Eleanor Finch
The cessation of campaigning during elections, also known as election silence or election blackout, varies across different countries and jurisdictions. This practice involves banning political campaigning or media coverage of a general election before or during the election. In some countries like Slovenia, Poland, and Nepal, it is forbidden to try to persuade people to vote for a specific candidate or political party on election day. The goal of election silence is to provide voters with an opportunity to reflect without external pressures before casting their votes. In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled in Burson v. Freeman (1992) that campaigning can only be restricted on election day within a limited area around the polling station. Countries like Israel, Italy, and Kazakhstan have specific laws regarding the timing of election silence, with some banning campaigning in cinemas or on television during this period. The approach to campaigning regulations differs, with some countries having clearly defined periods, while others, like the United States, allow campaigning throughout the presidential term.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Countries with election silence laws | Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Estonia, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malta, Nepal, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain |
| Purpose | To give voters a chance to reflect, free of external pressures, before casting their votes |
| Time period | Varies by country, from 48 hours to 5 days before the election |
| Activities prohibited during election silence | Campaigning, media coverage, opinion polls, advertising, canvassing, personal attacks on candidates |
| Enforcement | Varies by country, may include fines or legal action |
| Exceptions | Some countries allow print and digital media coverage, social media coverage may be difficult to regulate |
| Alternative approaches | The U.S. allows campaigning on election day outside polling stations; some countries have no designated campaign period |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Election silence laws vary by country
The laws around election silence vary significantly by country. While some countries enforce a strict blackout period during which political campaigning and media coverage of an election are banned, others impose more relaxed restrictions.
In some jurisdictions, such as Slovenia, Poland, and Nepal, it is forbidden to try to convince people to vote for a specific candidate or political party on the day of the election. In these countries, no active campaigning by the candidates is allowed during the election silence period, and polling is often banned as well. Other countries that enforce a similar blackout period include Italy, Kazakhstan, Malta, and the Philippines. For example, in Italy, it is prohibited to say the names of candidates on television in the month before the elections, except for TV news programs and regulated electoral advertising.
On the other hand, some countries such as Bulgaria and Hungary have ruled that election silence and bans on opinion polls before election day violate freedom of speech. In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled in Burson v. Freeman (1992) that campaigning can only be limited on election day in a small area around the polling station. Similarly, in Greece, the blackout period does not concern online publications, and in Ireland, it is not regulated by an "electoral law" but rather imposed in the Guidelines of the Broadcasting Authority.
The length of the silence period also varies by country. For example, in Australia, there is a ban on TV and radio advertising from midnight on the Wednesday before polling day until the close of polls on Saturday. In India, the silence period is 48 hours before the elections, during which all campaign-related or election-related activity is supposed to be halted, and no loudspeakers can be used. In Italy, polling is banned for 15 days before the elections, while in Spain, it is banned for 5 days before the election.
Strategies for Running a Winning Political Campaign
You may want to see also
Media coverage and campaigning rules
During the election silence period, active campaigning by candidates is prohibited, and the publication of opinion polls is often banned as well. The length of this period varies by country: it can start 48 hours before the election, or even earlier, and it usually ends when the polls close on election day. For example, in Australia, there is a ban on TV and radio advertising from midnight on the Wednesday before polling day until the polls close. In some countries, such as Slovenia, Poland, and Nepal, it is forbidden to try to convince people to vote for a specific candidate or party on election day.
However, not all countries agree with the concept of election silence. For instance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Burson v. Freeman (1992) that campaigning could only be limited on election day within a small area around the polling station. Similarly, the Constitutional Court of Bulgaria ruled in 2009 that election silence and the ban on opinion polls before election day violated freedom of speech.
The rules for media coverage during elections can be complex and vary depending on the country and the specific laws in place. In some cases, there may be regulations that require balanced and objective reporting, while also prohibiting certain types of content, such as personal attacks on candidates or content that promotes feelings of enmity between people based on race, religion, or other factors.
With the rise of social media, the landscape of campaigning and media coverage has also changed significantly. Traditional broadcasting rules and regulations may not adequately address the impact of social media on political campaigns. Political players now have more avenues to reach voters and engage in campaigning, including through individual accounts, party accounts, proxies, and precision advertising.
Campaign Strategies: Organization and Management Techniques
You may want to see also
Limits on campaign spending
Campaigning can be limited in the days leading up to an election, with some countries imposing an 'election blackout' or 'election silence' during this time. This practice bans political campaigning and media coverage of a general election before and during the election. The length of this blackout period varies between countries, with some starting 48 hours before the election, and others beginning on the day before the election. During this time, opinion polls are often banned, and in some jurisdictions, it is forbidden to try to convince people to vote for a specific candidate or party.
In terms of financial limits on campaign spending, this is overseen by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) in the US, which enforces the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA). FECA limits the amount of money individuals and political organisations can give to a candidate running for federal office. The FEC also sets campaign contribution limits for individuals and groups and oversees public funding used in presidential elections. Candidates can spend their own personal funds on their campaign without limits, but they must report the amount they spend to the FEC.
