Significance of televised public dialogs on voter perception
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.