A blog by Nicole Clark-University of Canberra, Australia
In post broadcast society, the expansion of digital
technology and variability of media outlets has lead to the fragmentation of
audience attention where, the presumption of attention is no longer relevant
(Bennet and Lyengar, 2008). Politics is
the theory and practice of influencing individuals on a civil or individual
level, with the act of achieving and exercising positions of governance within
a society (McAllister, 1998) Post broadcast
democracy, therefore, refers to the concept in fragmentation of political
discourse between politicians, citizens and dichotomies of shared media
consumption. Media separation, has lead
changes in management strategies in public relations (PR) that possibly
influence how politicians and
citizens engage in political discourse with post broadcast democracy, digital
technology and online/ offline media platforms (Wilson, 2011).
Politicians are public figures; they are individuals publicly selected to govern the structure of organised democracy (Macallister, 1998). Prime Minister Tony Abbot , recently announced on television, the close of the Science Ministry- showcasing Science as unimportant. However, on Twitter, regarding Science, he broadcast, @TonyAbbotMHR ‘Congratulations to Terry Speed and all winners at the Prizes for Science Awards - a terrific evening showcasing the work of our scientists’.
Mr Abbot
demonstrated duplicity on a topic- on one hand,
expressing a political statement the other, a personal one. Flew (2008) attains, post- broadcast democracy and digital/non-digital platforms allow
politicians to engage in politics in contrasting lights, which often result
with inconsistencies in political discourse. Thus, revealing the improbity of
democracy. Williamson. et al (2010), explains, the duality of digital media-
unlike traditional, creates difficulties in PR strategies with political
clientele. Davis (2002) highlight, politicians exercise caution when
discussing controversial issues, to avoid discrepancies towards political deceit.
Therefore, through Twitter, Mr Abbot released un-moderated content with the
potential to influence politics and public opinion on Science.
In contrast, citizen engagement in politics is divergent.
Australian citizens engage in bipartisan politics and choose which two major
parties best represent their personal views on democracy (McAllister,1998).
Since the beginning of democracy, citizens have participated in
politics via voting and public opinion (McAllister ,1998). For example, a
citizen who submits a letter to the editor via newspaper, is able to have their
opinion published- providing it meet the criteria for exposure. Jorgensen,
(2002) attributes, this type of non- digital
political involvement is strictly mediated, inferring it requires strong PR
strategies. Hence, for opinions deemed inappropriate publishment is unlikely. Richardson and Franklin
(2010) explain, opinion pages moderate the distribution of political chaos,
only publishing fair and representative bipartisan views. However, in digital
platforms, there is vast un-moderated political engagement among citizens. For
instance, (dontbeafuckingidiot.com), exposes
the political tyranny of the current Liberal Government ,by contrasting strong
opposing labor views with that of ‘backwards’ liberal ideologies.
Consequently, PR strategies are ineffective,
content is un-moderated and political engagement is difficult to police. Di Gennaro and Dutton (2006) state, in online digital platforms, there is no real
way to control citizen broadcast. They ascertain, citizen engagement through
digital platforms, allow for un-tame elements of political truths only
available in post- broadcast democracy.
Therefore, citizens engage in politics and distribute mass opinion that
likely influence political participation.
Through the dichotomies of media platforms in post- broadcast
democracy, citizens and politicians engage in politics in revolutionary ways.
On/offline platforms are principally different, so too is the level of
political engagement, and not all politics are moderated by PR strategies. In
conclusion, politicians discussing certain topics on digital platforms not
consistent with current broadcast in non- digital platforms; avoid exposure of
duplicity and political sway. Consequently, citizens that engage in politics
attempting to expose these in discrepancies, are unlikely to express this
through non- digital platforms moderated by PR strategies. Citizens instead,
broadcast through un-moderated digital platforms, to expose discrepancies that
influence politics in a post- broadcast democracy.
Abbot,Tony (@TonyAbbotMHR).‘Congratulations to Terry Speed
and all winners at the Prizes for Science Awards - a terrific evening
showcasing the work of our scientists’.30 October, 2013.Tweet
Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of
minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal
of Communication,58(4), 707-731.
Davis, A. (2002). Public
Relations Democracy: Politics, Public Relations and the Mass Media in Britain.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Di Gennaro, C., & Dutton, W. (2006). The Internet and the
public: Online and offline political participation in the United Kingdom. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(2), 299-313.
Flew, T. (2008). Not yet the internet election: Online media,
political commentary and the 2007 Australian federal election. Media International Australia
Incorporating Culture and Policy, (126), 5-13.
Jorgensen, K. W. (2002). Understanding the conditions for
public discourse: four rules for selecting letters to the editor. Journalism Studies, 3(1), 69-81.
McAllister, I. (1998). Civic education and political
knowledge in Australia.Australian Journal of Political Science, 33(1), 7-23.
Richardson, J. E., & Franklin, B. (2004). Letters of
intent: election campaigning and orchestrated public debate in local
newspapers' letters to the editor.Political
Communication, 21(4), 459-478.
Williamson, A., Miller, L., & Fallon, F. (2010). Behind
the Digital Campaign. An
Exploration of the Use, Impact and Regulation of Digital Campaigning. London:
Hansard Society.
Wilson, J. (2011). Playing with politics: Political fans and
Twitter faking in post-broadcast democracy. Convergence:
The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 17(4), 445-461.
