, transparency plays a big role during election. There is no room for secrecy but adequate space that ensures people are able to ask leaders and hear responses from leaders too. Transparency therefore is required at different governance levels to ensure access to information; accountability and legitimacy of individuals, institutions and processes themselves and for effective participation and healthy public debate.
In this way, watchdog journalism protects democracy and calls out undemocratic behaviour when and where it happens. The media’s presence at voting and counting centres is not only an information gathering exercise but critical to preventing electoral fraud and providing
electoral oversight.
But for this to happen freedom of speech and expression must be guaranteed and the media must be free to act independently and with impartiality.
And by informing citizens, it helps to protect the integrity of elections and the vibrancy and health of democracy. The very existence and enjoyment of watchdog journalism is an indicator of a healthy democracy and just leaders.
Journalists who work in media outlets controlled by government cannot work independently and objectively. They work against their own professional ethics and media standards. They cannot contribute effectively to providing democratic oversight and holding government accountable.
They are paid by taxpayer funds but they allow themselves to be controlled by politicians.
However, when journalists are provided the necessary space and opportunity to scrutinise politicians and political parties, and free to publish what they find without fear, that means the country enjoys a vibrant democracy and strong and independent media.
That is why authoritarianminded politicians make investigative journalism a prime target once they enter the corridors of power. That is why they detest watchdog journalism, because it points out their mistakes and reveals their incapacity to lead.
Watchdog journalism uncovered the famous Watergate scandal, a series of interlocking political scandals involving US
President Richard M. Nixon’s administration.
The scandal included a breakin at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C., on June 17, 1972, and the subsequent coverup by people who worked for or with the White House, and by Nixon himself.
Journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, writing for the newspaper, Washington Post, used interviews and investigative research to prove links between the Nixon administration and burglars. As a result, Nixon resigned, bringing renewed attention to the importance of the media in uncovering corruption, crime and human rights abuses.
In 2009, investigative journalists for The Telegraph in the United Kingdom, published reports of widespread misuse of expenses by members of parliament. The journalists went through roughly a million pages of information and uncovered massive misuse of public funds. The investigation exposed the scope of this abuse of office and as a result more than 20 MPs had to leave office.
In a public polling in the UK in 2013, respondents believed that investigative journalist had an impact on their democracy. Also, in the United States in 2020, Pew Research found that nearly three out of four US adults (73%) think it’s important for journalists to function as watchdogs over elected officials.
This shows that support for watchdog journalism is popular in strong and developed democracies.
People recognise that investigative journalists unearth lies and corruption and help bring interesting information to light.
This is also why authoritarian regimes place importance on silencing journalists, discouraging watchdog journalism and tries its best to bring media outlets under their control.
But watchdog journalists do not merely bring important information to public attention.
Their work, though often scrutinised and under-recognised, has the effect of helping keep politicians, leaders and public officials and business leaders in check. That is, if they know they could get caught and exposed for breaking the rules, they are less likely to do it.
In some ways, as the world goes through crisis after crisis, watchdog journalism becomes stronger than ever. The internet and social media make it much easier for information to come out and gives more people a bigger platform than ever before.
They are, of course, downsides to this. But on balance, it is both easier for watchdog journalists to disseminate information to more people, and more difficult for their targets to silence them. And that’s a good thing.
The future of watchdog journalism will also depend on how well investigative journalists are protected by law and from authoritarian regimes. Journalists have been threatened, sued, threatened, assaulted and even killed for their work.
Therefore, strong legal protections are needed for watchdog
journalists. This should include laws that guarantee a free and plural media environment, allow journalists’ access to publically elected officials, and also protect these journalists from getting entangled in frivolous court cases.
As we get closer to Election Day, which is about two weeks away, this newspaper is ready to carry out its watchdog duty.
By the very nature of its work, it will continue to reveal uncomfortable truths and step on politicians’ toes. But it will never cease to do its job.
Remember that a national election cannot be democratic unless the public is fully able to participate and is unhindered in exercising its choice.
As such, a free and independent media should exist to ensure there is a transparent and public platform for debate, exchanging of ideas and discussion.
The media’s role as a forum for competing political views and actors who vie for power to offer alternative ideas builds the country.
It is good because the media promotes space for dialogue between competing and diverse political perspectives.
When groups are engaged effectively and allowed to cooperate, this can help reduce polarisation and enhance democracy, unity, peace and tolerance.
Otherwise, the opposite with become true!
Until we meet on this same page same time next week, stay blessed, stay healthy and stay safe!