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.