large numbers of recipients whose only choice is to choose another
channel, ‘listen’ or switch off.
In this context we might ask: what information on political life is
available to be reported? How many channels of such information are
available? Who controls and edits the transmission of information by
these channels in whose interests? How do potential recipients of the
messages react to them? Do the mass media represent the masses to
the elite?
If the media do not know what the government is doing then
clearly they cannot report it to the electorate. In this respect demo-
cratic countries vary greatly in the access reporters and citizens can
obtain to information on government decision making. At one
extreme, the Swedish tradition of ‘open government’ requires
virtually all decision making to be publicly documented. At the other,
in the past the British tradition of official secrecy has made the
assumption that executive deliberations will be kept private unless a
positive decision has been made to release information. The United
States has adopted the opposite assumption with its Freedom of
Information Act which requires federal government agencies to reveal
any document at the request of any enquirer unless reasons such as
national security or personal confidentiality can be plausibly advanced
against this. In Britain a non-statutory Code of Practice on Access to
Government Information (April 1994) rather half-heartedly moved in
the open government direction. It allowed for numerous exceptions- including advice to ministers and anything that could be the subject
of a public enquiry. The Blair government was pledged to introduce
a stronger statutory measure, but the legislation that resulted (the
Freedom of Information Act 2000) has been criticised as weaker
than the Code. The Act has been implemented slowly and without
enthusiasm, with new financial and administrative barriers to its use
already being proposed by the government in 2006.
The extent to which journalists have a tradition of, and are
rewarded for, hard-hitting investigative journalism is also of
importance. In the United States there is a long tradition of such
‘muck-raking’ journalism culminating in the ‘Watergate’ investi-
gations of Bernstein and Woodward (1974) which contributed to the
ignominious resignation of President Nixon.
Another problem with political communication patterns from a
democratic point of view is the relatively limited number of effective
198 DEMOCRACY