Law - Reporting on Elections

Journalists must always be impartial, but this is even more pertinent when it comes to elections and your coverage of them. The big divide between broadcast and print here is that print publications can nail their flag to the mast and outright pick a side in which political party they want to win, this is because newspapers are orientated that way - there have always been specific newspapers for Labour supporters and the same goes for Conservative supporters. 

However, in terms of broadcast we are there to simply cover each 'major' party in an impartial and fair way and major parties have been decided so by Ofcom and the overall popularity of a political party. For example, it used to be that the major parties consisted of Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, but due to a surge in popularity and support, Ofcom have said that UKIP should now be considered a major party when it comes to reporting the European elections.

Defamation is an ever present risk to publications at election time - simply because the warring parties might spread defamatory statements or comments about another candidate and since it is just them spouting off accusations there is no privilege involved to protect the media in highlighting the statements made and if they were to do so then the journalist or the publication could get sued. An example of this would be in 2010 concerning Phil Woolas. Woolas is a former Labour Government Minister and he lost the Oldham East seat which he had previously with a majority of 103. He suffered a three year ban after being convicted of publishing false statements about the rival candidate in one of his leaflets and thus suffered the consequences. 

Under the Representation of the People Act 1983 - it is a criminal offence to publish an exit poll or exposing how other people have voted, before the polls are fully closed. This is because people would make of note of who has a chance of wining and if it were someone they didn't want to win then that would lead to a great deal of tactical voting - though this happens it generally would make the whole election corrupt and unfair as it is doctoring a specific outcome with a great deal of foreknowledge.

Further under this act it is deemed a criminal offence to publish anything remotely false about any election candidate, especially if the desired outcome would be to sway the minds of the voters. If you publish something particularly damning then it better be justified and justifiable. Basically, it has to be true so don't bother lying.