The accusation of a government obsessed with spin is one of the running sores of New Labour. Much of the time, the accusations are wildly exaggerated by journalists not averse to a bit of spinning themselves. But it is true that, in the early days of the government, it got into trouble giving partial information to some people early in order to keep them on-side.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of spin, however, we are now entering a media world where this type of communication is becoming less and less effective. An explosion in different types of media is leading to the fragmentation and decline of the more traditional outlets. When the government is trying to get stories out, it has rarely looked beyond the national papers and main television bulletins. But the audience for these is falling very fast.
All newspapers have seen a significant decline in circulation over the past few years, especially among the young. And traditional television news bulletins have not fared much better. The audience for the BBC’s six o’clock news in 1999 was around 7.5 million. In a typical week this year, the bulletin attracted 3.75 million viewers – a fall of 50 per cent.
The effects of the technology that has given rise to these changes are more profound than most politicians or political communicators have realised. First, it means that the government’s focus on tailoring its communication strategy to each individual outlet is becoming less and less effective. Spinning in this sense is just a waste of time. Instead, the government needs to concentrate simply on getting its message right, and getting the same message to the same outlets at the same time.
Second, it is becoming much more difficult for politicians to engage the large section of the population that is uninterested in politics. Now, it is easier than ever for the public to avoid political coverage. The scale of the challenge is apparent in a recent Electoral Commission study that found 54 per cent of respondents knew nothing or very little about politics.
Third and most important, even if more people avoid politics, it is very easy for those who are interested to get information directly from the source, rather than through the prism of political journalists’ interpretations. In this new world, it is ridiculous that the government calls in a select band of journalists at 11am and 4pm every day to tell them, and no one else, what it is up to. If a public company acted in the same way it would immediately be subject to a class action. Handing all the power to journalists – who become the anointed interpreters of what is going on as they rush out to do their two-ways outside No 10 – is not only bad for democracy, it is bad for government. It creates a totally unnecessary priesthood with exclusive access to information. A reformation is long overdue: the lobby should be web-cast and broadcast.
Equally, all government press conferences should be carried live through a government web-portal. And there is no reason why government ministers should not give interviews to their own portals about matters of policy. Explaining education policy in an interview with teachers on a government website would be much more effective and illuminating than doing 12 rounds with a Westminster-obsessed radio presenter. Of course, there will always be a role for tough questioning from the media pursuing their own agenda, but that should not be the only way in which the government gets its message across.
Maybe people will continue to want their news in a mediated way, and trust journalists to distil and analyse information for them. But the evidence points to some people having both the ability and desire to access political information directly, and do their own analysis, while some people want to avoid it altogether. Direct communications between government and citizen will become more important in the years ahead, and we should do all we can to encourage it.