Mass Media in a Democracy

Although Adlai Stevenson's recent complaint of the effect of mass media on the American electorate during the past Presidential campaign has a tinge of sour grapes to it, it is worth studying. He fears that television and radio exert an unhealthy influence on American thinking, in that they tend to reduce the People to a mass, prone to the fallacies of a collective mind.

Mr. Stevenson observes this trend in facets of American life outside the political area, but his particular concern is with the dangerous potentials of the communications system in an election. He fears that one party could buy an election by saturating television and radio channels with its candidates and its propaganda, thus playing on the herd tendencies in America.

We, too, are concerned with the growing power of communications over the American mind, just as we are concerned with the evidences of creeping conformity. America, however, can no longer be an atomistic society; it is an urban, industrial nation subject to all the intellectual dangers of the levelling process. In its politics, these dangers are becoming increasingly evident.

In the last campaign, television and radio were freely used by both parties. The Republican party, however, was able to utilize these media far more effectively than the Democrats, simply by virtue of a larger campaign fund. The Senate Subcommittee on Elections and Privileges has revealed that the Republicans outspent their opponents 2 to 1. The GOP was able to obtain not only more time on the air, but, from the important standpoint of audience appeal, better time.

America cannot, however, sacrifice having both both parties present their candidates and platforms to the national audience out of fear that the richer party will always win. The electorate has a right to information during a campaign and can no longer obtain it simply in whistle-stop speeches. An effective means of assuring major parties equal opportunity to state their case must be found.

Congressional legislation, enforced by the Federal Communications Commission, to make major networks grant all parties polling ten percent of the vote in the previous Presidential election equal and adequate free air time during the campaign would help alleviate the obvious discrepancies between the two parties' public relations activities. There is in this plan no attempt to lessen the potential of the mass media for good or evil. There is, however, the hope that by partially equalizing the air time utilized during a campaign, no party will be able to saturate the public mind with its "line."

Radio and television, as semi-public media, should consider this legislation as more of an opportunity for public service than as an imposition.

These industries are responsible for educating and enlightening the electorate, a responsibility which cannot be shirked. Neither can it be exploited by the financial inequalities of the major political parties. Congress must perform a constructive role in regulating the exercise of this necessary duty.