Book club: public choice and journalists
We often ask why government policies seem so irrational. Public Choice theory offers a simple but profound answer: politicians, bureaucrats, and voters are people too.
Last night, Book Club discussed the immensely insightful field of public choice theory, which applies insights and methods from economics to explain political and official decision making, together with my article on journalists:
Public Choice – A Primer, Eamonn Butler
Public Choice: Politics Without Romance, James Buchanan
Journalists - ten rules for working with the press, Steve Baker
Here are my introductory speaking notes.
Public Choice – A Primer by Dr. Eamonn Butler
Introduction
Opening Thought:
“We ask why government policies often seem irrational. Public Choice theory offers a simple but profound answer: politicians, bureaucrats, and voters act in their own self-interest—just like everyone else.”
Objective:
Understand how Public Choice theory explains government failure and the persistence of poor policy decisions.
Key Concepts
1. Rational Ignorance of Voters
Voters recognise their single vote rarely influences outcomes, so they remain uninformed.
I prefer the term “rational disinterest” to avoid judgement.
Example: Low awareness of complex fiscal policies or regulatory changes.
2. Rent-Seeking
Special interest groups lobby for privileges, extracting wealth without creating value.
Example: Industry subsidies, tariffs, and regulatory capture.
3. Bureaucratic Self-Interest
Bureaucracies grow their budgets and influence regardless of public need.
Example: Expansion of quangos and public sector agencies.
4. Government Failure vs Market Failure
Government failures are often overlooked, hidden behind good intentions.
Memorable Line: “Market failures are visible and corrected; government failures are concealed and perpetual.”
Solutions Suggested
Strong constitutional limits on government spending and regulatory powers.
Fiscal responsibility: balanced budgets, spending caps, and reduced policy complexity.
Discussion Questions
How does Public Choice challenge our trust in government institutions?
How can we see rent-seeking at work in modern politics?
Is there a practical path toward meaningful constitutional constraints?
Closing Thought
“The state isn’t a philosopher-king. It’s a collection of self-interested individuals. The real question is—how do we design better rules to contain them?”
Public Choice: Politics Without Romance by James M. Buchanan
Introduction
Opening Thought:
“We romanticise politics as a world of noble ideals. Buchanan strips away this illusion and asks us to confront a harder reality—politics is about self-interest, not virtue.”
Objective:
Explore how constitutional design can mitigate the negative effects of self-interested political behaviour.
Key Concepts
1. Politics Without Romance
Political actors pursue personal goals, not abstract notions of the public good.
2. The Instability of Majority Rule
Simple majorities can produce inconsistent, unfair, or inefficient outcomes (Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem).
Example: Constant policy reversals based on electoral swings.
3. Wicksell’s Unanimity Principle
Advocates for unanimous or supermajority rules to protect minority rights and avoid exploitative policies.
4. Constitutional Constraints
Buchanan promotes constitutional economics—rules to limit government overreach and reduce the space for self-serving political bargains.
Example: Balanced budget requirements, spending limitations.
Discussion Questions
Can we design political institutions that align personal incentives with the public interest?
Would supermajority rules create better policy outcomes or only more gridlock?
Is constitutional reform realistic in modern democracies?
Closing Thought
“By removing the romance from politics, we face a critical choice—accept the inefficiencies of self-interest unchecked or work to design institutions that align personal motives with the common good.”
Journalists by Rt Hon Steve Baker FRSA
1. Introduction
Opening Thought:
“Journalists. They will get you if they can. It is in their nature.”
Objective of the Session:
Explore the delicate, often dangerous dance between public figures and the media, as revealed with insight and humour by a veteran of both Westminster and the press firing line.
2. Key Lessons from the Text
A. Rules for Surviving Journalists
Rule 1: Don’t Brief Journalists
Even innocent conversations can go disastrously wrong.
Example: Fishing expeditions where journalists pose as if they have half the story, hoping you’ll provide the rest.
Rule 2: They’re Here to Help Someone—It’s Not You
Their job is to sell stories, not protect reputations.
Rule 3: Journalists Are Only Human
They have the same struggles and ambitions.
Insight: Their incentive is to find “scoops” to advance their careers.
Rule 4: Know Why You Are Talking to Them
Are you playing offence (advancing a cause) or defence (protecting a reputation)?
Think strategically: Like placing rocks before opening a sluice gate to direct the flow of a narrative.
Rule 5: Understand Their Motivations
Five basic news story types:
Scandal
Danger to the community
Novelty
Human interest
Sport
Memorable Example: Steve’s “greatest hit” was being wrestled to the ground by a cage fighter.
Rule 6: Know What You Want to Achieve
Is your story really news?
Avoid generic, empty announcements. Be clear, timely, and relevant.
Rule 7: Know the Outlet
Don’t pitch pro-market stories to The Mirror, and don’t expect The Independent to give Brexit a fair hearing.
Rule 8: Know the Individual Journalist
Understand their character, biases, and past reporting.
Golden Rule: Don’t mistake a journalist for a fool.
Rule 9: Apply the Guidelines in the Briefing
On/Off the record? Be clear.
Stick to accuracy, brevity, and clarity.
Beware of traps and manipulative fishing.
Rule 10: Answer the Questions
If you’re newsworthy enough to be doorstepped, give them something.
But—if you’ve sinned, keep quiet.
B. What If It Goes Wrong?
Even careful briefings can backfire.
Golden Recovery Strategy:
Apologise quickly.
Correct the record.
Move on—do not give oxygen to a dying scandal.
3. Conclusion
Final Reflection:
“Briefing journalists is both an opportunity and a responsibility. Handle it badly and they’ll ruin you. Handle it well and you might—just might—steer the narrative in your favour. But never forget… they will get you if they can. It is in their nature.”
Further Reading Recommendation:
Romps, Tots and Boffins by Rob Hutton
Would They Lie To You? by Rob Hutton