On March 26, as part of the Comparative Law of Institutional Communication course, Gabriella Porcaro, lawyer at the Pisa Bar and legal consultant for third-sector organizations in health and social care, gave a lecture on “Political Communication and the Protection of Informed Voting“.
The lecture offered students the opportunity to reflect on the evolution of political communication and its impact on the exercise of the right to vote. It began by examining the immediate post-war period, when political communication was deeply rooted in party ideology. Citizens were actively engaged, even if not always critically, and communication focused largely on election campaigns, with party leaders paying little attention to personal image or communication techniques.
The discussion then turned to how media have transformed political communication. First came television: as it became widely accessible, politics entered people’s homes, and politicians had to learn not only to convey ideas, but also to perform and capture attention. Later, the internet and social media shifted citizens from passive consumers to active participants. Audiences now comment, share, and engage with content, becoming vocal actors in the public sphere – while also facing challenges such as oversimplified messages, emotional appeals, and algorithmic influence.
Porcaro highlighted how these developments have reshaped the relationship between politics and communication. The public sphere has become increasingly professionalized, with specialists managing politicians’ images and messaging. Traditional top-down communication has given way to strategies that appeal directly to citizens, emphasizing their emotions, grievances, and desires – a shift often linked to populist approaches. At the same time, political communication has taken on features of consumer marketing: messages are distributed widely and continuously, simplified, fast-paced, and emotionally charged to capture attention. Leaders are increasingly personalized, with campaigns focusing on the individual rather than the party or ideology. This marketing-driven approach raises important questions about the quality of democratic debate and the freedom of voting. Political messages are often shortened, decontextualized, or emotionally manipulated to influence public opinion, blurring the line between information and persuasion and challenging citizens’ ability to make fully informed choices.
The lecture concluded by exploring possible ways forward. A return to politics grounded in clear ideas and open debate was emphasized as essential to restoring trust in institutions. Equally important is fostering digital literacy and critical thinking, giving citizens the tools to navigate information thoughtfully. In this way, voting becomes more than a procedural act – it becomes a meaningful exercise of democratic freedom.
