Can we break the Spin Cycle?

[This article was a reflection on the 2000 Federal Election but still holds true today.]

Four out of ten eligible voters decided not to cast a ballot for any of the five major parties or for any of the other parties contesting the election. With such a wide range of choices, why were so many Canadians alienated from our political process? Of course, we know that the campaign in 2000 was quite rough, with plenty of invective and hyperbole. But was 2000 really any different? A review of previous elections finds that aggressive campaigning is the norm in a political system that is the most ruthless in the Western World.

Perhaps the major difference was that this campaign was more about the leaders than the parties or their policies. Previous elections were about something; regional representation in 1997, the need for change in 1993, our relationship with the United States in 1988, and so on. But what was the main issue in 2000? We know from our daily election tracking program that concern about health care was the main preoccupation of Canadians and that this concern increased throughout the campaign. But aside from declarations in support of the five principles outlined in the Canada Health Act and accusations against other parties, was anything said about health care?

We also know that three out of five Canadians base their voting decision on policies, compared to only one-in five who say either the party leader or the local candidate. Why then was there no policy debate in this election? Is it because the policy positions of the parties were indistinguishable from each other? Hardly.

Some say that the behaviour of our politicians is to blame, that if they spent less time attacking each other they could spend more time promoting their policies. Is that true? Are the politicians responsible for the reduction of policy debate to soundbites and bumpersticker slogans?

Or is it the media, who prefer "media friendly" politicians over more substantive, yet boring, candidates? Despite their pretensions as public institutions, the media are businesses and they are driven by a need to attract and hold an audience.

Or is it our citizenry, who say they want a more comprehensive debate but have little patience, or time, to investigate these issues for themselves? Policy sells, but who’s buying?

We are trapped in a mutually reinforcing downward cycle. Our politicians need media coverage, so they compete for media attention. Our media needs an audience, preferably a paying one, so they focus on the sensational and the salacious. As citizens, we feel that the pundits and politicians are becoming more remote and we start tuning them out. This forces both politicians and the media to turn up the volume, which aggravates the problem further. Can we break the spin cycle?

It is not an easy problem to solve, but we should look to ourselves for a solution. If we don’t, voter turnout will continue to decrease and we will lose our democracy out of neglect.

- 30 -

This article appeared on the December 7, 2000 broadcast of CBC Commentary.