By Corina Lyngdoh
In democratic politics, pressure groups also known as interest groups are organizations which attempt to influence the government. They represent the interests of certain sections of the society viz. students, farmers, labourers, business people, government employees, women etc. They are organised unions or associations of people having common interests. Their aim is to seek better conditions for their members or the groups they represent through organised efforts. They try to influence the legislature, executive and other decision makers to get decisions made in their favour. Group activities are usually more effective than individual activities. Hence pressure groups play a vital role in a democracy in terms of influencing the government for expressing the common concern of a section of a society and promoting their interest.
Pressure groups play a crucial role in interest formation and interest aggregation. They play a mediatory role between the people and the government. According to Almond and Powell converting demands into policy alternatives is a significant method of interest aggregation by identifying possible policy alternatives and presenting them before the government. They also explain the pros and cons of each policy alternative which, in turn, provides inputs and helps policy makers to select the best alternative for policy making and law making. In view of this pressure groups are expected to make the political system respond to the aspirations of the people and provide the details of a particular policy issue of public importance to the ruling political elites.
Harold Lasswell, in his early work on Politics, uses the sub-title: ‘who gets what, when and how?’ In view of this understanding, the function of pressure groups in all democratic countries constitute an important dimension of the study of politics because the primary objective of any pressure group is to influence the government. The study of politics is the study of influences and the influential. A major trend in a democratic political process is the increasing role of pressure groups. Political scientist, Herman Finer viewed that it is perhaps now an axiom of political science that where political parties are weak in principles and organisation, the pressure will flourish; where pressure groups are strong, political parties will be feeble; and where political parties are strong, pressure will be curbed. In a parliamentary system of governance, pressure groups exert pressure mainly on the executive with the assumption that the legislature is under the control of the executive.
Pressure groups use various techniques to achieve their goals and strive to influence government policies through legal and legitimate methods such as correspondence, petitions, lobbying, publicity, public debates and maintaining contact with legislators.
However, one technique of pressure groups which, very is often wrongly misused is propagandising. It involves influencing public opinion to indirectly influence the government by stirring up public sentiment and thus promoting a particular cause by using propaganda. In a society where people who parrot the agenda of the pressure groups, such people are said to be propagandised. To propagandise is to spread biased information that supports a particular political viewpoint. Propaganda is the dissemination of information – facts, arguments, rumours, half- truths or even lies to control public opinion. It is often conveyed through mass media. They deliberately select facts and arguments and present distorted versions of issues in ways they think will have maximum effect. To maximise their point, they omit or distort pertinent facts or simply lie to divert the attention of the people they are trying to sway in their favour. They spread biased or misleading information to promote their point of view. ‘Propaganda isn’t about just sharing information, it’s more about swaying public opinion.’ Propaganda works by stealthily sliding into people’s thoughts and emotions and targets feelings rather than logical thinking and understanding.
Propaganda works on, “Making the lie big, making it simple, keep saying it and eventually people will believe it.” Social media platforms have become the new battleground for propagandists. One major concern with people is that propaganda is completely tailored to their beliefs and eliminates opposing viewpoints and dissenting voices. We cannot deny the fact that we live in an echo chamber, an environment in which we encounter only beliefs or opinions that coincide with our own beliefs and alternative ideas are not considered. They amplify or reinforce their pre-existing beliefs by communication and repetition inside a closed system completely insulated from any kind of rebuttal.
According to recent studies, the echo chamber effect on social media occurs online when a harmonious group of people find their opinions constantly echoed back to them reinforcing their belief systems due to the declining exposure to the opinions of others. Individuals who participate in echo chambers feel confident that their opinions will be readily accepted by others. YouTube users end up in partisan echo chambers especially after getting ‘likes’ and supportive comments posted by other users which are mostly improper, indecent and inappropriate. People not exposed to social media question the benevolence of it. Rather than exclusively fostering an atmosphere of camaraderie and universal understanding propagandists perpetuate power hierarchies. Since they have the agency to control a community’s narrative through a social media post, they have the agency to control the worth or deservedness of the community as well. The recent altercation between the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC) with one pressure group is a reverberation of the propagandising methods used by the group to convince public officials to adopt and implement policies to benefit their interests. The use of social media like YouTube to attract attention towards their cause; to reach out and interact with like-minded people unrelated to the cause is unpalatable. This group succeeded in disseminating information about MPSC being nepotist in the selection of candidates, alleging outrageous malpractices adopted in the conduct of screening tests and inconsistencies in the conduct of personal interviews etc. Such groups should first strive to get accurate information and conduct in-depth research before jumping to conclusions. Secondly, they should know the principles adopted; the standard procedures followed during the entire process of screening tests and the modus operandi in which the viva voce is carried out before making any assumptions. Thirdly, they should not rely on misinformation provided by unreliable sources.
The imbroglio caused by the leaders of the Union was unbecoming, irksome and unpleasant. It was totally unbecoming of the Union to make non-evidentiary accusations and use offensive language through sloganeering. All too often they discredited themselves by engaging in slander and character assassination, that is malicious and unjustified and with intent to harm the reputation of the Commission. Their intention to spoil the reputation of the Commission through criticism on social media shows that they are emotionally oriented with poorly defined goals.
To conclude it is important to note that the blame game does no one good. When we are made to believe that everything is someone else’s fault we will obfuscate the larger good. What have our aspiring youth gained after the demands of the Union have been accepted by the Commission? What needs to be stressed instead is that our youth need inspiration to work harder and try to outdo themselves not to outdo others. By focusing on their needs and accomplishments they will naturally build a stronger sense of self-worth. ‘Success is no accident. It is hard work, perseverance, learning, studying, sacrifice and most of all love of what you are doing or learning to do,’…. Pele.