How Social Media Ate Parliamentary Committees for Lunch
Always late to the party, I finally noticed a change in the way many parliamentary committees go about their work. Partisanship was always a part of the sessions where external witnesses were invited to testify. But there’s definitely some new ingredient cooking in this pot.
I’ve written about the work committees do before. And more than once in fact. But this latest insight is worth adding to that collection.
What’s changed? Here’s one example. In the middle of a long question addressed to a witness, a member suddenly interrupted himself. He (politely) demanded that, before he would continue, the committee chair should ensure the recording camera focused on him and on the witness who was responding (rather than focusing elsewhere).
There was nothing wrong with the request itself of course. The whole purpose of the video feeds is to help remote viewers visually connect to the proceedings. What I found strange was the member’s insistence. Was the issue important enough to cut into the limited session time available?
I also noticed some measure of grandstanding. It's almost like the witnesses were primarily there as a way for members to theatrically score points for public consumption. I know: we’re talking about politicians for whom the word “grandstanding” was invented. The thing is that I’d normally only expect such behavior where there’s someone sitting and watching from the grandstands.
But how many people do you think actually tune in to Parl VU to grab an afternoon’s entertainment with HESA Meeting number 34 or SRSR Meeting number 37? I’m a pathological policy wonk and, as a rule, even I’ll only do it when I’m personally involved. Life is short.
Then it hit me. It’s now really all about social media engagement. The parliamentary video record is a powerful (and inexpensive) tool for generating 1-5 minute video clips you can publish to your X feed.
A little research confirmed that Bloc and Conservative members tend to have active X accounts where clips from committee meetings regularly appear. Although for various reasons, Liberals seem far less likely to use the platform this way. Getting the camera angle or witness response just right can make the difference between a viral tweet and no-news-Tuesday.
Now there’s nothing anti-democratic about all this. Love it or hate it, X is where much of the effective political conversation is happening right now. As I wrote just a few months ago, the Liberal Party has invested significantly in their X strategy.1
The problem is that committees are among the few places where constructive and even bipartisan work can happen. Honest and open debate is supposed to be an important element of that work. But focusing on scoring social media points should happen on social media.
Related:
The Liberal Government's New Comms Strategy
I’ve written in the past about how tough it can be for governments to communicate to their citizens. There are so many channels through which communication happens and so many people pushing so many messages, that most voices are doomed to be ignored.
What Do MPs Actually Do in Committee?
While the comical obstruction and general silliness of Question Period might get most of the public’s attention, much of the real business of the House happens in parliamentary committees. And the formal output of that work can be found in the many reports presented to the House.
Are Parliamentary Committees Underachieving?
We can be forgiven for assuming that the Canadian government exists to spit out legislation that’s poorly planned, overtly political, and often legally dubious.
Update: they’re still at it and they’re still getting hilariously ratioed in the comments.
Maybe the grandstanding, two bit showmanship and fake indignation all contribute to the distrust and general contempt many voters have for politicians in general. Nice of them to capture it for display on X so those voters who like / need a constant reminder can refer to it.