LOBBYING MISUNDERSTOOD BY THE MEDIA

It can hardly be denied that lobbying faces an extremely bad reputation amongst the public at large in Europe. The term lobbyist is seen by many as an insult, and lobbying is often considered an illegitimate or distasteful activity. Reports in the media are usually negative about lobbying. Critics’ main objections are a lack of transparency in lobbying, implied links between lobbying and corruption and that lobbying lacks legitimacy or indeed even that it poses a threat to democracy. Lobbying appears undemocratic in their eyes because it bypasses the established “one man, one vote” principle with (one sided) representation of interests. The underlying fear is that politics become client politics; that a small minority gain benefits at the expense of the vast majority. An equally common criticism is the lack of transparency in lobbying. The claim is that the reasoning behind political decisions is unclear to the public as only the politicians make public appearances, not the lobbyists. Another common perception is that lobbying is linked to corruption, the main accusation being that lobbyists buy political advantages. Corruption allegations in particular portray lobbying as “immoral” or even “shadow politics”.

There is certainly no justification for a general and indiscriminate demonization of lobbyists, regardless of whether they act for business associations, unions, individual major businesses, non-governmental organizations, the Church or other groups in society. 

Each year sees the presentation of the “Worst EU Lobbying Award” in Brussels to civil servants, politicians and businesses. The prize publicly denounces what its jury considers particularly controversial lobbying activities with the aim of reducing their effect. This scandalisation of the issue contributes to the ‘lobbying myth’, a myth constantly being strengthened by implications in media reports, TV programmes, and which is sometimes reduced to a simplistic black and white scenario.  Lobbying is, moreover, an issue which can be easily used to serve and apparently confirm existing prejudices and resentment along the lines of ‘policy is made by business, not by voters- allegations completely unfounded. If the situation was that simple there would be no need for lobbying.

The lobbying myth reinforced by the media is therefore like most myths and legends far removed from the reality. No question that there are regularly cases which cross or at least touch ethical and legal boundaries. The  criticisms should therefore be taken seriously. Lobbying can without a doubt exceed reasonable and legitimate influence, especially when it reaches or passes the bound of what is legal. Yet such exceptions merely prove the rule that lobbying is usually structured, professional and legally unassailable. Lobbying critics should indeed themselves respond to critical queries. Who for example should decide how much lobbying is too much? Who should decide what constitutes the public interest?

What the media should focus on is gaining a better understanding of the democratic legitimization for lobbying. Modern societies and democratic systems of government are inconceivable without the aggregation, representation and organized establishment of interests. True, the positions represented are by definition individual interests (what interest is  not?); however, without them there would be no pluralism of opinions and views in political discourse. Politics does not exist in a vacuum but in mutually dependent relations to its environment. Interests are the basic driving forces behind players’ actions and thus part of the  very stuff of politics. Democratic politics is always shaped by confrontation, negotiation, agreement and compromise; by the debate between differing opinions with the aim of finding a political, consensus solution. 

The triad of interests, conflicts and consensus therefore together constitute politics. The media for example could write stories explaining that  political decisions are made in complex processes and procedures governed by formal and informal rules (unclear to the public). They could write about the numerous positive aspects to lobbying, for example the aggregation and communication of interests, political involvement, advice on political matters for business players and the companies’ needs in communication with politics.

The media could explain how good lobbying can create a common basis for communication between politics and businesses ensuring that the two sides work together to make the best possible sustainable decisions which are ultimately for the public good. 

Lobbying is an important part of corporate contextual environment management: a precise and ongoing analysis of a company’s political environment is an essential basis for long-term strategic company decisions and targeted communication with legislative and executive decision-makers can make implementing such decisions significantly easier. Ultimately, lobbying can help every company dependent upon statutory or administrative decisions, not only those in highly regulated sectors, to obtain competitive advantages or avoid competitive disadvantages.

May be that writing about the positive aspects of lobbying will not sell as many newspapers and/or boost audience statistics but it surely will represent a significant contribution by the media to the value of pluralism in democratic societies. We need the media to help us project a better image of who we are. Lobbying is a legitimate and necessary part of our democratic political process. Government decisions affect both people and organizations, and information must be provided in order to produce informed decisions. Public officials cannot make fair and informed decisions without considering information from a broad range of interested parties. All sides of an issue must be explored in order to produce equitable government policies. Lobbying is also NOT about fancy lunches, private clubs, five star hotels, expensive suits, or days out on the golf course. Lobbying involves much more than persuading legislators. Its principal elements include researching and analyzing legislation or regulatory proposals; monitoring and reporting on developments; attending parliamentary or regulatory hearings; working with coalitions interested in the same issues; and educating not only government officials but also employees and corporate officers on the implications of various changes.  

It is our task to help the media better understand who we are and what we do.