Voting behaviour and the media

Question 1

Voting behaviour and
the media

Answer 1

Before examining why people vote the way that they do, it is important to address
the popular misconception that the working class always vote Labour and that the
middle and upper classes are invariably Conservative voters. Like any misconception,
there is an element of truth in this. In the 1951 general election, for example, the
Conservative Party under Winston Churchill succeeded in defeating Clement Attlee
and Labour by mobilising middle-class support, which gave Churchill a majority in
the House of Commons.
However, general elections are influenced by a huge variety of other factors and it
would be simplistic to argue that the public will always vote according to class-based
allegiance. Margaret Thatcher won three general elections (1979, 1983 and 1987)
with significant amounts of working-class support, and in the 2017 and 2019 general
elections Theresa May and Boris Johnson won several traditionally working-class
seats, while seats that had been firmly Conservative were won by Labour.
The relationship between social class and voting behaviour is further complicated
by the reasons why voters of all classes might vote for the Liberal/Liberal Democrat
parties, the nationalist parties and the UKIP/Brexit parties. The variations within
social classes highlighted in Table 4.1 demonstrate why it is so important to avoid
generalisations when examining voting trends. Indeed, the more one studies voting
behaviour, the more one appreciates that the reasons why we vote as we do are
determined by a vast range of rational and even irrational factors.
In order to engage with this topic, you need to familiarise yourself with the
significance of at least three general elections. The case studies in this chapter focus
on the 1979, 1997 and 2019 general elections. You should be prepared to study these
in great depth, although you are advised to familiarise yourself with as many general
elections since 1945 as you can, as this will add conviction to your writing. It is
compulsory that you cover the 1997 general election.

CLASS A - Higher managerial, professional (judges, top civil servants, company directors)
Upper middle class

CLASS B - Middle managers, professionals (teachers, lawyers, accountants)
Middle class

CLASS C1 - Clerical workers, junior managerial roles, shop owners
Lower middle class

CLASS C2 - Skilled workers (builders, electricians, hairdressers)
Aspirational working class

CLASS D - Semi-skilled, unskilled factory workers
Working class

CLASS E - Casual workers, long-term unemployed, elderly people who rely solely on the
state pension
Working class

Question 2

Social factors - Class-based voting and class/partisan dealignment

Answer 2

From 1945 until 1966, general elections were defined by how successful the Labour
and Conservative parties were in mobilising their core support. The Conservatives
generally relied on the support of A, B and C1 voters, with Labour’s core support
among C2, D and E voters. In the 1964 general election, for example, Labour’s
Harold Wilson won 64% of the votes of DE voters, while the Conservative prime
minister, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, won 78% of the support of AB voters.
However, the 1970 general election, in which the Conservative leader Edward
Heath achieved a surprise victory over Harold Wilson, demonstrated that issue
voting (see pages 144–45) could determine the result of a general election as much
as class-based voting. In this election, the Conservatives won a large number of
traditional Labour seats because, following Enoch Powell’s ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech
in 1968, significant numbers of the white working class felt that immigration would
be more tightly controlled by the Conservatives. The decline of class-based voting
is also known as partisan dealignment and, since the 1970s, the results of general
elections have often been determined by striking examples of voting based on the
government’s competence and the salience (prominence) of specific issues rather
than according to class.
For example, in the 1979 general election, Margaret Thatcher startled political
commentators by launching the Conservative campaign in Labour-supporting
Cardiff. This was a clever attempt to disassociate the
party from being too middle class. The campaign’s
resulting focus on controlling inflation, enabling
tenants to buy their own council houses and confronting
trade union power following the excessive number of
strikes during the so-called ‘Winter of Discontent’,
was so popular that there was an 11% swing to the
Conservatives by C2 voters and a 9% swing by
DE voters. In her subsequent general election victories
(1983, 1987) Thatcher made further inroads into the
working class by associating the Conservatives with
strong national defence, privatisation and traditional
social values.
Like Thatcher, Tony Blair was highly successful at
broadening his party’s appeal far beyond its core
support. He increased Labour’s share of the vote in all
social categories and won a majority of support in all
age groups with the progressive appeal of New Labour
In the 2017 general election, Jeremy Corbyn gained further support from the AB
social category, while Theresa May made striking gains among DE voters. This was
due to pro-Europeans in higher social classes wanting to punish the Conservatives
for Brexit by voting Labour, while large numbers of DE voters considered the
Conservatives more likely to deliver Brexit and control immigration.
On the morning after the 2019 general election, Boris Johnson thanked Labour
voters who ‘lent’ their votes to the Conservatives, telling them, ‘I will never take
your support for granted.’ This suggests that the Conservatives understand that they
may not be a natural home for working-class voters and so will seek to maintain this
support by focusing on the NHS and ‘levelling up’. Whether or not they succeed is
likely to determine the extent to which partisan dealignment becomes a permanent
feature of UK politics.

Question 3

Social factors - Region

Answer 3

All the national parties can claim a significant concentration of support in certain
parts of the country (Table 4.2). This is mostly due to economic and social factors.
l The South East is the most prosperous region in the UK, with high levels of
home ownership and little tradition of heavy industrial trade unionism. The
Conservatives do disproportionately well there. Ethnically white rural parts of
the UK, such as East Anglia and the South Coast, are also classic Conservative
territory.
l Labour, meanwhile, has dominated ethnically diverse big cities with large
working-class populations, and major centres of industrial production such as
South Wales, Merseyside, Greater Manchester and Tyne and Wear.
l As a rule, the industrial North of England has been more likely to vote Labour
and the South of England Conservative.
The Liberal Democrats have fared disproportionately badly out of the UK’s first-
past-the-post electoral system (see Chapter 3) because they have fewer areas of
concentrated support. However, even liberalism has had its heartlands in the
Celtic fringes of the South West, rural Wales and the far north of Scotland,
where there is a long tradition of small-scale, non-conformist artisans who do
not identify with either of the main political parties. Since 1950, Orkney and
Shetland, for example, has always returned a Liberal/Liberal Democrat MP to
Westminster.

Question 4

Voting by region from 2005 to 2019

Answer 4

east 2005 - 43.2% east 2019 - 57.2%

london 2005 - 38.9% london 48.1%

Several interesting conclusions about voter/partisan dealignment can be drawn from
Table 4.2:

l London has increasingly become a Labour stronghold, with the party’s share of
the vote increasing by 9.2% between 2010 and 2019 despite losing all four general
elections (Table 4.3). This is probably due to the inclusive, more pro-European
position of the party, which is more popular in a multicultural global city like
London.

l Labour support has held up better in Wales, but here again the Conservatives
have dramatically increased their vote by 14.7% by appealing to Welsh
Euroscepticism.

l Support for the Liberal Democrats has collapsed across the UK, including in
traditional heartlands like rural Wales. In the 2017 and 2019 general elections,
for the first time ever Wales did not return a Liberal/Liberal Democrat MP.

l The evidence suggests that voting behaviour has become much more erratic in
recent years, challenging party dominance in regional heartlands across the UK.
The argument that FPTP encourages safe seats and minimises voter choice (see
Chapter 3) may not be as persuasive as it once was.

results of general election

2010 - labour, 38 seats. conservative, 28 seats. liberal democrats, 7 seats.

2019 - labour, 49 seats. conservatives, 21 seats. lib dem, 3 seats.

Question 5

Social factors - Age

Answer 5

The influence of age on how we vote is significant. The Conservative Party’s
support is strongest among older voters, while the Labour and Liberal/Liberal
Democrat parties have generally won the support of younger voters. This is because
the Conservative Party has traditionally emphasised policies such as lower taxation,
strong national defence, law and order and, in recent years, has been significantly
more Eurosceptic than Labour and the Liberal Democrats. These sorts of policies
appeal to older property-owning voters, who tend to favour security and stability
and, having more financial responsibilities and savings than younger voters, are
often keen for their taxes to be kept as low as possible. In the 2019 general election,
for example, it was striking that people who owned their homes or had a mortgage
voted Conservative by a clear margin. Those who rented were much more likely to
vote Labour (Table 4.5).

owner - 57% voted conservative
private renters - 46% voted labour

18-24 year olds. 62% voted labour
65+ year olds 645 voted conservative

Younger voters are more likely to be concerned with issues such as social justice
and the environment and so are more likely to favour Labour. In 2017, for example,
Jeremy Corbyn successfully connected with young people by emphasising that
Labour was on the side of ‘the many not the few’. Labour’s commitment in the 2017
and 2019 general elections to abolish tuition fees further encouraged support among
young people.

5% of the population, 18-24 year olds turnout 47% in 2019.

19% of the population 65+ olds turnout was 74% in 2019

Labour and the Conservatives have been most successful when they have been able
to reach beyond their core age support. In 1997, Labour achieved a 5% lead over the
Conservatives among voters aged 65+, helping Tony Blair to his landslide victory,
while in Margaret Thatcher’s 1979 general election victory the Conservatives
achieved a 1% lead over Labour among 18–24-year-olds. Currently, the dominance
of the Conservative Party among older voters gives them a major electoral advantage
because older voters are significantly more likely to vote.

