The survival of democracy depends on an enlightened electorate. For one thing, the common routine of government needs to be publicised. More importantly, every democratic government must have its fingers on the electoral pulse.

In the words of Thomas Jefferson: “Information must penetrate the whole mass of the people.” Jefferson held that “the basis of government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate for a moment to prefer the latter”.

Informing the people is an essential function of democracy and the information function in every free democracy has become a preserve of the media.

Under ideal conditions, it is not enough that a newspaper or a broadcasting station should be able to disseminate views without bias. A pluralistic environment makes sure that the citizen is not obliged to have only one organ, grinding out the same tune.

The Fourth Estate

The foregoing explains why the media have come to be considered as “The Fourth Estate”, ranking behind the Crown, the Church and Parliament in Britain. It all stems from the fact that the Press came to be regarded as public watchdog and opinion former.

Besides reporting the news, the Press editorialises. But it also makes space available for comment. Some newspapers engage columnists, giving them all possible leeway, with one eye fixed on quality and the other on circulation.

The complexity of public affairs, the evolution of social organisation, the pervasiveness of science and technology, and other developments, increased the demand for interpretative and in-depth journalism as well as news analysis. Hence the appearance of a new breed of opinion makers, who inquire around, investigate, think through, and sum up the result. The views of a columnist are as good as that of any other man or woman – although the best interpretative and analytical efforts call for insights, resourcefulness, experience and a talent for getting close enough to the official world in order to discern hidden significances, independently of the official perspective.

Add to this the ability to present complex matters in simple prose, and you have a respected and, possibly, an influential columnist who can “describe the event of the day in its proper relationship to the history of yesterday and the dream of tomorrow”.

This kind of columnist is a rara avis that would be snapped up by the quality press in cosmopolitan cities. He or she is a professional and a figure of awe, who understands “the inward mutterings of the age”, and has the ability to focus a powerful mind on the ultimate problem of democracy: informing mass opinion.

***

In Malta, we have more daily and weekly papers, as well as broadcasting stations, than many cosmopolitan cities with millions of inhabitants. Alas, quality does not come with quantity.

The media lacks the solid base that comes with mass circulation and the advertising revenue sustained by a big enough market. Competition and fragmentation denudes the financial input, and erodes such human resources with the necessary potential as are available

Other indigenous characteristics have also emerged to dent the potential of opinion makers across the local media spectrum.

Indigenous characteristics

Politicians, hungry for visibility, have hogged considerable space on a regular basis in most daily and weekly papers. To be fair, it must be said that a few of them have been active journalists during their career – and a limited number of these may be considered authoritative columnists in their own right.

On the other hand, a disproportionate number of active politicians sprang out of nowhere to write regular weekly or fortnightly columns on cabbages and kings – mostly cabbages.

Some rely on ghost writers and a number of them write de rigueur in their party paper and preach to the converted. Others write copiously and assiduously in their own party, and in the independent, press. More often than not, one anticipates the reading material and grasps the message by the headline.

There is a more insidious breed of wolves in sheep’s’ clothing who pose as columnists. In reality they may be slick public relations operatives or self-serving professionals, who ride the journalistic merry-go-round and brazenly hide their conflict of interest. Those of them who overdo it give the game away and lose their credibility.

Does this waste of time, effort and resources have any bearing on local opinion? Or is it a drain of resources that could otherwise be more effectively employed by the politicians (and the media) concerned?

It would appear that the more recent electoral results, and the steady swing of the pendulum, have brought home a healthy and welcome message – influences, more persuasive than politicians and PROs-cum-columnists, are playing a significant role.

Shot in the arm

The impact of education and the advance of pluralism in broadcasting speeded up the emancipation of the electorate. This shot in the arm has proved to be beneficial, particularly to the younger generation, who is more inquisitive, non-conformist and headstrong. The new generation views a world as it really is – one that, very often, does not conform to the picture certain politicians carry in their heads.

Most emancipated voters do not see first, and then define. They define first and then see. They do not accept stereotypes at face value. They have their modern concepts and they assess politicians by their own criteria.

Politicians who give the impression that they have just come from the mountain top with a set of tablets do not fit in the latter-day democratic milieu any longer.

The new, accepted wisdom is that, if a country is to be governed with the consent of the governed, then the governed must be able to arrive at opinions on what their governors want them to consent to. The electorate is aware of its sovereignty and is becoming increasingly determined to exercise it.

It is the columnist who is not beholden to any political party and can perform an essential service to the emerging thinking electorate – namely by critical analysis, to be savoured and filtered by the electorate which is sovereign.

It is fertility of insight, rather than vitriol, which nourishes democracy. This, to my mind, should be the star by which authentic opinion-makers should navigate.

Opinion-makers, as well as politicians, should further bear in mind that, with the rapid advance of technology, they are being short-circuited by an expanding audience, which consumes information and interacts by computer. Blogging is democratising the process of opinion making

Before long, it will be, very largely, the blogging community that will descend from the mountain top, intent on setting the democratic pace. The media and their opinion-makers will then have to be more focused.

[email protected]