1 Political Spin and Ethics: The Use of Political Spin in Modern Day Politics Can Be Justified or Not.

Have you ever thought what term a British game could share with modern politics? The answer is the term spin. The linguistic origin of the word spin can be found in cricket, where it is used to describe the bowlers effort to confuse his opponent by making the ball take an unpredictable path (Moloney 125). Similarly, in politics, the term refers to politicians intention to mislead their audience by providing it with a biased interpretation of events, policies and data (Manson 2). It is obvious from this definition that spin is considered as something inherently wrong. Surprisingly, many scholars have challenged this idea, setting off a debate over whether the use of spin in modern politics can be justified or not. On one end of the spectrum, there are those who claim that political spin cannot be justified because of the many negative consequences it has on society as a whole. On the other end, its supporters present spin as a genuine response to the new media environment and a vital part of any democratic society, thus providing a legitimate justification for spin. In my view, although political spin can be seen as a response to the pressures of the new media environment, it is still not ethically justifiable because it is detrimental to society as it undermines journalism, politics and ultimately democracy. The aim of the present essay is to prove that a practice that has so many negative implications and is responsible for societys degradation can never be justified. The essay is divided into two parts. The first part offers a discussion of the opposing views, while the second examines the ethical dimensions and negative consequences of political spin on democracy, politics and journalism.

2 Advocates of political spin, mainly politicians and PR experts, assert that the use of spin in political communication is legitimate because it is the unavoidable outcome of a democratic society that fosters freedom of speech and free expression of ideas . This argument finds support in Robin Browns article Rethinking Government Media Relations: Towards a theory of Spin. In his article, Brown maintains that [s]pin is only found in democratic regimes; in authoritarian structures spin is not required because the maximization of the positive coverage that spin provides is ensured through the use of censorship (9). In democratic societies, where authority is delegated through the election process, politicians have to compete with each other in order to gain public support (McNair 51). However, public support could be gained only through publicity and, more specifically, through positive publicity, which can only be achieved through spin (52). The politicians quest for constant positive publicity has created a dependency on the media and a need to employ communication tactics in order to control the medias agenda (52). The latter has proved a great feat to accomplish given the radical changes in the media environment (Brown 6-7). First of all, the number of media has increased, as has their size (Campbell 2); for example, in the past The Times on a given Saturday was 30 pages and now is 300 (2). Second, the media have moved to a consumer - centric structure (Brown 6) aiming at aligning their content with audience preferences. This, according to the former General Director of BBC, means more interpretation of news than objective presentation of information (7). These changes in media size and content increase the possibilities for negative coverage by political opponents and journalists who interpret the news and, thus, put extra pressure on

3 politicians to counteract negative influences (7). So, it is at this point that the need for spin appears. Yet, even though it is evident that spin is the effect of mass media democracy, the cause and effect rationale fails to provide spin with a moral justification, because it overlooks the negative consequences of spin for society as a whole. The main negative impact of spin is that it undermines democracy. According to Kevin Moloney, Spin is a weak or soft form of propaganda (128). In other words, spin aims to manipulate public opinion through the use of misleading information. This intended manipulation of public thought results in a misrepresentation of reality that threatens the foundations of democracy (Brown 8). More specifically, in a democratic society where voters are dependent on the media in order to have access to information needed for democratic decision-making, spin undermines democracy in two ways (McNair 50). First, it overstates the positive aspects of a candidate, policy or event (Maloney 132). Second, it deprives voters of access to information which is considered negative, but which is necessary for the electorate to make a rational decision (Manson 20). So through manipulation, spin directs the democratic decisionmaking process (19). Furthermore, given that spin is deceptive by definition, it is opposed to the democratic values of equality and respect. By managing peoples awareness, spin can be seen as unequal and disrespectful treatment because it favors one group (politicians) at the expense of another (voters) (Brown 9). In addition, the use of spin in modern politics degrades political life. According to Scammel, political spin favors image at the expense of substance (as cited in Moloney 125). In other words, the core of modern politics nowadays is the projection of personality and style rather than the policies and argumentation emphasized in the past