Question 6

social factors - Ethnicity

Answer 6

The impact of ethnicity in determining voting
behaviour is also significant. Historically, since
Commonwealth immigrant communities were
generally within the C2, D and E classes, they were
more likely to vote Labour because of its high spending
on the welfare state and close association with the
trade union movement. Labour’s commitment to
multiculturalism and its introduction of the first Race
Relations Acts in 1965, 1968 and 1976 to outlaw
discrimination have further provided it with a strong
historical connection with immigrant communities.
Meanwhile, the influence of Enoch Powell — whose
‘Rivers of Blood’ speech in 1968 called for an end to
Commonwealth immigration — on some elements
within the Conservative Party has often made it seem
hostile to immigrant communities. For example, in
the 2017 general election, the Conservatives won just 5 of the 75 most ethnically
diverse constituencies in the UK. In contrast, Labour won 46 of the 73 seats in
London, which is 45% white British.

Despite the Johnson and Truss cabinets being the most ethnically diverse in UK
history and positive efforts by the Conservative Party to connect more with minority
ethnic voters by selecting more candidates from minority ethnic backgrounds, Table
4.8 demonstrates Labour retains a commanding lead among minority ethnic voters.
This suggests that ethnicity continues to be a salient factor determining voting.
The appoinment of Rishi Sunak as the UK’s first British Asian prime minister in
October 2022 may challenge this, although his privileged background suggests this
is by no means certain.

ethnic vote

share of minority ethnic note followed by national share of vote.

labour 64% (32.1)
conservative 20% (43.6)

However, it is also important to not generalise about
minority ethnic voters. In several constituencies, the
Conservatives have successfully cultivated the British
Asian vote. For example, Harrow East and Leicester
East both have large British Asian populations and
both have seen a steady increase in support for the
Conservatives

2019 general election - harrow east
Conservative 54%.

Question 7

Social factors - Education

Answer 7

The impact of education on voting behaviour significantly changed in the 2017
general election. Those with higher educational qualifications comprise the top social
brackets and have traditionally been more likely to vote Conservative. However, in
2017 there was a remarkable change in voting patterns, with the Conservatives
increasing their support among those with fewest educational qualifications and
Labour achieving higher levels of support among those with degrees in the top
brackets. The 2019 general election results suggests this may be part of a long-term
trend in which the Conservatives have aligned themselves with stricter controls on
immigration, increasing their support among white working-class voters who feel
threatened by globalisation and so decisively voted for Brexit in the 2016 referendum
(see Chapter 3). Labour’s more liberal approach to immigration and its more nuanced
approach to Brexit have dramatically increased its support among better educated,
more cosmopolitan voters who voted Remain in 2016 and have been dismayed by
what they see as Conservative insularity.
David Goodhart, in The Road to Somewhere (2017), has contrasted the less educated
‘somewheres’, who are rooted to their communities through lack of opportunities,
with the better educated ‘anywheres’, who have the educational qualifications to take
advantage of globalisation. In 2017 and 2019, it seems as though Labour generated
significant support among the ‘anywheres’ while the Conservatives achieved their
own breakthrough with the ‘somewheres’ (Table 4.10).

degree or higher voting labour 2017-2019 48% vs 39%

no qualifcation voting conservative 2017-2019 52% vs 59%

Question 8

social factors - Gender

Answer 8

The influence of gender in determining the result of general elections has changed
since the end of the Second World War. From 1945 until the 1980s Labour’s close
association with male-dominated trade unionism and its reputation for allowing
inflation to spiral, so hitting family finances, provided the Conservatives with a
powerful opportunity to appeal to the housewives’ vote. In the 1959 general
election, Harold Macmillan associated Conservative prosperity and stability with
a happy family life. Then, in 1970, Edward Heath defeated Harold Wilson by
pledging to reduce the cost of living, thereby winning significant support among
housewives. In 1979 Margaret Thatcher similarly articulated women’s concerns that
Labour governments had allowed inflation to undermine family finances and that
irresponsible trade unionism was pulling society apart (Table 4.11).

47% of women voted 1979 conservative.

However, the Conservatives’ traditional lead among female voters has been
challenged by Labour. This is perhaps because the Conservative Party’s emphasis on
strong national defence and its growing association with euroescepticism may have
contrasted unfavourably for some women with Labour’s focus on education, social
care and the National Health Service (Table 4.12).
Although the overall gap is minimal, among younger voters women are dramatically
more likely to vote Labour than Conservative. In 2019, among 18–24-year-old voters,
just 17% of women voted Conservative and 64% voted Labour, whereas 22% of men
in this age group voted Conservative and 59% Labour. Whether this trend has been
caused by a reaction against certain male Conservative politicians among younger
women is uncertain. As men and women increasingly play similar roles in the family
and workplace, the gender gap may diminish as a factor determining voting behaviour.

2019 general elections

conservative m46 f43
labour m31 f 34

Question 9

Political context

Answer 9

Although social factors are significant, the political context in which a general
election is held is of defining importance. This is because the electorate makes
decisions based on several judgements about the governing and opposition parties.
The factors that inform these judgements are based on the competency and
effectiveness of the government and are called valence factors. This means that
voters make value judgements on the government and the opposition parties.
With the decline of class-based voting, valence factors become more significant in
determining the result of a general election.

Question 10

Political context - Governing competence

Answer 10

A core reason why voters choose to vote in the way they do involves a valence
judgement on the effectiveness of the government and the likely effectiveness of the
opposition. If voters are reassured that the government is competent, they are less
likely to vote for opposition parties. Alternatively, if the government seems unable
to cope with the challenges it faces, this may encourage voters to vote in a new
government, either because they believe another party to be more likely to govern
well or as a protest vote.

A Conservative poster from the 1959 general election depicting a happy family at
home and the line ‘Life’s better with the Conservatives — don’t let Labour ruin it’ is an
example of how the valence influence of competency can be utilised by a governing
party. On that occasion, the remarkable prosperity achieved under the Conservatives
rewarded Macmillan with a 100-seat majority over Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell.

Question 11

Key terms
Valence factor

Answer 11

The
relative success or failure
of a government’s policies.
Voters who vote according
to valence factors are
making their decision
based on whether they are
satisfied or dissatisfied
with the government’s
performance.

Question 12

key terms
Governing competency

Answer 12

The extent to which the
government is regarded
as having been capable
and competent. If it is
viewed as having failed
in government, this will
encourage the public to
vote for a change.

Question 13

The influence of governing competency in general elections succesfull vs unsuccesfull

Answer 13

Successful governments

1959
Economic prosperity and a wider availability of
consumer goods contributed to Harold Macmillan
increasing the Conservatives’ parliamentary
majority to over 100. Macmillan’s calm sense of
authority and the way in which he took political
advantage of rising living standards, claiming ‘most
of our people have never had it so good’, gave
voters little reason to change government

1966
After 2 years in power, Harold Wilson’s Labour
government still looked energetic and focused and
industrial unrest was limited. Facing a new and
untried leader of the opposition, Edward Heath,
Wilson called a snap election and dramatically
increased his parliamentary majority to over 100

1983
Although unemployment levels remained high,
Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative government had
successfully brought inflation down, fulfilling its
manifesto commitment. Her leadership during the
Falklands War (1982) and the unity of her cabinet
further reinforced the government’s reputation for
strength of purpose

Unsuccessful governments

February 1974
When Edward Heath called a snap general election, he did so in
response to another miners’ strike, which threatened more severe
industrial disruption. His decision to use a general election to
assert the government’s authority led to this being referred to as
the ‘Who governs Britain’ general election. Many voters, however,
saw this as evidence that an incompetent government had lost
control of the nation

1979
The inability of Labour prime minister James Callaghan to stop
the dramatic escalation of strikes during the Winter of Discontent
undermined public faith in his government. This was made worse
when his attempts to reassure the country were misquoted in the
press as ‘Crisis? What crisis?’. Swing voters consequently voted
Conservative because they thought Margaret Thatcher was more
likely to confront the growing power of trade unionism

Question 14

Political context - Leadership

Answer 14

The image that the party leader projects has become increasingly important for
voter support. Some prime ministers, such as Harold Macmillan in the 1959 general
election, have won convincingly because they were able to present themselves as
competent and in charge.
In the 1983 general election, Margaret Thatcher’s reputation for strong and focused
leadership contrasted with Michael Foot’s left-wing intellectualism, which had little
appeal beyond Labour’s core vote. For example, Thatcher faced down one-nation
rebels at the 1980 Conservative Party conference, saying, ‘You turn if you want to.
The lady’s not for turning’, and sent a task force to recover the Falklands from an
invasion by Argentina in 1982. Foot, in contrast, although a brilliant orator, failed to
inspire widespread backing. He has been described by Andrew Marr as ‘a would-be
parliamentary revolutionary detained in a secondhand bookshop’.
In 2001, Tony Blair dominated the political landscape with the charismatic force
of his personality and so there was little reason to vote for a weak and divided
opposition under William Hague.

