‘Politics influence the media in the UK’. Describe and evaluate the validity of this statement.The media as an important channel for public awareness of the political world have been regarded as the main targets the government and politicians tend to control, and even in the United Kingdom where the journalism industry has a long history serving for public service. As the public relations has integrated with political areas and been increasingly prominent, the government can manipulate media more easily and reach a new high in this special era, which has made the media fall into a dilemma where they lose the right to supervise public powers. Admittedly, the influence posed by politics is enormous and severe for British press. This essay will discuss backgrounds of what contributed to the political impact on media in the first place, then explaining how politics impose impacts on media and to what extent have the media been affected. It also will analyse the emergence of this influence from three perspectives: politics, public relations and media.Politics influence media for many reasons, some of which are naturally caused by media themselves. Generally, media rely on official materials and information from news agencies when they are reporting news, and increasing demands for productivity of reports are responsible for this (Lewis, Williams, & Franklin, 2008). Due to the growing intense competition, media tend to maximise their profits, which means that journalists have to face huge amounts of work. Therefore, the information made by PR practitioners was used to fill ‘news holes’ by political journalists because they need stories, and at the same time, public relations practitioners became a printing machine and generated enormous stories (Blumler, 1989). In this case, pre-packaged sources of news have been seen as an acceptable and convenient choice for journalists processing news (Lewis et al., 2008). However, this could raise some problems. Due to the fact that those pre-packaged sources are mainly produced by PR industry and news agencies which represent the interests of government agencies or other personal institutions, the independence and credibility of journalism has been questioned by public (Waymer, 2013). Since some people suggest that adopting those pre-packaged sources could offend the professional culture of journalists, violating the independence and editorial autonomy of media (Gans, 1979), most part of political reports could be written by public relations editors such as interviews on politicians, stories about politics and even the main point of journalists (Lloyd, 2004).In terms of reporting political news, pre-packaged news sources have occupied a significant proportion in news coverage. Senior PR practitioner Hobsbawm (2012) said that “at least 60 per cent and more commonly 80 per cent of any broadcast or broadsheet outlet has got a PR element in it”. PR materials behind the news have severely influenced the quality of news, because PR works as a constructor of social reality (Berger & Luckmann, 1967; Tuchman, 1978). Indeed, information sources provided by PR industry have severely influenced the quality of news and drawn a veil over the truth, as Davis (2002) mentioned that the status of the fourth estate media is based on an independent autonomous image when they seek out news, but the liberal description of journalists has been severely undermined by the growth of the PR sector.There is a trading relationship where journalists gain newssources and politicians’ image being maintained, while PR as an intermediatorin this cooperation. In this partnership, journalists, politicians and PRpractitioners gain interests respectively and play different roles. In thefirst place, public relations, a fundamental factor should be clarified. PRjust like a professional makeup artist decorating their outfits and maintainingtheir reputation (Kim and Kiousis, 2012). From a theoretical perspective, PR isabout reputation and it is a necessary part of most of businessesorganisations, companies as well as some political institutions in the modernsociety, because every organisation including non-profit charities or businesscompanies ultimately relies on its reputation and self-image for success (Waymer, 2013). It is understandable forthose organisations to use effective PR to improve their images, because inthis business world, perceptions of customers, clients, and the public havecrucial influences on their purchasing decisions, driving their minds to judgewhether good or bad; however, PR has the ability to change perceptions andunderstanding of the public, and help those organisations earn reputation. Thisis why PR has become an indispensable part of modern business world, but it isnoteworthy that PR has been widely used by official institutions such asgovernments, public service and politicians, which raises plenty of questionsand debates.PR has been recognised as the primary factor and aneffective measure for politicians who intend to impose effects and pressure onmedia, in other words, PR is a connector during this relationship. It receivesinstructions from controllers which normally played by politicians and sendsannouncements or news materials to journalists, so it basically serves thegovernment or politicians who give their right of enforcement (Oborne, 2012). Furthermore, PR also as aprocessor or producer, collecting and processing stories which have beneficialimpacts on their employers, which means that those stories could become fromvoices of politicians or official institutions. PR practitioners process politicalannouncements and documents in the most authoritative and politicallyattractive news sources, and this is why PR can be naturally chosen andpublished by journalists and