Editorial: Follow-up question a vital tool in pursuit of information gathering
By MEDICINE HAT NEWS EDITORIAL BOARD on April 22, 2023.
The Alberta Government has announced a new restriction on how many questions a reporter or media outlet can ask at a news conference. This restriction, which removes the journalist’s ability to ask a follow-up question, does not promote open and honest dialogue, and is problematic for journalists, the public and politicians alike. A healthy, functioning democracy can only be maintained in a society where elected officials can be held accountable by their constituents, and when those constituents have reliable access to thorough, informed reporting through reputable media outlets. The follow-up question is a vital tool in the pursuit of information gathering – allowing for accountability and clarity of context – and prohibiting its use sets a dangerous precedent for anyone who steps in front of a podium during an election cycle, regardless of party or platform. By narrowing the scope of questioning, the field of information available to the public becomes limited. This, in turn, forces many media outlets to rely on the same quotations and soundbites, rather than being granted the ability to explore issues in greater depth and provide the public with a broad spectrum of information on issues of importance. Follow-up questions thus allow for deeper context that is often necessary in gaining a full understanding of complex issues. This context, simply by being spoken into the record, inhibits the ability for speculation and misinformation to spread while broadening fact-based understanding of issues that matter to voters. Prohibiting follow-up questions prevents the journalist’s ability to press the issue and hold decision-makers to account – often resulting in a talking point in place of a direct response – allowing those who hold or seek public office to side-step discussion on important matters under the guise of efficiency. Voters deserve everything the follow-up question provides. Revoking this basic civil privilege can only serve to inhibit the power each voter holds by casting shadows over the corners that journalism serves to illuminate. 9-8