Question 15

Successful opposition leaders

Answer 15

Sometimes opposition leaders can generate support by capturing
the mood of the nation. In 1970, Edward Heath’s dogged principles
successfully contrasted with a growing distaste for Harold Wilson’s
misplaced presidentialism and reputation for duplicity. Similarly,
in the 1979 general election campaign, Margaret Thatcher was
presented as a sensible and forthright ‘housewife’ who, like much of
the rest of the nation, was no longer prepared to tolerate excessive
trade union power. In 1997, the energy of Tony Blair’s campaign
and his attractive self-confidence had huge appeal in the country in
contrast to John Major’s reputation for dithering, weak leadership.
Successful opposition leaders are thus able to set the agenda of an
election to their advantage.

l Winston Churchill, 1951 general election — Churchill successfully campaigned
on a manifesto pledge to ‘set the people free’, promising to end rationing and
reduce the middle classes’ tax burden. He also won support by contrasting one-
nation Conservative values with the class-based socialism of the Attlee government.

l Margaret Thatcher, 1979 general election — Although less popular than Labour
prime minister James Callaghan, Thatcher successfully focused the general
election on the government’s failure to confront the growing power of trade
unionism.

l David Cameron, 2010 general election — In 2010, David
Cameron focused the Conservative campaign on the huge
increase in the national debt under Gordon Brown. Having
suffered from so much media criticism, this was Labour’s
weakest point and contributed to Brown’s defeat. That
Cameron did not achieve a parliamentary majority was due
to a strong showing by the Liberal Democrats under Nick
Clegg.

Question 16

unsuccesfull opposition leaders

Answer 16

However, some opposition leaders can fail to engage with the
public and may even lose support as the campaign continues.
In 1959 Hugh Gaitskell could not compete with Macmillan’s
effortless charm, while in both 1987 and 1992 Neil Kinnock
could not convince enough swing voters that he possessed the
gravitas necessary to be prime minister. In 2015, Ed Miliband
also failed to inspire the confidence of the electorate.

l Neil Kinnock, 1992 general election — Having lost to
Margaret Thatcher in 1987, Neil Kinnock was confident
of defeating John Major in 1992. However, the triumphant
presidentialism of his campaign grated with core swing
voters. The Sheffield Rally just days before the election saw
Kinnock become incoherent with excitement. His repeated
‘We’re all right, we’re all right’ shocked enough voters back
to the Conservatives to give Major a slim victory.

l Michael Howard, 2005 general election — In 2005, Michael Howard succeeded
in reducing Tony Blair’s majority. However, lingering memories of Anne
Widdecombe’s jibe that ‘there was something of the night’ about him meant
that he could not inspire widespread popular support for the Conservatives. His
support for the Iraq War (2003) also ensured that the anti-war vote went to the
Liberal Democrats under Charles Kennedy.

l Ed Miliband, 2015 general election — Miliband failed to persuade enough voters
that he had the strength of character to be prime minister. An attempt to provide
him with greater stature by having him publicly unveil a 9-foot stone tablet with
his campaign promises carved into it backfired when it was ridiculed as the
‘Edstone’ and ‘The heaviest suicide note in history

Question 17

Liberal/Liberal Democrat leadership

Answer 17

Although every modern prime minister has been a member of either the
Conservative Party or the Labour Party, the leadership of other political parties has
often been important in determining the result of a general election. The 1964,
February 1974 and 2010 general elections all demonstrate how a strong showing
by the leader of the Liberal/Liberal Democrat parties can have a significant impact
on the result.

l 1964 general election — Although Harold Wilson had expected to win a decisive
victory over Conservative prime minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home, Labour
managed only a 4-seat majority. This was because Liberal leader Jo Grimond’s
energetic campaign appealed to young people. The Liberal vote consequently
increased by 5.3%, while the swing to Labour was only 0.2%.

l February 1974 general election — In the ‘Who governs Britain?’ general election,
Jeremy Thorpe offered an exciting alternative to Edward Heath and Harold
Wilson. The Liberals increased their share of the vote by 11.8%. By holding the
balance of power, Thorpe was able to force the resignation of Edward Heath as
prime minister.

l 2010 general election — This was the first election in which televised leaders’
debates were held in the UK. Nick Clegg’s engaging personality made him the
clear winner, forcing both Gordon Brown and David Cameron to admit, ‘I agree
with Nick.’ The Liberal Democrats’ party-political broadcasts also focused on
Clegg’s trustworthiness. The 57 Liberal Democrat MPs elected to Parliament
denied Cameron a majority, leading to the first coalition government since 1945.

Question 18

minority party leadership

Answer 18

The impact of Nigel Farage as UKIP leader in the 2015 general election was also
significant. Although UKIP was expected to win votes at the expense of the
Conservatives, Farage’s relentless focus on immigration made it a pivotal issue
among the working class and so took potential votes away from Labour, helping the
Conservatives to win key marginal seats. Although UKIP only won Clacton, the
party achieved 12.6% of the popular vote.

In Scotland, an extraordinarily effective campaign by SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon
in the 2015 general election led to Labour losing 40 seats north of the border,
undermining Ed Miliband’s hopes of forming a government. Two years later, Ruth
Davidson, leader of the Scottish Conservatives, ran a highly effective campaign that
won the Conservatives 13 Scottish seats. This was the highest number since 1983 and
without them Theresa May would not have been able to form a government.

Question 19

The popularity of the party leader

Answer 19

A party leader can be very important in winning support for their party. However,
as Table 4.14 illustrates, a party leader can have a negative approval rating but still
achieve highly if they are able to define to their advantage the issues on which a
general election is fought.

1979 - Although James Callaghan was significantly more popular than
Margaret Thatcher, she still won the general election by focusing on
the competence of the government and the need for change

2015 - Although UKIP leader Nigel Farage had the worst approval rating of any
party leader, he succeeded in making immigration a key issue in the
election, dramatically increasing UKIP’s vote among the working class

2017 - When the general election was announced, YouGov found that 50%
of voters thought Theresa May would make the best prime minister
compared with just 14% for Jeremy Corbyn and 36% undecided.
Although Corbyn never achieved approval ratings as good as May’s,
his much more optimistic campaign increased the Labour share of the
vote by 9.6%

Question 20

The campaign

Answer 20

The way in which a party campaigns can be significant in determining the result
of a general election. The socialist rhetoric of the Labour Party’s campaign in 1983
appealed only to its core vote and failed to engage middle-class swing voters who
were beginning to benefit from the tax cuts of the Thatcher government. In 1992,
John Major salvaged the Conservative campaign by taking to his soap box to appeal
directly to the voters. This old-style electioneering was a welcome contrast to the
stage-managed Neil Kinnock campaign and gave the Conservatives an unexpected
general election victory. In the 2017 general election, Jeremy Corbyn campaigned
in a similarly traditional fashion across the nation, taking the Labour case directly
to the people, in marked contrast to Theresa May’s lacklustre and highly controlled
campaign. However, 2 years later, Corbyn failed to campaign in the same optimistic
fashion. Beset by allegations of anti-Semitism and unable to address great open-air
meetings (due to poor weather during the December general election), Corbyn was
quickly thrown on the defensive. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson
fought a tightly organised campaign simply focused on ‘Get
Brexit Done’. This powerful appeal contributed to his 80-seat
majority.
However, even a carefully choreographed campaign can fail
if the electorate is not persuaded by the manifesto or the
leader. In 1987, for example, Peter Mandelson brilliantly
organised Labour’s campaign, including an inspiring television
commercial focusing on Neil Kinnock. Yet Labour’s vote
share increased by only 3.2% over Michael Foot’s disastrous
campaign in 1983. The key issue was not the campaign but
that Thatcher was perceived to be much the stronger leader.

Question 21

Debate
Do campaigns influence the result of a general election?

Answer 21

yes

In the February 1974 general election, the Liberal Party under Jeremy Thorpe exploited widespread discontent with both Edward Heath and Harold Wilson, especially among first-time voters. In a campaign address a few days before the vote, Thorpe called on Liberal voters: ‘Stand firm. Don’t be bullied. Together we can make history and heal
the self-inflicted wounds of Britain.’ As a result, the Liberal share of the vote increased by 11.8%.

no

• In the 1950s and 1960s the class allegiance that
  political parties could depend on meant that campaigns
  made little difference in swaying most voters. For
  example, the 1955 and 1959 general election campaigns
  simply confirmed expected Conservative victories under
  Anthony Eden and Harold Macmillan ( could include stats for class voting)

yes

• In 1992 John Major’s decision to abandon stage-
  managed events and take his soap box to town
  centres was in marked contrasted to Neil Kinnock’s
  over-confidence at the Sheffield Rally. This changed
  the dynamic of the general election, giving the
  Conservatives an unexpected victory

no

• Although Harold Wilson’s dynamic and presidential
  campaign in 1964 was supposed to make him appeal to
  the voters as a British John F. Kennedy, in fact Sir Alec
  Douglas-Home’s low-key dogged earnestness proved
  more appealing. In the end, Wilson increased Labour’s
  share of the vote by only 0.2% on Hugh Gaitskell’s
  lacklustre performance in 1959.

and

• In 1970 Edward Heath’s campaign was dismissed as
  bland and uninspiring. Plans had been drawn up by top
  Conservatives to force his resignation when he lost.
  His surprise victory over Harold Wilson was completely
  unexpected

yes

• In 2017 Jeremy Corbyn’s optimistic rallies and
  popular manifesto commitments such as ending
  tuition fees contrasted sharply with Theresa
  May’s uninspiring campaign appearances and the
  widespread unpopularity of the ‘dementia tax’. As a
  result, Labour dramatically increased its support as
  the campaign progressed, from less than 30% of the
  vote at the beginning to 40% in the general election

no

In 2019, the Conservatives ran a more effective
campaign by relentlessly focusing on Brexit. However,
during the campaign, polling hardly changed, suggesting
that many voters had already decided how to vote before
the campaigning began

Question 22

Voter turnout and trends

Answer 22

Voter turnout in general elections is less high than it has traditionally been. A
low point was reached in 2001 when just 59.4% of the electorate voted. By 2017
turnout had recovered to 68.8%. It dipped back to 67.3% in 2019, although this
may have been because it was a winter general election. What matters more than
the headline figure is the age factor. Older people are much more likely to vote
than younger people. This is generally to the Conservatives’ advantage, as they
have much more support among older voters than does the Labour Party. Labour
has also been disadvantaged since voters in the lower social classes are less likely
to vote than in the higher categories. However, because of the Conservatives’
growing support among C2, D and E voters, this may become a problem for the
Conservatives as much as for Labour.

