A Polarization-Containing Ethics of Campaign Advertising

Author:

Mráz Attila12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Philosophy , ELTE Eötvös Loránd University , Budapest , Hungary

2. Department of Philosophy , Stockholm Centre for the Ethics of War and Peace, Stockholm University, Stockholm , Stockholm , Sweden

Abstract

Abstract This paper establishes moral duties for intermediaries of political advertising in election campaigns. First, I argue for a collective duty to maintain the democratic quality of elections which entails a duty to contain some forms of political polarization. Second, I show that the focus of campaign ethics on candidates, parties and voters—ignoring the mediators of campaigns—yields mistaken conclusions about how the burdens of the latter collective duty should be distributed. Third, I show why it is fair to require intermediaries to contribute to fulfilling this duty: they have an ultimate filtering position in the campaign communication process and typically benefit from political advertising and polarization. Finally, I argue that a transparency-based ethics of campaign advertising cannot properly accommodate a concern with objectionable polarization. By contrast, I outline the polarization-containing implications of my account, including a prohibition on online targeted advertising, and intermediaries’ duties to block hateful political advertising.

Funder

National Research, Development and Innovation Fund, Hungary

Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Philosophy,Sociology and Political Science

Reference64 articles.

1. Aikin, S. F., and R. B. Talisse. 2020. Political Argument in a Polarized Age: Reason and Democratic Life. Medford: Polity Press.

2. Ansolabehere, S., and S. Iyengar. 1997. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.

3. Bagg, S., and I. Tranvik. 2019. “An Adversarial Ethics for Campaigns and Elections.” Perspectives on Politics 17 (4): 973–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592719002639.

4. Beerbohm, E. 2016. “The Ethics of Electioneering.” The Journal of Political Philosophy 24 (4): 381–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopp.12082.

5. Brennan, J. 2012. The Ethics of Voting. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3