We all have, I suppose, a sense of who we are. Over years of growing up, through exposure to outside influences, we develop a sense of what we are capable of, a sense of how we are perceived by those about us. It may not be wholly shared, but it is ours. To then be confronted with an image that is unfamiliar can be disconcerting, especially if that image is unfavourable.
And so it is with political parties, especially at conference time. Inside, spirits are high, enthusiasm for the electoral battles to come is abundant, and thoughts turn to potential victory. Meantime, out in the 'real world', the media are painting a different picture, one that suits their agenda, the simplistic left versus right, A versus B. They wish to talk of winners and losers, whereas we think of winning, and what we might do if we were fortunate enough to achieve victory. We think of principles and grand ideas, of philosophy and theory, whilst journalists are looking to blame someone for whatever is exciting them this week.
"If only we could reach out to the public to tell them of our plans to do X or Y", all would be well. It is my view that there is a danger that it will become more and more difficult to do so as the media fragment. Our views will increasingly be refracted through a prism of bias, often by no means malicious, in favour of the perceived voice of the mob, personified by opinion makers whose volume and tenor obscure their utter lack of mandate.
As one fears for any individual who is defined by what others say as opposed to what they themselves do, one fears for a democracy whose flaws are magnified yet whose virtues are overlooked.
No comments:
Post a Comment