Question 23

The manifesto

Answer 23

In its manifesto, a political party explains the policies upon which it will govern. It is
unlikely that voters will engage with all the elements of a manifesto (see Chapter 2).
However, certain popular policies may help swing the result, while unpopular or
confusing policies can help to undermine a campaign. Two examples demonstrate
the influence of a party’s manifesto, the Labour Party’s manifestos of 1987 and 1992:
l In 1987 the Labour Party manifesto did not commit to the UK’s nuclear
deterrent. This enabled the Conservatives to claim that Labour could not be
trusted on defence, their campaign poster boldly stating ‘LABOUR’S POLICY
ON ARMS’ next to an image of a surrendering soldier.
l In 1992 the Labour manifesto commitment to increase public spending allowed
the Conservatives to claim that a Labour government would mean a ‘tax
bombshell’ for every family.
On both these occasions the Labour manifesto contributed to the Conservative
victory.
In the 2017 general election, however, the Conservative Party’s manifesto pledged
that if elderly people receiving NHS care at home had assets of more than £100,000,
the excess would contribute to the cost of their care after their death. Although
the plan was supposed to provide a fairer system of care, it was quickly labelled a
‘dementia tax’ by the press and the Conservative campaign stalled. Meanwhile,
Labour’s manifesto commitment to abolish tuition fees gave the party a dramatic
boost from young and first-time voters, while its promise of an end to austerity
and the introduction of higher taxes for the top 5% of the population had broad
popular appeal. Its slogan ‘For the Many Not the Few’ also gave the campaign an
inspirational dynamic, which was absent from the Conservative campaign.
Two years later, Labour failed to replicate this in their 2019 manifesto. Instead,
their commitment to renegotiate the terms of the UK’s EU withdrawal and then
hold a second referendum on EU membership contrasted unfavourably with the
Conservatives’ simple manifesto promise to ‘get Brexit done’.

Question 24

Issue/instrumental voting

Answer 24

In addition to making decisions on the competence of the government, voters can
choose to vote on the salience (importance) to them of certain issues. This can also
be referred to as instrumental voting and suggests that voters do study a party’s
manifesto and make decisions based on how they respond to particular issues.
Therefore, political parties often establish focus groups to investigate which issues
the public feels most strongly about so they can tailor their manifesto accordingly. In
other words, general elections can be determined by voters making a rational choice
based on their individual self-interest.
In 1983, for example, Conservative warnings that a Labour government under
Michael Foot would reverse the right-to-buy scheme contributed to Margaret
Thatcher’s landslide re-election by encouraging the aspirational working class
to vote Conservative to protect their properties. In 2015, immigration and
Euroscepticism were unexpected core issues for many voters, contributing to the
remarkable increase in UKIP’s vote from 3.1% in 2005 to 12.6%. In 2017, a core
issue was where the leading parties stood on Brexit, while Labour’s commitment
to abolishing tuition fees provided a strong incentive for younger voters to vote
Labour. In the 2019 general election, the party positions, manifestos and campaigns
were also driven by this issue of Brexit.
However, in some general elections instrumental voting can be considerably less
important than the government’s reputation for competence. For example, in the
1997 general election Labour enjoyed an 11% swing among AB voters even though
they were most likely to be affected by Labour’s proposed windfall tax on privatised
utilities. This suggests that the perceived incompetence of the government of
John Major was the valence factor that mattered more than economic self-interest.
Since the UK formally left the EU on 31 January 2020, the EU is unlikely to be an
important factor going forward, and governing competence, such as the political
fallout of the fuel and cost of living crisis, may once again become key in determining
the result of a general election.

Question 25

influence of the media - Media and impartiality in the UK

Answer 25

l Ofcom (the Office of Communications) regulates television and radio broadcasts
to ensure ‘due impartiality’. The BBC, ITV, Channel 4, SFC and Channel 5 are
thus expected to provide balance in their approach to the news. In 2019, RT,
the Kremlin-backed broadcaster, was fined £200,000 by Ofcom for its biased
reporting of the war in Syria and the Salisbury poisonings of Sergei and Yulia
Skripal. In February 2022, as the Russia–Ukraine war began, the government
asked Ofcom to investigate claims that RT was responsible for ‘disinformation’
against the West.
l In June 2021 the privately funded GB News was launched with an acknowledged
right-wing bias. Its presenters have included Nigel Farage, Mark Steyn and
former Sun journalist Dan Wootton, who used his first appearance on the
channel to attack UK government restrictions during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Rather than encouraging a free exchange of ideas, the existence of such channels
suggests that the public may now choose to source news from one partisan
channel, undermining broadcast television’s reputation for impartiality.
l Newspapers have never been bound by ‘due impartiality’. Indeed, they have
generally approached the news from an entirely different perspective, taking pride
in offering a highly prejudicial political stance to grip their readers. Controversial
newspaper editors such as Kelvin MacKenzie (The Sun, 1981–94) Paul Dacre
(Daily Mail, 1992–2018) and Piers Morgan (Daily Mirror, 1995–2004) have taken
pride in the way in which they provoked outrage with hard-hitting, opinionated
pieces.
l Social media are unregulated by Ofcom. They are not expected to fulfil a standard
of impartiality in its comments, stories or judgements. Since more young people are using social media as their main way of accessing news and information, the
implications of internet bias are increasingly important.

Question 26

influence of the media - Print journalism

Answer 26

Newspapers in the UK are not bound by ‘due impartiality’. Most of them have
generally supported the Conservative Party. The right-wing tabloids (The Sun,
Daily Mail and Daily Express) have often been ruthless in their attacks on the
Labour Party in charged headlines and opinion pieces. The Daily Telegraph is also
firmly Conservative. The Times and Sunday Times have a reputation for greater
impartiality. The Guardian’s progressive bias makes it a natural home for Liberal
Democrats. Only Mirror Group newspapers have consistently supported the
Labour Party.
The reputation that newspapers have for opinion-forming has made them highly
attractive to business tycoons such as Robert Maxwell, Conrad Black and Rupert
Murdoch since it enabled them to wield influence in politics. The classic view
of the influence that newspapers exercise was given by prime minister Stanley
Baldwin in 1931 when he charged that the Daily Mail and the Daily Express
‘are engines of propaganda for the constantly changing policies, desires, personal
vices, personal likes and dislikes of the two men (Lord Rothermere and Lord
Beaverbrook). What are their methods? Their methods are direct falsehoods,
misrepresentation, half-truths, the alteration of the speaker’s meaning by
publishing a sentence apart from the context…What the proprietorship of these
papers is aiming at is power, and power without responsibility …’ Currently,
six unaccountable media tycoons with a pronounced right-wing agenda (Lord
Rothermere, Rupert Murdoch, Richard Desmond, the Barclay Brothers and
Evgeny Lebedev) share vast influence over the sorts of stories UK citizens
encounter when they read newspaper coverage either in print or online.

Question 27

influence of the media - Do newspapers wield political influence?

Answer 27

At the close of the twentieth century newspaper sales had generally declined,
although some newspapers had proved very resilient, and some had even managed to
significantly increase their readership. However, the internet has had a devastating
impact on all sales, with fewer people than ever before regularly reading a newspaper.
In many cases the decline has been staggering, with sales of The Sun dipping from
3,877,097 in 1997 to 1,210,915 (March 2020) and the Daily Mirror from 2,442,078
(1997) to 333,556 in December 2021.
Nevertheless, although newspaper sales have decreased dramatically, free online
newspaper sites attract a massive new online audience (Table 4.15).

number of visits in december 2021
mail online - 155m visits
the guardian - 125m
the sun - 65m
teh daily mirror - 61m

Critics suggest that newspaper bias reflects rather than influences the opinions of
its readership and therefore newspapers’ political influence can be exaggerated. For
example, readers of the Daily Mail and Mail Online are already likely to be attracted
by the right-wing focus of its news stories and opinion pieces, so their views are
being reinforced rather than developed out of nothing. Similarly, a Guardian reader
will choose this newspaper because of its liberal and progressive reputation. It will
have little appeal to conservatives, who source their news stories and opinions from
newspapers that better reflect their political views.
The extent to which the political stance of newspapers can impact the result of
a general election is also contested. In 1992, having switched its support to the victorious John Major, The Sun famously declared, ‘It’s The Sun Wot Won It.’
However, its notorious headline on the day of the general election, ‘If Kinnock wins
today, will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights’, may simply
have reinforced growing public unease with Kinnock as a potential prime minister
following the Sheffield Rally.
In the 2015 general election, according to the Media Standards Trust, 77% of tabloid
leaders were hostile to Ed Miliband. However, before claiming that such negative
publicity explains David Cameron and the Conservatives’ unexpected victory, it
is important to acknowledge that tabloids were even more hostile towards Jeremy
Corbyn in the 2017 general election. Despite this, support for the Labour Party
increased by 9.6% because of its optimistic ‘For the Many Not the Few’ campaign.
This suggests that claims that newspapers can swing the result of a general election
may be unfounded.
Nevertheless, the stories and personalities that newspapers choose to focus on
between general elections certainly do help ‘to set the political weather’. This can
either discredit or enhance the reputation of a government or opposition. From
2007 to 2010, for example, most of the press was hostile to the Brown government’s
response to the global economic crisis. Consequently, in the 2010 general election
the political environment was much more in favour of the opposition parties than
the government.

