TWO SUCCESSFUL challenges to the Constitution have made it more difficult for broadcasters to report a referendum campaign in a satisfactory manner. They have been required, following Supreme Court judgments, to give each side equal time in their campaign coverage. This has been done by applying a “stopwatch” principle to secure a perfect balance between the views of both sides.
The resulting coverage may not provide compelling viewing or listening for a television or radio audience. What is broadcast may fail to engage the public’s interest or attention because of an inflexible application of this time rule. Clearly, there has to be a better way of upholding the Supreme Court judgments while also ensuring the voting public is more fully engaged by the referendum question they are being asked to decide.
The all-party committee on the Constitution believes so. It has spent four months examining whether this broadcast rule could be amended by legislation, thus avoiding a referendum to change parts of Articles 46 and 47 of the Constitution. The committee has agreed that this can be done and proposes a change in broadcasting legislation to do so. Many broadcasters in their evidence to the committee felt the equal time requirement challenged their professional ability to deliver balanced content in reporting a referendum campaign. As the Independent Broadcasters of Ireland (IBI) pointed out: “Real balance in terms of content may require that some groups and some claims require more scrutiny than others”. This is particular so if the claims are either wholly spurious or greatly exaggerated. Wilful distortion and misrepresentation of facts have become regrettable features of recent referendum campaigns. Undoubtedly, the intent is to create doubt and uncertainty in the minds of the public and make a confused electorate less likely to vote.
Where a non-contentious issue is decided by referendum, an obvious difficulty can arise. There may be little public opposition to the proposed change but the 50/50 balance rule means equal time for both sides. In 1979, for instance, well before these Supreme Court judgments, a referendum to regularise adoption orders was overwhelmingly carried with over 99 per cent support. Today a national plebiscite on a similarly non-contentious matter would require balanced coverage. The arguments of the 1 per cent would be equally balanced with those of the 99 per cent. Quite rightly, the committee feels that broadcasters should be allowed discretion to ensure fairness and balance between all sides.