still attracts a huge number of readers (Hobsbawm, 2012). PR materials successfullybecome significant sources of political news and also become the supervisorypower to monitor journalists, controlling their coverage within a steerablerange and preferably with positive effects.On the other hand, when PR has become one of politicalfactors which affect media coverage, journalists have received important newssources and subsidies to some extent.As Gandy (1982) mentioned that authorities and politicians provide an information subsidy to news organisations including conferences documents, political announcements, video news releases, press briefings, lobbying and even some opportunities to interview politicians. There is no doubt that the information subsidy is the most effective beat, and it is also the result of cooperation between politicians and PR practitioners. This subsidy refers to initiative disseminating information which is newsworthy, self-serving or potential advantageous, and its contents include official announcements, press conferences, government statements and even some private life of politicians (Sissons, 2016). Consequently, journalists use the accessible information to produce the most appropriate news for politicians’ interests, due to the pressure of productivity. Another reason of why journalists choose pre-packaged information as news sources is that media have a strong sense to coverage news by using the most authoritative, appropriate and reliable sources of information, so as to ensure the objectivity and impartiality of reports, but it is ironical that these desires have misdirected media to reliable sources, social realities and political status defined by PR practitioners (Kim & Kiousis, 2012). If media have a sense to resist for their situations, politicians can cut information subsidies and precipitate media into desert of information, which is unacceptable for media. As Baistow (1985) pointed that journalists have risked their social status and been steered by the fifth estate of public relations, the objectivity of media has become a cynic. Indeed, media, as the fourth estate, occupied a pivotal position in British society, losing the ability of playing with political rights (Lewis, Williams and Franklin, 2008). Since enemies of media are so powerful that the balance of power is easily broken, media have lost their initiative in reporting (Mcnair, 2016). Meanwhile, authoritative sources of information have mostly come from PR practitioners. As a result, to some degree, media lack the critical right to criticise on governments and politicians because PR which serves for authorities can cut off the supply of information sources. In this way, criticism of authorities might be not able to see.It is also noteworthy that politicians, as manipulators,have become the main beneficial owners during this relationship. Admittedly,the political power and public relations have allied in the long history ofBritish politics and sustained for long period of time, bringing success andflourishing for authorities but also deteriorating the development of Britishmedia (Heller, 2016). Basically, policymakersunder this alliance is aimed at how to effectively manipulate the media,because the government always believes that they can capture the awareness andopinions of public as long as the media can be effective controlled (Kim & Kiousis, 2012).In order to shape their own positive image, especiallyduring reporting political news, politicians have taken many measures. Firstly,the government imposes centralised control on the dissemination of mass media andthey expect to master the right of interpreting information and strictlycontrol the media; however, in a democracy country like Britain, the governmentor politicians have no right to censor or control mass media directly. In thiscase, under the guidance of PR practitioners, the government had achieved thepurpose of controlling media through conducting strict restrictions onsubordinate departments (Lance, 2005). For instance, during the administrationof Blair, Alistair Campbell as the prime minister press secretary imposed hiscontrol plan, so the government can strictly stipulate the subordinatefunctional departments which are responsible to propaganda events. The main reason why the government took these measuresis to ensure that all media outlets involved in politics are spoken for thegovernment, and the position of media is a consistent line with authorities (Mcnair,2016). It could be demonstrated that all important interviews and appearanceswhich could be broadcast on media should be sent to Street number 10 beforemaking any agreement of authorities; all the major speeches, governmentstatements and new policy initiatives in the policy content should be promptlygiven a clear attitude or instruction from PR practitioners; the declaration draftedby journalists should be given to press office for approval (Oborne, 2012).Superficial, these regulations aimed on the employees of press office or peoplework at propaganda department, but in fact, it completely controlled thedissemination of media. It is difficult to find the government’s flaws, becausethere are no formal documents of the government. In the time of Brown’sadministration, the government strengthened its self-protection and posed a lawwhich prevented the media from spying the content of the government’sforthcoming policies (Oborne, 2012). Furthermore, in order to deepen thecontrol and avoid any error in reporting, almost all government statements orrepresentations have been carefully planned and rehearsed by PR experts, whichmeans that the public could never see the real image of politicians andgovernors (Mcnair, 2016).In addition, the government also tends to process andstandardise