According to some critics, the right-wing bias of the press has benefited the
Conservative Party. Certainly, most tabloids’ relentless attacks on the Labour Party
during the 1980s benefited Margaret Thatcher. However, we should beware of
taking this argument too far. From 1992 to 1997 the press was also deeply hostile
to Conservative prime minister John Major, while right-wing tabloids such as
the Daily Mail and The Sun undermined Theresa May by claiming she was weak
on Brexit. In early 2022, Boris Johnson’s reputation was irreparably damaged by
press coverage of No. 10 parties during the lockdown restrictions, but then briefly
recovered as the press focused on his response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Relentlessly negative press coverage of Liz Truss’ leadership irreparably damaged
her premiership, provoking her resignation after just 45 days in office. This suggests
that, although most of the press does have a strong right-wing bias, no political
party or leader can ever be entirely confident that it will always have their support.
Indeed, when the press turns on a Conservative leader (e.g. Major, May, Johnson,
Truss) the attacks can be particularly vicious and wounding.

Even though traditional newspaper readership has declined, newspapers remain
crucial in setting the political agenda. Powerful news stories are often first reported
in the press and then inform debate on television and social media, rather than the
other way around. How a news story is presented, developed and impacts the public
thus still owes a great deal to the press.
For example, the Daily Mail’s campaign to expose the Metropolitan Police’s
mishandling of the murder enquiry into the death of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence in 1993 contributed to the ongoing debate about the extent of racism
in British society. The Daily Mirror worked closely with the Justice for Gurkhas
campaign to press the Brown government to grant the Nepalese former military
servicemen residency rights in the UK. The success of the campaign owed a great
deal to the unfavourable publicity directed against Brown by a normally loyal left-
wing newspaper. Newspaper headlines can also encourage such negative attitudes
that the policy is quickly dropped as being too politically toxic. This was the case
in 2012 when George Osborne’s proposed tax on takeaway hot food was reported
as a ‘pasty tax’, and in 2017 when the Conservative Party’s manifesto commitment
that old people contribute to the cost of care homes became quickly known as the
‘dementia tax’.
Hostile press coverage can also exacerbate developing political scandals. In 2018, press
attacks on the home secretary, Amber Rudd, during the Windrush Scandal, when
Commonwealth immigrants were wrongly deported from the UK, contributed to
her resignation. In 2021, Matt Hancock’s position as health secretary was made
untenable by press coverage of him kissing his aide during lockdown. The Daily Mirror
and The Guardian’s investigative reporting of illegal lockdown parties at Downing
Street and The Sun’s exposure of sexual allegations against the Conservative deputy
chief whip, Chris Pincher, helped to provoke the resignation of Boris Johnson. The
media’s exposure of Downing Street lockdown parties led to a collapse in popular
support for Boris Johnson, forcing him from office on 5 September 2022.

Question 28

In focus - influence of the media on pms

Answer 28

On 22 November 2021, YouGov gave Boris Johnson a net approval rating of minus 35%. On
30 November 2021, the Daily Mirror broke the first story about potentially illegal parties held
at Downing Street during the Covid-19 lockdown. Other newspapers soon followed. When the
next YouGov poll was taken on 17 January 2022, the prime minister’s approval rating had sunk
to minus 51%. Although he slightly recovered following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on
24 February 2022, his approval rating remained abysmal and on the day Johnson resigned
it was minus 53%, with only 19% registering a positive view of the prime minister.
Initially Conservative-supporting newspapers, such as The Sun and the Daily Mail, threw their
weight enthusiastically behind Liz Truss. The Sun, for example, greeted her with headlines
such as ‘Liz puts her foot on the gas’, while the Daily Mail welcomed her with ‘Cometh the
hour. Cometh the woman’, while fulsomely praising Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget with ‘At
last! A True Tory budget’. However, when the value of the pound plummeted, Labour surged
ahead in opinion polls and Kwarteng was sacked as chancellor of the exchequer, their eager
support swiftly turned to recrimination and contempt. At Truss’ press conference following her
sacking of Kwarteng, Harry Cole, The Sun’s political editor, asked how she could now justify
remaining as prime minister, while the Daily Mail ran headlines including ‘Get a Grip’ and ‘How
much more can she (and the rest of us) take?’ As the media storm intensified against her, and
Conservative MPs panicked at what seemed the prospect of a general election wipe-out, Truss
announced her resignation after just 45 days in office.

Question 29

The media and government popularity- negative news vs a posotive spin.

Answer 29

Negative news

During the winter of 1978–79, the Labour government of
James Callaghan faced widespread industrial unrest. Most
of the tabloid press were deeply critical of Callaghan, with
banner headlines asserting that the government could
not cope. In 1978, The Sun abandoned Labour for the
Conservatives. Its famous headline attacking Callaghan,
‘Crisis? What crisis?’, became so influential that the
Conservatives even used it in a party-political broadcast. By
the 1979 general election, sustained negative publicity had
moved public opinion decisively against the government.
Callaghan himself remarked during the campaign, ‘It does
not matter what you say nor do. There is a shift in what the
public wants and what it approves. I suspect there is now
such a sea-change — and it is for Mrs Thatcher’

Following his surprise general election victory in 1992,
little went right for John Major. On Black Wednesday (16
September 1992), his government dramatically increased
interest rates in a doomed attempt to cling on to the
European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Even Conservative-
supporting newspapers like the Daily Mail, The Sun and the
Daily Telegraph accused the government of incompetence.
Divisions in the party over membership of the European
Union, allegations of ministerial sleaze and claims that
it had mishandled ‘mad cow disease’ further dominated
the headlines, putting the government on the defensive
and making Major seem ridiculous. By the 1997 general
election, 5 years of mockery, including from once loyal
newspapers like The Sun and the Daily Telegraph, had
helped to firmly shift public opinion against the government

a posotive spin

Tony Blair understood that having a positive relationship
with the press was indispensable to the success and
popularity of his government. For example, The Sun’s
decision to abandon the Conservatives for New Labour
provided Blair with a regular source of positive publicity.
Communications experts working for Blair, such as Alastair
Campbell, proved so effective at positively ‘spinning
stories’ that they earned the name ‘spin doctors’. However,
questions over the legitimacy of the Iraq War (2003) and
the failure to pacify the country led to the erosion of that
support, undermining both Blair and Labour

When Harold Wilson called a referendum in 1975 on
whether the UK should remain a member of the European
Economic Community (EEC), every mainstream national
newspaper supported membership. Only the communist
Morning Star was against. The vote in favour of continued
membership was a resounding 67.2% to 32.8%. By the
2016 EU referendum the situation was completely different.
Since the 1980s the press had become increasingly
Eurosceptic, with The Sun and the Daily Mail regularly
accusing the EU of attempts to undermine UK sovereignty.
During the campaign, Press Gazette estimated that 49.6%
of the press supported Leave, 32.6% Remain and 17.8%
were undecided. More significantly, support for Remain was
often qualified, in contrast to stridently confident Leave
headlines. For example, the day before the EU referendum
the Daily Mail headline told its readers, ‘If you believe in
Britain, vote Leave’

Question 30

the influence of the media - broadcast media

Answer 30

In contrast to the USA, where television channels are politically partisan, in the
UK broadcast television and radio are required to maintain certain standards of
impartiality when reporting the news. The BBC, ITV, Channel 4, SFC and Channel
5 are thus expected to provide balance in their approach to the news. However,
during the 2019 general election, ITV decided to restrict the leaders’ debates to
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn — the only leaders assumed to be able to form
a government. In so doing, ITV discriminated against the leaders of the smaller
parties.
GB News openly marketing itself as right-wing suggests that television objectivity is
being challenged by the rise of privately funded or foreign news channels. Television
bias may need to be factored into debates about the influence of broadcast media.
For example, on 18 March 2022, Ofcom revoked the licence for the Kremlin-
backed RT as it investigated 29 separate allegations concerning its coverage of the
war in Ukraine.
Since most people in the UK use television as their main source of news, all
political leaders seek to establish a commanding TV presence. Political leaders
have often employed former journalists to present them in the most effective way
in the media. For example, Alastair Campbell, the former Daily Mirror political
editor, played a vital role in constructing Tony Blair’s attractive New Labour
public image. In 2022, facing publicity fallout because of Downing Street parties
during the pandemic lockdown, Boris Johnson appointed veteran journalist and
broadcaster Guto Harri as his director of communications in a vain attempt to
restore his media reputation.

