Tom Jacobson is a professor of communication in Media Studies and Production, and he currently serves as director of the SMC interdepartmental Master of Science in Globalization and Development Communication. His principal research areas address development, political and community change, and public deliberation. He has been associate professor at SUNY-Buffalo, and visiting professor at Northwestern and Cornell universities. Jacobson is past-president of the Participatory Communication Research Section of the International Association of Media and Communication Research (IAMCR). He currently is chair of IAMCR’s Scholarly Review Committee. In an interview with him we asked him some questions about many significant and complex issues regarding good governance, democracy rule of law, and the role of media and many other related issues, and he answered the questions as the following:

Gulan: One of the most difficult challenges facing the process of building effective and efficient governance is incorporating different views and accommodating conflicting interests, so how we can overcome this seemingly insurmountable obstacle?

P. Jacobson: The ballot box, i.e. voting, in the principle mechanism for accommodating conflicting interests, traditionally. But it is increasingly clear that governance priorities determined by voting depend on an underlying willingness among citizens to accept certain communicative requirements of democracy. These include the willingness to compromise, the willingness to respect those with whom one may disagree, and the willingness to negotiate through civil discourse. Civil discourse seems to be increasingly precious, and difficult to find. I believe this is one of the chief challenges of our time, globally. It relates to your question on the culture of democracy, about which more below. One part of a solution to this challenge would be to teach our children about the importance of mutual respect and compromise.

Gulan: To what extent it is the duty of government to set the stage for healthy public deliberation? And what are the significance of this deliberation?

P. Jacobson: Traditionally, it has been thought that speech protections alone are sufficient to make public deliberation possible. For this government needed only to protect free speech. However, speech protections alone are inadequate. Setting the stage for healthy public deliberation requires other things, too. Government must be transparent, allowing citizen access to government information through freedom-of-information laws as well as sunshine laws that require government meetings to be open to the public. Government can also facilitate opportunities for discussion through public broadcasting and through citizen forums. Today, it is abundantly clear that government must allow social media to flourish. These speech, information, and deliberation freedoms are essential to modern democracy.

Gulan: How do you see the relation between the democracies and rule of law, do you believe that rule of law is one of the building blocks of democracy, is the rule of law is inconceivable in the absence of democracy?

P. Jacobson: Certainly, legal systems can and do exist outside the sphere of democratic government. Legal systems can be based on religious values, autocratic fiat, or other sources of authority. On the other hand, it seems widely accepted that democracy requires legal systems capable of enforcing laws that are designed by the citizenry.These legal systems must be based on responsiveness to the common good, to citizen wishes. Traditionally, the West has relied on a doctrine of “natural law,” to provide a perspective on the common good. Increasingly, it is believed that the common good must find its legitimation in citizen deliberation leading to legislation. Even supreme courts must take social and cultural preferences into account.

Gulan: Is it conceivable to build a good governance under authoritarian government? Some refer to the Chines model, what do you make about this?

P. Jacobson: It is fair to say that good governance includes not only democratic responsiveness but also the ability to deliver services to citizens. Even in democratic societies citizens confer legitimacy on government in part through “getting things done.” This refers to the effective provision of basic services such as defense, business infrastructure, roads, education, and so on. The Chinese communist party has recognized this, i.e. that citizen support for government depends on effective governance as well as on belief in ideology. Another interesting example is Singapore, whose citizens sometimes express unhappiness with the government’s suppression of speech and other “rights,” but who are fairly happy with Singapore’s government overall. In the West, “good” governance certainly also includes freedom and transparency. So, I believe good governance includes both efficiency and also responsiveness to citizen interests.

Gulan: Sometimes some populist leaders emerge that offer easy and simple solutions to complicated problems of the society, so what are the root causes of the emergence of such characters and what are their perilous implications on the democracy and good governance?

