The Coming of Parliamentary Television

The Lords and the Senate Compared

Bibliographic Data

ID6345945
AuthorsAnthony Mughan (The Ohio State University), Jonathan Swarts (The Ohio State University), Jonathan P Swarts (The Ohio State University)
Year1997
Volume45
Issue1
Pages36-48
Publication date1997-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePolitical Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0032-3217 • E-ISSN: 1467-9248
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1111/1467-9248.00068
OpenAlexW2039300333
LanguageEN
Citations received2

Subscribing to a Burkean view of representation, legislators have long tended to resist constant public scrutiny. In recent years, however, they have overcome this reluctance in a large number of countries and voted to allow the televising of their proceedings. But why they did so remains a mystery. Some media theorists argue that television exposure is a ‘great democratizer’. It demystifies public authority figures and obliges them to become more accountable for their actions. The experience of the British House of Lords and the United States Senate suggests instead that television was invited in by rational political actors as a means of achieving their goals in a time of change. In this view, television is best seen not as a force in its own right, but as a medium of communication that can be strategically deployed by goal-oriented political élites responding to different political circumstances and institutional incentive structures

Economics · Incentive · Law and economics · Market economy · Parliament · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Representation (politics · Scrutiny · Sociology · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Public Administration