The FEC also requires candidates to file pre-election and post-election reports on their campaign finances, including the names of individuals and organisations contributing to their campaigns and the amounts. These reports must be filed by all candidates, even if they are unopposed or not actively participating in an election.
In addition to limits on the amount that can be spent, there are also rules around how the money is spent. For example, campaigns must adopt an accounting system to distinguish between contributions made for the primary election and those made for the general election. If a candidate loses the primary election, any contributions accepted for the general election must be refunded or redesignated within 60 days and cannot be used to repay primary election debt.
The press also has a duty to provide objective reports about the elections and candidates, without accepting any form of payment to project a candidate or party in a certain manner ('paid news').
Campaign Issues: Candidate Choices and Strategies
You may want to see also
Explore related products
US Supreme Court ruling on Burson v. Freeman
In the case of Burson v. Freeman, the US Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of a Tennessee law that restricted political campaigning within 100 feet of a polling place. The case centred around Mary Rebecca Freeman, who was the treasurer for a city council campaign in Metropolitan Nashville-Davidson County, Tennessee, in 1987.
Freeman argued that Tennessee Code §§ 2-7-111(b) and 2-19-119, which created a "campaign-free zone" within 100 feet of a polling place, limited her ability to communicate with voters. She asserted that these statutes violated her rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution. Freeman sought a declaratory judgment that the provisions were unconstitutional and a permanent injunction against their enforcement.
The Supreme Court of Tennessee initially ruled in Freeman's favour, finding that the state had a compelling interest in banning such activities within the polling place itself but not on the premises around it. The court concluded that the 100-foot limit was not narrowly tailored to protect and was not the least restrictive means to serve the state's interests.
However, the US Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that the Tennessee law did not violate the First Amendment. The Court's judgment, announced by Justice Blackmun, stated that the law was a content-neutral and reasonable time, place, and manner restriction. The Court recognised that voting is a fundamental liberty in a democratic system and that the state's interest in protecting voters from interference justified the speech restriction.
The Court's decision in Burson v. Freeman has been referenced in subsequent cases involving restrictions on political expression near polling places, such as the 2018 case of Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky.
Campaign Strategies: Candidate's Critical Component
You may want to see also
The role of the press during elections
Informing Voters:
The press plays a crucial role in informing voters about the views, backgrounds, and policy positions of candidates. This includes covering daily incremental updates about candidates' activities and more in-depth stories about their stances on various issues. The media also facilitates debates and dialogues between candidates and voters, providing a platform for direct engagement.
Vetting Candidates:
Traditional media outlets also act as a watchdog, vetting presidential candidates and providing insights into their characters and beliefs. This is especially important for voters who live outside the early primary states, as it helps them make informed decisions.
Influencing Public Opinion:
The media's influence on elections is undeniable. Journalists and media outlets can shape public opinion by choosing which candidates to cover and how much attention to give them. This can impact a candidate's visibility and, consequently, their electoral success. Additionally, the media's political biases can drive polarization among the populace, as people tend to seek out news sources that align with their existing beliefs.
Adhering to Legal and Ethical Guidelines:
During elections, the press must adhere to specific legal and ethical guidelines. For example, in some countries, there is a period before an election, known as "election silence" or "pre-election silence", during which all campaigning and election-related activities are halted. The press must refrain from publishing opinion polls or engaging in campaigning during this time. They are also expected to provide objective reports, avoiding unhealthy campaigns, false statements, unverified allegations, and personal attacks on candidates.
Navigating Evolving Challenges:
The media landscape is constantly evolving, and journalists face unique challenges with each election. For instance, the 2016 US election was particularly contentious, and the media faced criticism from both sides for its coverage. Additionally, with the rise of social media, candidates can now bypass traditional media outlets and speak directly to voters, requiring journalists to adapt their approaches.
In conclusion, the role of the press during elections is complex and ever-changing. While the press plays a vital role in informing voters and facilitating engagement, it must also navigate legal and ethical guidelines and adapt to the shifting media landscape. The influence of the media on election outcomes underscores the responsibility of journalists to provide objective and unbiased reporting.
Political Parties: Supporting Candidates to Victory
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Election silence, also known as election blackout, is the practice of banning political campaigning or media coverage of a general election, before or during that election. During this time, no active campaigning by the candidates is allowed, and polling is often banned.
The US Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that campaigning can only be limited on election day in a small area around the polling station. The country does not have a designated campaign period, and roughly two years out of every presidential term are taken up with campaigning.
The UK does not have a specified campaign period. The money spent on election campaigns is regulated by the Electoral Commission to ensure fairness and transparency.
The election silence period varies from country to country. For example, in Australia, there is a ban on TV and radio advertising from midnight on the Wednesday before polling day until the polls close. In Israel, there is a ban on TV and radio ads during the campaign, except for a concentrated block scheduled by the election committee around two weeks before the election.
