CommentIsLinked@LDV … Chris Huhne: The implicit media prejudice against the Lib Dems

Over at the Independent, Lib Dem shadow home secretary Chris Huhne argues that the real bias at broadcasters is not against the Conservatives, but the Liberal Democrats. Here’s an excerpt:

The evidence of such bias is compelling and persistent. Broadcasters repeatedly ignore a third view on matters of the day. Even where Labour and Conservative views are nearly identical – such as on crime, Afghanistan or Iraq – news organisations evidently feel they can eliminate the Liberal Democrat viewpoint in the interests of simple, adversarial debate. The idea that there might be more than two points of view in an argument is normal in other European democracies, but not here.

Reporters even refer to “both parties” or “both main parties” as if we were still in the Fifties-style two-party system, which is deeply insulting to voters who do not live in Labour-Conservative battlegrounds. Forty per cent of parliamentary seats have the Liberal Democrats in first or second place.

The real bias of the broadcasters is thus not any deliberate attempt to skew reporting, but an unthinking conspiracy to remove the Liberal Democrat point of view from public debate between elections. It is bias by indifference. But such a bias more effectively undermines our support than anything else. People do not support a party they do not know. …

This is particularly important when so many voters for both Labour and the Conservatives are motivated primarily by dislike of the other. In these circumstances, there could be a particularly large election bounce for the Liberal Democrats. The recent YouGov marginals poll found that 37 per cent of voters would support the Liberal Democrats if they thought we could win.

Britain’s broadcasters should not prejudge the voters, let alone the electoral system. The only fair approach, at a time of heightened political sensitivity, is to apply the rules as they would be applied in the general election.

You can read Chris’s article in full here.

Read more by or more about or .
This entry was posted in LibLink.
Advert

6 Comments

  • There is much of merit in this article, tho I would broaden the scope from the libdems to coverage of dissenting points of view on any major story which is outside the “established” consensus of the two bigger parties. however, i can’t help thinking that surely part of the blame is down to the media operation at cowley street. Maybe we need to force our way into the media more often and in more imaginative ways…

  • How would that be achieved exactly? Journalists will cover what they want to. There is no way even the most competent press office can force its way into a story against the will of the person who is writing it. And journalists for the most part take the Labour v. Tory view because that matches their view of what politics is about. Do not forget also that journalists are for the most part trying to bang their stories out as quickly as possible so sourcing comment from all parties requires a lot of effort.

    I am not an expert on press but from what I can tell we will normally only get in when:

    a) we have something striking, different and interesting to say;
    b) when an article is about such a momentous issue that there is enough column space and journalistic effort devoted to it to include all mainstream points of view;
    c) when one of the the other teams’ press offices have been slack in responding to a particular story
    d) when the article is about us.

One Trackback

  • By Twitter – Data Vs Copy | Delib Blog on Mon 19th October 2009 at 2:19 pm.

    […] Member website is terrible for this at the moment, starting posts titles with phrases like ‘CommentIsLinked@LDV‘. How engaging for the non tech […]

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Roland
    @nick Baird - “ or whether it was just a terrible mistake caused by a lack of attention and professionalism by the officers involved.” I think this is th...
  • David Murray
    Typo: I first joined the Liberal Party in November 1966, almost 60 years ago this year !...
  • Tristan Ward
    Personally I'm with Tim Farron who is quoted in the Politics Home article as saying the Lib Dems ought to be the party for sensible people, or words to that eff...
  • David Murray
    The current 'explainer' and previous editions seem to be obsessed with statistics, rather than being a proactive guide to the way forward. We don't want to foll...
  • Tony Ferguson
    Lets hope the Board and the Conference Committee can agree to schedule this at a time when most members will have arrived in Brighton and not at 9am on Saturday...