4 (McNair 52). In this context, ideological principles are sacrificed for the acquisition of political power. An example that makes this point evident is the case of Dick Morris, Bill Clintons spin-doctor, chose to blur the ideological lines of Clintons position in order to gain greater support from a wider range of potential voters (52). This example highlights the fact that spin has transformed politics into a game of power, where there is no room for political values and ideals (52). Given that ideology is an integral part of politics, the absence of clear boundaries between the different parties threatens the existence of politics itself (Campbell 3). More specifically, by observing politicians that abandon political principles, voters have realized that politicians aim to promote their own personal interests instead of the interests of the electorate (53). As a result, voters have lost confidence in their leaders (Manson 18). Furthermore, in Alastair Campbells view, there [is] a sense that politics and the media [are] involved in a dialogue from which the public [is] becoming excluded(3). The essence of Campbells argument is that nowadays voters have become aware of the interdependent relationship between politics and media and they feel alienated from the political sphere. According to an independent review of government communications, which was conducted by the UK government in 2004, [T]rust in government and politicians is at its lowest, at least in modern times (as cited in Manson 18). This lack of trust has resulted in increasingly lower numbers of voters turning out on election-day (18). This low turnout is detrimental to the political process because it undermines the foundations of democratic participation. The undermining of democracy and politics is not the only negative effect of spin. Political spin is detrimental for journalism as well. According to Kevin Moloney, spindoctors deprive journalists of the freedom to act according to their role as supervisors of

5 the political environment1 (127). More specifically, political PR experts use aggressive behaviors towards journalists in order to influence the medias agenda (127). Journalists witness that these behaviors range from public humiliation and bullying even to harassment (131). Because of this oppression, journalists have adopted passive forms of journalism. According to Moloney, they have entered into an exchange relationship with politicians, in the sense that instead of scrutinizing government actions, they have become accomplices in the abuse of power (130). For example, the Daily Mirror in the 1980s inaccurately accused Arthur Scargill2 of having links in Libya in order to undermine the 1984-85 miners strike (McNair 57). These allegations, as it can be concluded, were aimed at supporting the governments efforts to suspend the strike. Furthermore, according to Former Conservative Minister Lord Wakeham, the result of the 1992 elections was determined by biased media coverage (57). These cases highlight the issue of bias, which undermines reporting and journalism in general. In summary, all the evidence above proves that political spin has multiple negative consequences in the spheres of democracy, politics and journalism. Given that these institutions are the foundations of public life, their degradation will prove disastrous for society. As a result, in an ethical context, the use of political spin cannot be justified, due to the fact that it goes against public interest. Consequently, I believe that it is time for all politicians to recognize their share of blame and to adopt more responsible behavior towards the electorate because, after all, it is their duty to promote the interest of their countrymen.

This is the Fourth estate role of journalists and it is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Tucker, G. Unwin and Philip Unwin, History of Publishing Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica Online, 2011. Web. 13 Oct. 2011.
2

Arthur Scargill in 1980 was president of the National Union of Mineworkers .

6 Works Cited Brown, Robin. Rethinking Government-Media Relations: Towards a Theory of Spin. Paper prepared for ECRC Conference-Marburg, 18-21 September 2003. Web. 8 Sept. 2011. Campbell, Alastair. Its Time to Bury Spin. British Journalism Review 13.4 (2002): 15-23. Web. 8 Sept. 2011. < http://www.bjr.org.uk/data/2002/no4_campbell> McNair, Brian. Journalism, Politics and Public Relations. An Ethical Appraisal. Media Ethics. Ed. Matthew Kieran. London and New York: Routledge, 2000. 49-65 Manson, Neil. The Ethics of Spin, under review for publication in the Journal of Applied Philosophy. Web. 8 Sept. 2011. Moloney, Kevin. The Rise and Fall of Spin: Changes of Fashion in the Presentation of UK Politics. Journal of Public Affairs 1.2 (2001): 124-135