Even impartial television reports can influence political fortunes based on a
politician’s looks. Harold Macmillan understood this and always avoided being
filmed returning from a long flight: ‘After 14 hours of travel, you get off the
aeroplane wanting only a shave and a bath — oh no — you are cornered — the
lights in your eyes — the cameras whizzing. You put up your hands to shield your
eyes and the next day there you are in ‘The Daily Clarion’ looking weary, old,
worried — over a caption which implies you are past it!’

Labour leaders such as Hugh Gaitskell, Michael Foot, Neil Kinnock and Ed Miliband
had a difficult relationship with television, which may help to explain why they
lacked enough popular support to win a general election. Gaitskell appeared too
intellectual, Foot too elderly and eccentric, Kinnock too bombastic and verbose,
and Miliband appeared to lack the necessary strength of character. Conservative
leaders have also suffered at the hands of television. William Hague was a brilliant
parliamentary performer, but this did not translate to television. Iain Duncan Smith
made so small an impression against Tony Blair on television that he was replaced
by the Conservative Party without ever fighting a general election.
However, some leaders are highly skilled in using television to their advantage. In
the 1960s, Harold Wilson’s image of bold and modern leadership benefited from
stage-managed photo shoots with celebrities such as The Beatles and Sean Connery.
In the February 1974 general election, the suave media-savvy Liberal leader Jeremy
Thorpe had a much more attractive television image than either Edward Heath
or Harold Wilson. Consequently, the Liberal vote increased by 11.8%. Margaret
Thatcher famously used power dressing to establish her reputation for strength and
decisiveness.
By capturing the mood of the nation in his ‘People’s Princess’ speech on the death
of Princess Diana in 1997, Blair reinforced his stature as a political leader. During
the Covid-19 pandemic, Boris Johnson’s regular briefings to the nation gave him a
powerful connectivity with the public, which strengthened his popularity in a time
of national crisis. As leader of the opposition, Sir Keir Starmer did not have the same
regular access to the electorate, making it more difficult for him to establish himself
in the public consciousness.

The widespread coverage of Prime Minister’s Questions makes it an important
television battle as both the prime minister and the leader of the opposition try
to seize control of the political agenda for their own advantage. If they can utter a
memorable soundbite, this will further help their political fortunes. As leader of the
opposition (1994–97) Tony Blair was highly successful at using Prime Minister’s
Question Time to contrast the strength of his leadership and Labour unity with
John Major’s declining grip on his party. David Cameron also enhanced his profile
as Conservative leader with his confident attacks on Gordon Brown during Prime
Minister’s Question Time. Cameron’s speech writer, Ameet Gill, called it ‘an
important fixture in the weekly calendar to make the political weather’.
However, as Harold Wilson put it, ‘A week is a long time in politics.’ Prime ministers
can be built up by television but also undermined by it. Harold Wilson misjudged
the mood of the nation in his ‘Pound in your pocket’ speech on devaluation in
1967, leading to a dramatic loss in support. Having previously used television to
his advantage, Tony Blair’s authority was ruined by television footage of bloodshed
and violence in Iraq. In 2022, Boris Johnson’s positive media image was crushed by
media accusations that Downing Street had disobeyed Covid restrictions, swiftly
followed by the Chris Pincher scandal in which Johnson admitted appointing him
deputy chief whip despite being aware of sexual allegations against him. So great
was the media storm and the resulting collapse of support in the Conservative Party
that he was forced to resign. The media storm provoked by Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-
budget in September 2022 was so massive and sustained that when Suella Braverman
resigned as home secretary, Truss’ own position as prime minister became untenable.

Question 31

In focus - news cosnumption

Answer 31

News consumption in the UK (Ofcom findings, 2021):
l 79% of the adult population use television as their main source for accessing the news.
l 93% of adults aged 65+ use television to access the news.
l 89% of 16–24-year-olds report that their main source of news is the internet.
l 85% of minority ethnic people access news from the internet rather than television.
This evidence suggests that although television remains a powerful source of information, its
influence, especially among young people, is increasingly being challenged by the internet,
which is significantly less regulated.

Question 32

A tale of two Gordons

Answer 32

On 28 April 2010, amid Conservative claims that he had doubled the national debt, Labour
prime minister Gordon Brown did a walkabout in Rochdale. During his visit he refuted claims
from 65-year-old Gillian Duffy that EU migrants were flooding the NHS. Unfortunately, Brown
had left his microphone on and when he thought he was safely in his car, he recorded himself
accusing his aides of pushing Duffy towards him: ‘She was just a sort of bigoted woman who
said she used to be Labour. I mean, it’s just ridiculous.’ Hours later the tape was played in front
of Brown on the Jeremy Vine radio show. The Sun’s headline the next day was ‘Brown toast’,
keeping Labour firmly on the defensive with only a week before voting.

On 17 September 2014, the day before the Scottish independence referendum, Gordon Brown
gave a powerful and widely reported pro-union speech. A lacklustre ‘Better Together’ campaign
had failed to engage the electorate and the momentum seemed to be with Leave. However,
Brown’s emotional plea for unity — ‘What we have built together by sacrificing and sharing, let
no narrow nationalism split asunder ever’ — changed the dynamic of the referendum as people
prepared to vote.

Question 33

influence of the media - Broadcast television and politics

Answer 33

News reports -

Television editors decide what news stories are in the ‘public interest’. This suggests that news does
not just happen, it is created. This can bring political advantages and disadvantages. During the 1997
general election, regular television focus on anti-sleaze candidate Martin Bell’s contest with Neil
Hamilton in the Tatton constituency significantly disadvantaged the Conservative campaign. However,
in the 2019 general election, television focus on Brexit likely benefited the Conservatives with their
constant refrain of ‘Get Brexit Done’. In 2022, unrelenting television coverage of lockdown parties
at Downing Street, the Sue Gray report and then the Chris Pincher scandal combined to force Boris
Johnson from office. Truss’ press conference following her sacking of Kwasi Kwarteng as chancellor of
the exchequer was so hesitant and stilted that far from reducing calls on her to resign it actually further
undermined her authority

Interviews

Political interviews have long been a staple of television. Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair were very
confident interviewees even when they were on the defensive. However, Jeremy Paxman’s BBC interview
with Ed Miliband in the 2015 general election (‘hell, yes, I’m tough enough’) reinforced negative public
attitudes about him. In the 2019 general election, during his BBC interview with Andrew Neil, Jeremy
Corbyn did not dispel rumours that he had endorsed anti-Semitism. This failure dominated the next day’s
newspapers and helped put the Labour campaign firmly on the defensive

Satirical
comedies

Broadcast television can engage in satire so long as it is evenly balanced. However, some politicians’
public reputations have suffered more from satire than others. In the early 1960s, Harold Macmillan’s
unflappable reputation for ‘Edwardian cool’ was ruined by That Was the Week That Was. Neil Kinnock
suffered at the hands of Spitting Image. In contrast, Boris Johnson used his appearances in satirical
programmes like Have I Got News for You to successfully develop his brand image on television

Leaders’
debates

The extent to which leaders’ debates influence general elections is unproven. In 2010, Nick Clegg’s
confident performance in the televised debates was highly popular and yet the Liberal Democrat vote
share decreased by 1% and they lost 5 seats. Theresa May was ridiculed for not attending the leaders’
debates in 2017. However, her campaign had already proved lacklustre and so her non-appearance did
not change the campaign dynamic. In 2019, opinion polls were not impacted by the debate between
Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn when they reiterated their existing positions. This suggests that unless
something exceptional occurs, leader debates are unlikely to dramatically change voting intentions

Question 34

the influence of the media - social media

Answer 34

Social media are becoming an increasingly important
way for people to access news and information and users
access news stories on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat
and Twitter through their preferred news outlet. This
presents new challenges for the free exchange of ideas
in a liberal democracy. When people read a newspaper
or watch television, they make a one-off informed
choice. On social media, algorithms register users’
viewing choices and connect the user with posts of
similar interest. If users have a politically partisan search
history, they are bombarded with related material,
thereby reinforcing their existing prejudice. Powerful
financial interests can also flood the internet with
advertising. Since the user may not even realise that it
is advertising, this further undermines the individual’s
capacity for making informed judgements.

Critics note that accessing information on a smart phone means it is more likely that
the user will be grabbed by a headline without reading the full article. Memes can also
wield huge influence without having any evidential basis. The comments posted on
social media are rarely an invitation to debate. Instead, they are often judgements and
assertions, sometimes expressed in aggressive language designed to limit discussion.
Although in 2022 the BBC was still the dominant news channel on social media, on
TikTok, which is especially popular among young people, the right-wing GB News
was increasingly dominant. According to television reporter Luke Hanrahan, the rise
of opinion news pieces is dangerous because it encourages people to watch the news to
have their prejudices confirmed rather than to be better informed.
Twitter is particularly controversial. Its supporters claim that it connects the public
and creates a constant free exchange of information and opinions. However, critics
note that Twitter is responsible for the rapid spread of unverified comments and
assertions, which make politics a shouting match between rival opinions with no
attempt at dialogue and consensus.

Social media can also encourage an unprecedented cascade of news and publicity.
This can be to the advantage of politicians and spread important news. During
the 2019 general election, ‘Get Brexit Done’ was a simple and arresting message
that spread quickly on social media, to the advantage of the Conservative Party.
When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Boris Johnson’s statement
condemning Russian aggression was posted across social media, making clear the
UK government’s position.
However, since the internet is not bound by Ofcom, fake news stories can
proliferate. This could have disastrous implications for informed debate within a
liberal democracy. Unlike newspapers, social media stories are not attributable to
journalists and so a story can spread with absolutely no provenance. For example,
during the pandemic, social media encouraged the proliferation of anti-vaccination
conspiracy theories with no evidential basis. During the Russia–Ukraine war many
images and stories were shared on social media with no attempt to verify whether
they were true or false.

