Improving Election Debates: Evidence from Liberia

Improving Election Debates: Evidence from Liberia

Author: UCL Political Science January 23, 2025 Duration: 36:20
This week we’re looking at how to improve the discourse of election campaigns. In settings where votes are often traded for services, how can competition be nudged to focus more on policies designed to serve the public at large?

Ever wonder what happens when sharp academic minds turn their focus to the headlines? UCL Uncovering Politics pulls back the curtain on the forces shaping our world, straight from the heart of one of the world's leading universities. This isn't a lecture series, but a series of conversations where complex ideas about power, culture, and society are made accessible and urgent. You'll hear researchers from UCL's Department of Political Science and School of Public Policy dissect everything from voting behaviour and international conflict to the philosophy underlying our social structures, connecting rigorous scholarship directly to current events. Each episode feels like sitting in on a fascinating discussion between experts who are as curious about the "why" behind political phenomena as they are knowledgeable. The podcast serves as a direct line to cutting-edge analysis, offering depth and context that goes far beyond the daily news cycle. By spotlighting the fantastic work done within the department, it provides listeners with a richer, more nuanced understanding of the mechanics behind culture, government, and the news we consume. Tune in for a thoughtful and genuinely enlightening exploration of contemporary politics, grounded in research but always engaged with the real world.
Author: Language: English Episodes: 100

UCL Uncovering Politics
Podcast Episodes
Should Politicians Always Be Truthful? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 39:07
This week we ask if politicians should always be truthful? It often feels like many politicians themselves think not. But what does a healthy democracy demand?
Do Religious Schools Hinder Children's Autonomy? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 36:15
This week we look at religious schools. Is it ok to limit students' exposure to diverse viewpoints and encourage a form of conformity that undermines their ability to form their own independent beliefs? What rights do pa…
How Can Populists Be Defeated? [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 38:13
This week we ask what many will say as among the most pressing political questions of our day: How can populists defeated? Can it be assumed that their incompetence in power will lead to their decline? Or is something mo…
Decision Making In The European Union [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 32:10
This week we’re looking at decision making within the European Union. How are decisions about how to make decisions made? And what can we learn from these processes about patterns of power in this vital institution?
Rewilding the University - Prof Cathy Elliott's inaugural lecture [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 37:34
This week we ask: could the University be a wild place? A resilient ecosystem of biodiversity, interdependent relationships, entanglements and emergence? What would it look like if we let go of command, control and manag…
Constitutional Reform in the UK [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 42:13
This week we ask: What are the prospects for constitutional reform in the UK? What options are on the government’s agenda? What might actually happen? And will any such changes be adequate for resolving underlying proble…
Echo Chambers, Confucian Harmony and Civility [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 29:23
This week we are tackling echo chambers. What should we do when we encounter someone from another echo chamber? Should we be civil and respectful when faced with people with extreme political views?
Is Morality the Cause of Ideological Disagreement [not-audio_url] [/not-audio_url]

Duration: 38:10
This week we ask what drives ideological disagreement in politics? How far do people on left and right disagree with each other because they have fundamentally different moral intuitions or for other reasons?