Let’s face the children

Recently I tendered a study, to the Commissioner for Children, on “children and the impact of electioneering” (available at http://www.tfal.org.mt/).

It is a fact borne out of this report that children form their impressions and their understanding of the world from the experiences that they come across in life, not least politics.

In a society where we inhale ‘politics’ with every breath we take, this ‘happening’ can either be perceived as an itchy event or else it can become an opportunity for children to be dynamically engaged in their communities.

Even though there may not be a decorous debate taking place on this issue (that is, on the impact of electioneering on minors) we still need to explore whether it is required that we safeguard children from potentially negative influences and effects that campaigning might be inflicting. Explicitly: should we promote children’s issues during political campaigns? How can politics remain controversial and relevant to children at the same time? How much politics should children be exposed to? If we do not agree that children should be exposed to politics, in what way should we bowdlerize their involvement?

Kevin Aquilina, in his paper Children’s Rights in the Maltese Audiovisual Landscape: Proposals for Legislative Reform, states (2005), “Children are fragile, vulnerable and need protection”.

It is clear that there is cognisance that children need to be ‘protected’ but there is also furtive agreement that they also need to be betrothed in terms of political participation particularly in electioneering. If truth be told, there was a general consensus among the interviewees in this study that the way forward should be based on the development of a set of guidelines to ensure self-regulation. It is an accepted verity that the UN Convention on the Rights of Children (1989), the Broadcasting Act and other pieces of legislation are frameworks that should be shielding children and young people satisfactorily, even though it appears that there are gaps in the system that need to be touched upon.

The wide-ranging datum is that it is good that children are socialised into political thinking, but it is also imperative to protect them from situations where they are used as props, most notably during electioneering. The most outstanding concern is that we should avoid negative representations of children in political ads. Parental and children’s consent and the corresponding passable grounding is paramount.

It is likewise crucial to ensure that children remain curious about their communities and it is vital that we keep in mind that no matter how much information we give them, they are continuously seeking more. Regardless of their parents’ political affiliation and viewpoint it is only fair to appraise children about the bigger picture so that they can grow to be mindful.

The challenge here is to find ways how the political debates are transposed to children and to provide them with the tools to be/come critical. It is central to twig the delicate and tension-filled moments children find themselves in during election campaigns. Still we need to do away with the myth that children are mindless!

I commend political parties to commit themselves hastily to the following: refrain from using children under eight years of age during electioneering; images used in political ads are to be retrieved from stock photos (to avoid would-be labeling and bullying); and the Press Act (Chapter 248) is amended to include the setting up of a commission that will have the responsibility of overseeing political party propaganda (billboards, printed materials and social media campaigning).

It would also be principled of the parties not to include children younger than 16 years of age as a backdrop during election-time. The Institute of Maltese Journalists (IGM), in collaboration with the Commissioner for Children, should also take a leading role in offering concept training to photographers, camerapersons, reporters and journalists on how children should be embodied in the images they capture during political events.

It is also recommended that all political publicity that involves children be screened prior to publishing by the said commission, as established by a revised Press Act (Chapter 248). A methodical, exhaustive and mandatory screening process is to be assumed by media assessors. In view of this, the Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority should take on the role of establishing standards, criteria and touchstones.

Political parties are also to be encouraged to meet with minors between the ages of 12 and 18 years to discuss their political programmes, meetings that should be consented to by the young people themselves and their parents.

Rightly so, Mario Mallia, educator and spokesman for education, AD, states: “We need to be cautious and attentive to ensure that children are not exploited. … We want children to participate”.

I would like to conclude with media specialist Joe Borg’s affirmation: “Policy, and more so, legislation has to be based on research. I do not favour the use of the faces of Maltese children on political billboards or propaganda. But is there any evidence which shows that such depiction has resulted in negative effects? If there is no such evidence I would be in favour of an educational campaign with parents and lobbying with political parties instead of legislation”.

Andrew Azzopardi is a senior lecturer in the Department of Youth and Community Studies, University of Malta.