Social media’s impact on political opinion making and voting is contentious. In the
2017 general election, Labour had double the number of Conservative Twitter users.
Some critics suggested that this helped Labour to increase its vote share by 9.6%,
making it the first general election in which social media use played a significant
role. However, this dramatic rise in support may have been due to other factors,
such as the contrast between the Labour and Conservative manifestos and Theresa
May’s and Jeremy Corbyn’s styles of campaigning.
Yet it may be that social media primarily strengthen existing political points of
view. Social media often facilitate access to broadcast and press stories rather than
initiating them, suggesting its influence is still less important than traditional forms
of media.
However, the political impact of social media is continually evolving. Black Lives
Matter and #MeToo are social movements that have had enormous influence by
spreading their message across the internet. Social media also provide an instant
test of public opinion, which politicians can use to judge public reaction to their
policies.

Question 35

Opinion polls - How important and reliable are opinion polls both during
and between elections?

Answer 35

Opinion polls have been used regularly in the UK since the 1945 general election.
There are several leading polling companies in the UK, notably Ipsos MORI,
Populus and YouGov. Researchers take a cross section of society in terms of age,
social class and gender and then ask them for their views. The larger the sample
and the more accurate the sample of society, the more likely the poll is to provide a
strong indication of public opinion.
l Opinion polls can determine the public’s attitude on a specific issue.
l They can also be used to determine how the public intend to vote in a referendum
or an election.
l Political parties can commission opinion polls themselves to determine public
opinion on a specific issue and develop policies that reflect public concern.
l On General Election Day, exit polls record how the public have voted. They are
usually highly accurate and are released at 10 p.m. when polling closes.

Question 36

Debate
Do opinion polls have a beneficial impact on UK politics?

Answer 36

yes

• Opinion polls demonstrate changing attitudes on
  important issues, ensuring that political parties are
  constantly informed about developing public opinion.
  Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February
  2022, in a YouGov poll the percentage seeing Russia
  as a threat jumped from 34% (September 2021) to 64%
  (March 2022)

no

• The public can focus too much on opinion polls in
  general elections. Instead of voting on principle,
  they can be encouraged to vote tactically. In the
  2019 general election, the website tactical.vote
  used polling data to show anti-Conservative voters
  whether they were better off voting Liberal Democrat
  or Labour

yes

• In 2022, opinion polls demonstrated such public
  outrage at government parties during the pandemic
  lockdowns that the parliamentary Conservative Party
  was encouraged to ditch Boris Johnson as an electoral
  liability

no

• During 2015, 56 national opinion polls suggested
  voters wanted to remain in the EU. Just ten suggested
  a vote for Leave. When David Cameron decided to
  call the EU referendum, he was therefore highly
  confident that Remain would win. Critics suggest that
  such positive polling for Remain may have made its
  supporters too complacent about the result

yes

• Opinion polls can also encourage enthusiasm
  for politics. During a general election campaign,
  numerous opinion polls reflect the current state of
  party popularity. This can increase voter turnout if the
  result is likely to be very close. In 1992, opinion polls
  suggested a hung parliament with no party able to
  claim an overall majority. Consequently, voter turnout
  was very high (77.7%) because voters felt that their
  votes really mattered

no

• Critics of opinion polls argue that they undermine
  conviction politics by making politicians focus too much
  on policies they think may generate popularity instead
  of what they think is right for the country. Politicians
  can end up being led by short termism and expediency
  rather than by what they think is right
• During general election campaigns, if opinion polls
  show that one side is far ahead, this can discourage
  voter turnout. In 2001, the massive lead that Labour
  had accumulated in the polls discouraged the public
  from voting since the result appeared a foregone
  conclusion

Question 37

Case studies of three general elections - 1979 general election

Answer 37

The loss of a vote of confidence in the House of Commons by one vote (311/310)
in March 1979 forced James Callaghan to call an immediate general election.
Although Callaghan’s approval rating was high, large-scale industrial unrest during
the preceding Winter of Discontent had undermined his government’s authority.
The Conservative campaign exploited discontent with trade union strike action and
benefited from extensive support from the press.

Question 38

Case studies of three general elections - 1979 general election governing competence

Answer 38

The 1979 general election demonstrates how social factors can combine with valence
issues of governing competency and issue voting to determine the result. James
Callaghan’s minority government had managed to survive only with the support of
the Liberals and the nationalist parties. In the autumn of 1978, Callaghan decided not
to call a general election even though Labour was ahead of the Conservative Party
in most opinion polls. This proved to be a mistake since in the winter that followed
his government faced a highly damaging series of strikes by public sector workers
unprepared to accept the government’s 5% pay cap. These included ambulance
drivers, refuse collectors, water and sewerage workers and, notoriously, gravediggers
in Liverpool. The dominant issue on which the Conservatives campaigned would
thus be the record of the government, especially its failure to confront excessive
trade union pay claims.

During the campaign, Callaghan’s unflappable grandfatherly image, for which
he had earned the nickname Sunny Jim, failed to resonate with voters, who felt
that he was underestimating how trade unions’ demands for higher pay for their
members was driving up inflation. His attempt to calm the nation on his return
from Guadeloupe, seen as a refusal to accept there was a crisis, made him appear
complacent and out of touch. That he had played a leading role in every Labour
government since 1964 also made it difficult for him to persuade floating voters that
he was now the right prime minister to successfully confront the growing influence
of the trade unions.

Question 39

Case studies of three general elections - 1979 the campaign.

Answer 39

Even before the campaign began, the Conservatives focused on Labour’s record in
power, in particular its inability to control excessive trade union pay claims, bring
down inflation and reduce unemployment. Valence issues of governing competence
were thus vital in the Conservative victory. In addition, the Conservatives emphasised
that they were a party of national unity, with common sense and practical solutions
to the growing power of trade unions.
Positive press coverage of the Conservative campaign reinforced the message among
voters that Margaret Thatcher would offer a fresh approach to the defining issue of
trade union influence. This helped to increase the Conservative vote in several social
groupings that had traditionally been more likely to vote Labour. The narrowing
Conservative poll lead as the general election loomed closer also likely boosted
Thatcher’s fortunes by encouraging her supporters to turn out to vote. The high
turnout in the 1979 general election (76%) is therefore likely to have helped the
Conservatives more than Labour.
The Conservatives also gained votes from the Liberal Party, which by propping up
Callaghan in the Lib–Lab pact lost some of its traditional middle-class support. The
imminent trial of its former leader, Jeremy Thorpe, for conspiracy to murder his ex-
lover further damaged Liberal fortunes. Voters were therefore much less inclined to
vote Liberal as a protest vote and so the Conservatives were the main beneficiaries 8.1% swing vote

The social breakdown of the general election illustrates just how much class
dealignment had taken place, with Conservative support dramatically increasing
across all social classes — the biggest swing being among Labour’s traditional core
C2 voters. In the October 1974 general election, Labour had led the Conservatives
23% among C2 voters. By 1979 the parties were neck and neck with C2 voters

C2 - 1974 conervative 26, labour 49.
1979 conervative 41, labour 41.

DE 1974 conervative 22, labour 57
1979 conervative, 34, labour 49.

The Conservatives also significantly increased their support among women and
younger voters

women 1974 conservative 39, 1979 47

18-24 yer olds 1974- conservative 24,
1979 conservative 42.

Question 40

Case studies of three general elections - 1997 general election

Answer 40

In 1997 the Conservatives had been in power for 18 years. The Major government was
divided over Europe and associated with sleaze and incompetence. This contrasted
with the dynamism and unity associated with Tony Blair and New Labour. With
Labour 20% ahead in most opinion polls at the beginning of the campaign, even
the most optimistic Conservatives found it difficult to believe they could win this
general election.

Question 41

Case studies of three general elections - Governing competence 1997

Answer 41

Having narrowly won the 1992 general election, John Major’s 1992–97 government
quickly became associated with incompetence, disunity and ministerial corruption.
Major’s reputation for weak leadership was exploited by Tony Blair, who provided
an exciting contrast to an increasingly unpopular prime minister.
Major was defeated in 1997 because he could not persuade the electorate that his
party was fit to govern. As early as 1992 the government had lost its reputation for
economic competence when it abandoned the European exchange rate mechanism
(ERM) on ‘Black Wednesday’. The resulting dramatic rise in interest rates hit
mortgage owners the most and the Conservatives never regained the economic trust
of the electorate because neither the chancellor of the exchequer, Norman Lamont,
nor the prime minister took responsibility by resigning.
The Conservative Party was also divided over the European Union. Major only just
managed to get the Maastricht Bill, which further increased European unity, through
the House of Commons against opposition from his Eurosceptic backbenchers. The
resignation of several ministers over allegations of sleaze damaged the government’s
reputation. The government’s slow response to ‘mad cow’ disease, together with
claims that ministers had colluded in the illegal sale of arms to Iraq, also undermined
their credibility.