P. Jacobson: The rise of authoritarianismhas a number of possible root causes. One is lack of effective, good, governance. Citizens will sometimes look to a strong leader who can “get things done,” and “make the trains run on time.” Another source of citizen support for autocratic leaders is citizen unhappiness with the ruling classes, especially if the living conditions of ruling classes seem to be excellent while the mass of citizens are suffering. Autocratic leaders often take advantage of inequalityby exacerbating citizen unhappiness with the ruling classes and using this unhappiness to build their political power. Citizens can look to authoritarian leaders for other reasons, too, when leaders appeal to the citizens’ desire to live in a “great” country. Hitler made such appeals to German citizens during the 1930s. Often, authoritarianism rises from a combination of these and other factors. For example, Donald Trump today is both exacerbating citizen unhappiness with inequality in the United States, as odd as this sounds given his wealth, and also issuing appeals to “make America great again.”

Gulan: How vibrant press is crucial for a well-functioning democracy? And what happens when we have a media that doesn’t not conducting its supposed functions?

P. Jacobson: It seems undeniable that if citizens prefer democratic government, then a vibrant press is required. One important thing to keep in mind is that democracy is not a categorical condition. Democratic governments are not “well-functioning” or “not well-functioning.”Rather it is a matter of degree of well-functioning. The French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau, and others, advocated a doctrine of the “perfectibility of man.” By this they meant not that human beings were, or ever could be, perfect. Rather, they meant that humans were capable of improving their affairs and that this is worth doing. So, the press will never be perfect, nor will democracy be perfect. There will always be room for improvement in both the amounts and kinds of freedoms citizens might wish to pursue. The simple ideal of “freedom,” must be understood to incorporate this complexity. A press should be as vibrant as possible to support as much democracy as possible.

Gulan: Another related question is the accusations of media of being disseminating false and fake news, what do you make about that?

P. Jacobson: The fake news accusations number among the chief challenges of our time. Achieving high quality news reporting has always been difficult, always imperfect.One reason for this is that true objectivity is not possible, and many issues are complex. Dishonest politicians today prey upon citizens by suggesting that news media are not only imperfect, but also “fake.” The only path forward I can see is to admit imperfection, which high quality news media already do, and continue working to produce news that is as fair and accurate as possible. One additional action might be to promote “media literacy” in schools and in the public at large to teach youth and citizens how the media actually operate. This way they can judge the quality of news reporting for themselves, based on knowledge rather than politicians’ self-serving lies.

Gulan: On the other hand some talk about the revolutionary and transformative role of media, how do you analyze this development?

P. Jacobson: Media certainly can be revolutionary and transformative. In the early democracies of England, the United States, and France, freedom of the press was literally of revolutionary importance. In smaller, and newer countries, non-peaceful takeovers of government regularly include takeovers of radio and TV stations. Here the media have revolutionary importance. In the contemporary era, in more complex and highly developed societies, it is more difficult to speak of revolution or transformation. Here, the fights are more legalistic and political, even though equally important for improving government.

Gulan: Although holding elections is necessary condition for democracy, but not sufficient one, so how do you see the relations between elections and democracy? Do believe that sometimes holding elections will be counterproductive especially in the absence of strong and robust institutions?

P. Jacobson: Certainly, strong democratic institutions are important. On one hand, they are necessary for promoting fair elections. On the other hand, they are important for implementing the outcomes of elections, beginning with the peaceful and lawful transfer of power among individuals and political parties. One of the dangers of holding elections in the absence of effective institutions is that when elections fail, then citizens can lose faith in elections and in democratic practices generally.

Gulan: Some say that the existence of culture of democracy is absolutely essential for success of democratic governance, so how this culture can be built? And what is the role of media in this regard?

P. Jacobson: I am not aware of any recipes for building democratic culture. Surely it is a bit complicated, involving both norms and institutions. Laws not only provide mechanisms for enforcement but also serve as symbols of respect for the common good, and therefore laws are important even if not sufficient in themselves. Government agencies can model democratic practices by themselves being transparent and responsive to citizen interests. And leadership must embody democratic principles by respecting democratic practices such as promoting fair elections, practicing peaceful transfer of powers, and speaking on behalf of collective welfare. Media have a role to play in portraying democratic interests and themselves practicing fair and balanced coverage. All this makes it clear that social change and progress must advance at a systemic level, change requires political, and economic, and media, and cultural institutions to all participate.