Ho-Hum or not, election matters.

I think this editorial gets it wrong. Most people are not bored by the election campaign but have other matters that they find more important. Many may in fact be indifferent, so indifferent, that they will not even bother to vote.
Of course not all people find the campaign boring as the author's own son illustrates. There are a few political junkies. As for many on the campaign trail they probably find the campaing exhausting rather than boring.
I expect it is only a few journalists who are required to cover the campaign out of a sense of duty who are bored! This article is from the London Free Press.

Ho-hum or not, election matters

Sat, September 22, 2007

By PAUL BERTON, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF



Watching the Ontario election leaders televised debate this week was not my idea of fun, but I endured it for two reasons: As a journalist, I felt I should; and my son is a political junkie who insisted we tape it during dinner.

But I'm guessing I was in a minority. I surveyed our newsroom and many of my fellow journalists gave it a miss.

If journalists, most of whom are political junkies, believe they can miss the debate, it's fair to say much of the general population feel the same.

My same survey of the newsroom revealed most of my colleagues read daily our election coverage, or most of it, or at least they say they do. (What else could they say?)

But I think journalists are more interested in politics than average readers. As I've said before, we like any story with clear-cut winners and losers, especially if the future of the city, province or country rests on the outcome.

The bigger question is whether the general population is following the election with anything more than passing interest, or consuming campaign news with any enthusiasm other than simple osmosis.

At The London Free Press, we have committed lots of resources to it. Several reporters and editors are devoted to it daily, and at least one full page, and sometimes more, each day are eaten up by election articles.

And yet, the comment I hear often is that the campaign "is sooooo boring."

The televised debate is often the highlight or turning point of a campaign, but even it didn't seem to light anyone's fire.

Joe Ruscitti, managing editor of The London Free Press, declared Thursday the only way he would endorse its presence on the front page Friday was if someone threw a pie in the face of one of the leaders.

And having watched it myself, it's hard to argue the leaders said anything at all we hadn't heard already, and if they did, we don't believe it or can't understand it.

Many voters do not even know they will get another ballot on voting day with a question that could fundamentally change the way MPPs are elected in Ontario. But like most referendums, people don't quite understand what the issue is all about, despite many stories in this newspaper and others.

That's why the vote on MMP (mixed-member proportional) representation is doomed to failure. It requires an unattainable majority to make it happen and it's complicated, so most people simply tune out.

Meanwhile, a relatively tiny part of the Progressive Conservative platform -- on faith-based funding for schools -- has stolen centre stage from bigger issues facing the province, such as health care, municipal infrastructure, and education in general.

Journalists sift through it, and get accused of simplifying or sensationalizing issues. If it's true, they do it to engage readers. They probably annoy the candidates, but they're actually doing them a favour.

If people really don't care, why do we persist in the face of indifference?

Because we still believe it's vital that as many eligible voters as possible get involved in the process. It's democracy, after all. It may not be as intriguing as Britney's latest escapade, but it's far more important.