Some
countries practice a news blackout (also known as a silence period or a
reflection period) on campaign news before or during voting. This means that
media must stop covering campaigning, and often that campaigning must stop, for
a designated time preceding voting day. The intention is the give voters the
opportunity to reflect on their choice, free from the media ‘noise.’ Often, this is a voluntary arrangement. In
places such as France where a blackout is legislated, the regulatory body needs
to spend resources enforcing it. In Israel, which has extensive prohibitions on
campaign news, the Independent Broadcasting Authority is required to police its
observance. The implementation of this prohibition illustrates the dangers
inherent in such restrictions: the IBA tends to interpret the application of
the law in a particularly strict manner, to avoid being held responsible for
its breach.[i]
Blackouts are usually 24 hours or less,
(for example in Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, France, Hungary,
Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Spain, Slovenia, Macedonia), but are sometimes
longer. In Indonesia, a 3-day blackout is required. Estonian law divides its election campaign
into four periods, with a blackout of election campaigning for three of them.
The application (or nomination) period, the voting period, and the counting and
publication of results are all periods when campaigning is forbidden.
The
Media Experts Commission in Bosnia-Herzegovina was an example of a regulatory
body that vigorously enforced a blackout from 24 hours before polls opened in
the 1998 presidential elections until the polls closed. It did this by issuing
clear statements in advance of the blackout period and then relying on the
findings of its own media monitoring unit. It concluded that most of the
violations of the blackout were a consequence of uncertainty in applying the
rules. One television channel, for example, when it broadcast film of
candidates at polling stations mentioned the names of their parties - which it
was not allowed to do. In one case regarded by the MEC as more serious, a
station broadcast interviews with two political leaders. The Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe referred the case to the Election Appeals
Sub-Commission (EASC), the complaints body, which struck nine candidates of the
party from its election list. The MEC itself commented that most countries, in
most conditions, would probably regard such an approach as draconian,
unnecessary, and an interference with media freedom.[ii]
Papua New Guinea has an unusual arrangement
when it comes to managing media coverage.
Due to the logistical challenges of holding an election in a country of
small and sparsely-populated islands, polling is scheduled to take place over a
two week period, on a rolling basis around the country. Campaigning, polling,
counting, and reporting of results, continues throughout the electoral period –
in other words, there is neither a defined campaign end, nor a news blackout.
While there are logical reasons for this process, civil society actors are
concerned about the undue influence of on-going campaigning and reporting while
people are voting.
In this age of
globalized media, it is almost impossible to ensure that international media
published outside national borders follow blackout rules. When voters have
access to the Internet or international television, the blackout becomes
meaningless. At the most, the regulatory body can attempt to ask overseas media
to respect domestic rules. With social media blackout periods are even more difficult to enforce and breeches even more difficult to sanction.
[i] Akiba A. Cohen
and Gadi Wolfsfeld, "Overcoming Adversity and Diversity: The Utility of
Television Political Advertising in Israel", in Political Advertising in Western Democracies, eds. Lynda Lee Kaid
and Christina Holtz-Bacha, (London/Thousands Oaks: Sage Publications, 1995)
[ii] “Final Report:
Media in Elections 1998”, (report by Media Experts Commission, 1998), 33-34.