Question 42

Case studies of three general elections - Tony Blair and New Labour 1997

Answer 42

Although attempts to make the Labour Party more attractive to middle-class voters
had begun under Neil Kinnock, he lost both the 1987 and 1992 general elections.
The sudden death of his successor, John Smith, in 1994 then led to Tony Blair
taking over as Labour leader. Blair’s youthful energy and charisma drove forward
the modernisation of Labour, based on the principles of an inclusive ‘stakeholder
society’. Clause IV of the Labour Party constitution was amended so that Labour
no longer committed itself to nationalisation. Blair also moved to the centre by
promising not to increase income tax, while he even challenged the Conservatives’
traditional lead on law and order by promising ‘to be tough on crime, tough on the
causes of crime’.

Question 43

Case studies of three general elections - The campaign 1997

Answer 43

Tony Blair’s press secretary, Alastair Campbell, ran
a disciplined campaign, which showcased Blair as a
youthful and energetic leader whose progressive centre-
ground policies were in sharp contrast to Major’s
reputation for weak and uninspiring leadership. In
1997, Blair’s presidential style of leadership was exactly
what the electorate wanted.
The ‘pledge card’ that Labour campaigned on in 1997
also gave coherence to its campaign and was a way
of persuading voters that Labour could be trusted in
government after 18 years in opposition.

Question 44

Case studies of three general elections - Labour’s 1997 pledge card

Answer 44

l Cut school class sizes to 30 or under for 5-, 6- and
7-year-olds.
Tony Blair proved to be a highly effective campaigner in the
1997 general election when his charisma was at its strongest
l Halve the time between arrest and punishment for persistent young offenders.
l Cut NHS waiting lists.
l Take 250,000 young people off benefits and put them into work.
l No rise in income tax, VAT on fuel to be cut to 5%, interest rates and inflation
to be kept as low as possible.
The Labour’s Party’s inspiring election broadcasts reached out far beyond Labour’s
core vote. Just 3 days before the general election its ‘angel taxi driver’ broadcast
offered a moving vision of how life could be so much better under Labour, fitting
in with its campaign song ‘Things Can Only Get Better’. Labour’s promises of
dramatic constitutional reforms, including devolution and House of Lords reform,
also resonated with Liberal Democrat voters, helping Labour to win seats that might
otherwise have gone Liberal Democrat.
At the same time, Labour was in the unusual position of having the support of The
Sun, which in 1997 still had a circulation of almost 4 million. However, The Sun
switched allegiance to Labour only when Labour already had a commanding lead
in the polls. Its support, therefore, was significant only in reinforcing Labour’s lead
over the Conservatives.
In contrast, the Conservative campaign was hampered by the government’s inability to
escape its reputation for corruption and disunity. Journalist Martin Bell stood as an anti-
sleaze candidate against Neil Hamilton, who had resigned from the government over
allegations that he had taken ‘cash for questions’. This created huge negative publicity.
The high-profile campaign of the Referendum Party also meant that Conservative
divisions over Europe remained more prominent than Major would have wished.
To make matters worse, the Conservatives’ disastrous ‘New Labour New Danger’
campaign, focusing on Blair’s ‘demon eyes’, entirely misjudged the mood of the
nation. Five years of constant media attacks on Major’s competence also made his
leadership an electoral liability in a way that it had not been in 1992.

Question 45

Case studies of three general elections - The results 1997

Answer 45

The scale of Blair’s general election victory meant that the Conservatives scored
their lowest share of the popular vote since the leadership of the Duke of Wellington
in 1832

labour - 418 seats, 43.2% of the vote 145+ seats and 8.8%+swing

conseravtive 165 seats, 30.7% of the vote, -178 seats, and -11.2% swing

2 shows how Labour was able to dramatically increase its share of the vote
in all social categories by presenting itself as a progressive party under a dynamic
leader. Despite its broad inclusive appeal, Labour in 1997 still performed by far
the best among C2 and DE voters, while the Conservatives managed to keep a
substantial lead among AB voters.

1997 general election — social class voting trends

social class - AB - labou 31, conservative 41. 11 % swing since 1992

social class C1 - labour 39, conseravtive 37, 14% swing.

social class C2 - labour 50, conservative 31, 9% swing.

social class DE - labour 59, conervative 21, 9%swing.

Question 45

Case studies of three general elections - 2019 general election

Answer 45

When Boris Johnson succeeded Theresa May as prime minister on 24 July 2019,
he inherited a minority government and a Conservative Party that was still divided
over how to deliver Brexit. A general election was therefore called for 12 December
2019. Johnson enthusiastically campaigned on a promise to ‘get Brexit done’, while
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn struggled to have the same impact he had had against
the much less charismatic Theresa May in 2017. Johnson’s success in winning
traditional ‘Red Wall’ Labour seats secured him an 80-seat majority, indicating the
continuing relevance of partisan and class dealignment.

Question 45

Case studies of three general elections - The campaign 2019

Answer 45

In 2017, Jeremy Corbyn’s optimistic, pro-European and youth-focused campaign set
the tone of the general election. The idealistic title of the manifesto ‘For the Many
Not the Few’, together with mass open-air rallies, was also in marked contrast to the
much more sterile Conservative campaign, contributing to a 9.6% swing towards
Labour. In 2019, however, Labour struggled to replicate that success. A winter
campaign provided less opportunity for the sort of public meetings Corbyn excelled
at. His refusal to explicitly condemn anti-Semitism within the Labour Party during
his BBC interview with Andrew Neil on 25 November put him firmly on the
defensive for the last 3 weeks of the campaign.

Labour’s commitment to renegotiate the terms under which the UK would leave
the EU and then offer a second referendum also misjudged the mood of the nation.
In addition, Labour’s promise to dramatically increase public spending, with for
example a 4.3% increase in the health budget as well as free broadband, contributed
to fears that a Labour government would have to increase taxes to pay for such
generous promises.
In contrast, the Conservative manifesto and campaign were firmly focused on the
simple and direct message ‘Get Brexit Done’. After three and a half years of Brexit
gridlock, this resonated among voters and the Conservatives managed to keep
Brexit at the centre of the campaign. Boris Johnson’s popularity as a leader was also
made central to the campaign. For example, the campaign video ‘Vote Conservative
Actually’ ended with Johnson appealing directly to the electorate for their support:
‘Enough, enough. Let’s get this done.’
The Conservatives reinforced their support in Leave areas (which were generally
less prosperous than Remain areas) by emphasising their ‘levelling up’ policies. This
helped them snatch ‘Red Wall’ constituencies such as Blyth Valley, Sedgefield and
Bolsover, where Labour support was already in decline.
In Scotland, the Conservatives lost ground to the SNP following the surprise
resignation of Ruth Davidson as party leader in August. Without her combative
leadership and with differences between Scottish Conservatives and the Johnson
administration, their vote share declined by 3.5%. The Liberal Democrats’
controversial promise to remain in the EU despite the result of the 2016
referendum did win them support in Remain areas. However, the first-past-the-
post system operated against them and so their influence in the general election
was minimal.

Question 46

Case studies of three general elections - Governing competence and issue voting 2019

Answer 46

Given that the Johnson government had been in office for only 6 months and that its
focus had been on extricating the UK from the EU, governing competence played
a minimal role in the 2019 general election. As in the 2017 general election, when
the May government had only been in office for a year, the key issue on which the
election was fought was Brexit. However, it is important to note that the political
paralysis caused by the EU referendum in 2016 was unique. Usually general elections
occur at regular intervals, enabling the electorate to better judge the effectiveness of
the government. Thus, the 2017 and 2019 general elections had more in common
with the two crisis general elections in 1974 (February and October) than with most
general elections.
Despite the scale of the Conservative victory, a close analysis of geographical, social
and demographic trends suggests that the 2019 general election was not a watershed
election. Instead, it confirmed pre-existing trends of partisan and class dealignment
as the Labour Party increased its vote share in cosmopolitan and pro-European
Union areas, while the Conservatives did well in more Eurosceptic areas with a
declining industrial base.
Table 4.23 illustrates this with a comparison of the results in two Midlands
constituencies. Warwick and Leamington Spa are two prosperous West Midlands
towns. North Warwickshire has a significantly higher working-class population and
has roots in coal and heavy industry.
The salience of Brexit as the core issue in this general election is further demonstrated
by the way in which different age groups voted. Labour dominated the vote share
among pro-European younger voters, as did the Conservatives among older more
Eurosceptic voters.

A comparison of Leave and Remain Midlands constituencies

Warwick and Leamington Spa
Voted 59% Remain in the 2016 EU
referendum

2015 - general election 47.9% - conseravatuve. labour - 34.9%
2017 - general election labour - 46.7%
conservative - 44.4%
2019 - labour 43.6% conseravtive 42.3%

North Warwickshire
Voted 67% Leave in the 2016 EU
referendum

2015 - labour 36 %b conservative 42%
2017 - labourn 38.9% conservative 56.9%
2019 - labour26.8% conservative 65.9%

EU referendum 2016 — how the youngest and oldest voted

18-24 - 71% remain
65+ - 64% leave

Voting according to age in the 2015 and 2019 general elections

18-24 year olds went from voting 43% labour to 62%

65+ year olds went from voting 47% lconservative to 64% conservative.

Question 47

Case studies of three general elections - The results 2019

Answer 47

conservatuves gained 43% of the vote and labour gained 32% of the vote