Significance of televised public dialogs on voter perception

Muhamad Ali, Jakarta

The General Elections Commission (KPU) has decided to schedule televised public dialogs, rather than debates, for June 30 and July 1, to provide all candidates with an opportunity to convey their visions, missions and programs. The term dialog was officially selected to prevent "any candidates from discrediting others".

The dialogs, also called joint television appearances, will be held in two parts, each of which will last 90 minutes and will be broadcast by several stations on prime-time evening television. Participants will consist of some 300 people including campaign teams, KPU members, the media, civic groups, academics and special guests, with candidates to be questioned first by a select panel.

This will be the first time in Indonesian history that such public dialogs are being held officially.

Within the national context, it can be argued that the dialogs will be significant in regards not only political campaigns, but also political education and democratization.

U.S. scholars have debated the significance of televised public debates in that country, where the activity is part and parcel of its political culture. Its detractors argue that the debates have no significant influence, because they simply reinforce voters' predispositions. Instead, party affiliation, parental influence, income, religion, ideology and the like are considered more influential factors.

In addition, the debates were deemed to have caused very few changes of perspective and focused more on presentation and character than on current issues and policy, as the format allowed the candidates' appearances to be more important than the substance of their statements.

They further argued that presidents were not required to debate in office, the debates did not reveal candidates' qualifications for the presidency and that personality and image eclipsed the discussion of issues. Other critics approach the debates as just another event, and can live with or without them.

On the other hand, their proponents argue that the debates are important and influential, and that the mass media has a great impact on the electorate. The candidate's political ideology may be conveyed to the voting public in other ways, but the most prominent and enduring was through television.

Public broadcasts relayed candidates' credentials, including political platforms, characters and their ability to convey ideas through the medium. Young voters were raised on television and expected to see candidates who could perform adequately on television, they said.

Public debates or dialogs are primarily for television, a powerful communication tool in wooing voters. Exposure to politics via television cultivates a voter's attitude toward issues and candidates and thus aids in determining their vote. As such, television offers a means to provide political education to the nation as a single community, and public dialogs can serve democracy. In short, television could function as a vehicle of direct democracy.

For candidates, the public dialogs will be important not only to familiarize voters with their names and faces, but also to sell their ideas, characters and performance. They feel the need to be telegenic and comfortable with the electronic media, while they must also be intelligent, good communicators.

According to an International Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) survey conducted on June 1, personality and policies on key issues are vital rationales to sway voters in their favor. More specifically, leadership quality is the most crucial of all.

The dialogs will be an important contributing factor to the democratic process of the direct presidential election -- as a platform for political education, legitimization of the democratic process and for presenting the national and international credibility of a future president.

They will also promote discussion about political matters within families, schools, workplaces and communities, raise political awareness and enhance political knowledge.

In the U.S., some debates have resulted in a shift in public opinion toward one candidate over another. Such a shift might also happen here as a direct result of public dialog aired on TV.

The IFES survey listed the most pressing issues: reducing corruption, checking inflation, creating jobs, maintaining territorial integrity, fighting terrorism and protecting the environment.

The dialogs will serve the majority of the electorate better than any other single campaign communication tool in presenting the candidates' personalities and their stance on current issues. Yet, since accountability is essential to democracy, a televised political activity should also be fair.

The writer is a lecturer at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University.