political information. Still taking Britain as example, The Britishgovernment has set up several information agencies, such as the centralinformation office (Halstuk and Chamberlin, 2001). The original intention ofestablishing these information agencies is to ensure that conveying informationto the public in a proper way, and requirements of these agencies is to conveyinformation about government activities and government policies timely, accuratelyand objectively. Conversely, since Mrs Thatcherera, no matter the central information office or political news service, hasbeen transformed or remoulded by politicians, which destroyed the independentand objective positions of journalism, turning into a propaganda toolcontrolled by politicians to sell their ideologies (Young, 1990); sayingnothing of the new labour era, Blair’s government not only renamed theinformation and communication agency but also defined the propaganda role(Oborne, 2012). In 1997, the government emphases functions of agencies andinfiltrate them into every area of society, and it is claimed that centralinformation agencies should build cooperative relationships with PR exports toprovide more efficient solving projects. Afterwards PR practitioners have beenemployed as special advisers by politicians; therefore, the relationshipsbetween media and governments have been reconstructed, and media struggle in atougher situation. It is also impossible for media to receive real and genuineinformation about politics, so they would be obliged to report pre-packagedinformation. Through this way politicians and governments can impose softmonitoring thereby influencing the decisions of journalism.In conclusion, political factors did have a severe impact onBritish media, and this phenomenon has become a unique symbiotic relationshipand spread its influence on all areas of society. If politicians are thedeciders, the PR practitioners, as the experts who live in government pressoffices, would be the transmitters and processors of information. They have arole of news planning masters and experts of poll canvass and imageconsultants; they interpret political sources for media, communicate with journalistsand advise them for reporting news which benefit politicians; they have asignificant impact on reports and dissemination of political news. Forjournalists, although they could enjoy the free and convenient informationsubsidies, the evil effects they have to accept. Their independence andintegrity have been suffering, and they lost the power of supervisingauthorities and the right of serving democracy and for worse.ReferencesBaistow, T. (1985). Fourth-rate Estate: an anatomy of FleetStreet, London: Comedia.Berger, P. and Luckmann, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality,Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Blumler, J (1989). Elections, the Media and the Modern PublicityProcess, in: Marjorie Ferguson (Ed.), Public Communication, London: Sage, pp.101–13.Davis, A. (2002). Public Relations Democracy: public relations, politicsand the mass media in Britain, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Gandy, O. (1982). Beyond Agenda Setting: information subsidies andpublic policy, New York: Ablex.Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBSEvening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Pantheon.Halstuk, M. E. &Chamberlin, B. F. (2001). Open Government in the Digital Age: The LegislativeHistory of How Congress Established a Right of Public Access to ElectricInformation Held by Federal Agencies. Journalism & Mass CommunicationQuarterly, 78(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900107800104Heller, M. (2016).Foucault, Discourse, and the Birth of British Public Relations, (June),651–677. https://doi.org/10.1017/eso.2015.101Hobsbawm, J. (2012).Public relations and journalism. Komunikacie, 14(1), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780701275606Kim, J. Y. &Kiousis, S. (2012). The Role of Affect in Agenda Building for Public Relations:Implications for Public Relations Outcomes. Journalism & MassCommunication Quarterly, 89(4), 657–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699012455387Lewis, J. Williams, A.,&Franklin, B. (2008). a Compromised Fourth Estate? JournalismStudies, 9(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700701767974Lloyd, J. (2004). What the Media Are Doing to Our Politics,London: Atlantic Books.Mcnair, B. (2016). PRmust die?: spin , anti ? spin andpolitical public relations in the UK , 1997 – 2004 PR Must Die?: spin ,anti-spin and political public relations in the UK , 1997 – 2004, 9699(April),1997–2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670042000246089Oborne, P. (2012). Isthe British press really so feral? 1–8.https://doi.org/10.1177/0956474812460472Paluszek, J. L. (2002).Propaganda, Public Relations, and Journalism: when bad things happen to goodwords. Journalism Studies, 3(3), 441–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/146167002760089436Price, L. (2005). The Spin Doctor’s Diary: inside Number 10 withNew Labour, London: Hodder and Stoughton.Sissons, H. (2016).Negotiating the News. Journalism Studies, 17(2), 177–198.https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2014.973147Tuchman, G. (1978). Making News: A Study in theConstruction of Reality. New York: Macmillan.Waymer, D. (2013).Democracy and government public relations: Expanding the scope of“Relationship” in public relations research. Public Relations Review, 39(4),320–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.015Young, H. (1990). Themedia under Mrs Thatcher. Contemporary Record, 3(4), 6–8.https://doi.org/10.1080/13619469008581078Get Help With Your EssayIf you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!Find out more