YEREVAN PRESS CLUB WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
SEPTEMBER 14-20, 2007
HIGHLIGHTS:
FIRST `PRESS CLUB’ PROGRAM IN NEW SEASON
`ISKAKAN IRAVUNK’ EDITOR ASSAULTED AGAIN
MEDIA ETHICS OBSERVATORY MAKES ITS FIRST JUDGMENTS
FIRST `PRESS CLUB’ PROGRAM IN NEW SEASON
Since September 19 on the evening air of `Yerkir-Media’ TV `Press Club’
program cycle resumed. Every Wednesday the guests of `Press Club’ – party
representatives and politicians, jointly with experts from NGOs and media –
will be discussing the urgent issues of public concern. The program is
hosted by the President of Yerevan Press Club Boris Navasardian.
On September 19 the guests of the first `Press Club’ in the new season were
the head of Ramkavar-Azatakan Party of Armenia Harutiun Arakelian, faced by
experts – the representative of the International Center of Human
Development Ashot Khurshudian and the Observer of Public Radio of Armenia
Lusineh Vasilian. The discussion subject was the start of the new
Parliament’s work and the domestic political situation before the
presidential elections.
The next program of `Press Club’ cycle will be aired by `Yerkir Media’ on
September 26 at 21.40.
The `Press Club’ cycle is produced under a project of Media Diversity
Institute, with the support of the United Nations Development Program, Open
Society Institute Assistance Foundation-Armenia and the British Council
Armenia.
`ISKAKAN IRAVUNK’ EDITOR ASSAULTED AGAIN
On September 15 at about 19.00 at the editorial office of `Iskakan Iravunk’
newspaper its Chief Editor Hovhannes Galajian was assaulted. Two strangers
gave a severe beating to the journalist, striking him with iron whips.
Hovhannes Galajian was hospitalized with brain concussion and bruises,
stitches were put on his head. He is currently in hospital. This is already
the second case of violence against Hovhannes Galajian: on September 6 last
years he was beaten by the entrance to his house. Those guilty of the
assault have not been found to this day (see details in the report on
freedom of speech in Armenia in 2006 at YPC web-site ).
`Yerevan Press Club and the Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression have
repeatedly noted and reinstate that such attacks continue due to inadequate
work of law enforcements bodies and their inability (or unwillingness?) to
find the authors and implementers of violence against media and journalists
and hold them accountable. We condemn this new case of terror and announce
that the lack of disclosure of such crimes, particularly, during the
pre-election period, can serve even more to unleash those seeking to silence
the freedom of expression by whips’, the statement of the two journalistic
associations, released on September 17, says in particular.
Statements condemning the incident with the Editor of `Iskakan Iravunk’ were
made also by other journalistic associations, representatives of a number of
parties.
Criminal proceedings have been instituted by the Investigative Department of
the RA Police on the attack on Hovhannes Galajian, by Article 113 of the RA
Criminal Code (`Intentional injuries of medium graveness’).
MEDIA ETHICS OBSERVATORY MAKES ITS FIRST JUDGMENTS
On September 12 at Yerevan Press Club an ordinary session of the Media
Ethics Observatory was held. As it has been reported, the Media Ethics
Observatory was elected on March 10 2007 at a meeting of heads of media and
journalistic associations, who supported the YPC initiative to jointly
develop the main norms of professional ethics and further follow them in
their day-to-day activities. The Media Ethics Observatory lists 7 members:
Hagop Avedikian (Chief Editor of `Azg’ daily), Levon Barseghian (Chairman of
the Board of `Asparez’ Journalist’s Club of Gyumri), Astghik Gevorgian
(Chairwoman of the Union of Journalists of Armenia), Emmanuil Mkrtchian
(General Director of `Arminfo’ news agency), Mesrop Movsesian (President of
`Meltex’ LLC), Boris Navasardian (Yerevan Press Club President), Lilit
Simonian (lawyer, Head of the Center of Right and Information). The mission
of the MEO consists in considering the complaints-appeals regarding the
violation of the Code of Conduct and presenting its opinion on them. The
Code of Conduct and its appendix, the Declaration on Election and Referendum
Coverage Principles, was signed by 20 media of Armenia (see the texts of the
documents in the YPC Weekly Newsletter, March 9-15, 2007).
At the session of September 12 the MEO adopted its first judgments. One of
them referred to the media activities during elections to the RA National
Àssembly, held on May 12, 2007 (published below).
JUDGMENT OF THE MEDIA ETHICS OBSERVATORY
REGARDING THE ARMENIAN MEDIA COVERAGE OF PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS OF 2007
The Media Ethics Observatory, elected on March 10 at the meeting of the
heads of media and journalistic associations, who joined the YPC
self-regulation initiative, having discussed the activities of Armenian
media during parliamentary elections of 2007, arrived at the following
conclusions:
1. During the parliamentary elections of 2007 the media work displayed both
positive and negative trends. It is noted as positive that during the
coverage of this promotion campaign the media made fewer insulting remarks
to the address of candidates and parties and were less engaged in political
labeling. The negative trend was the lack of regulated approach to provision
of airtime/newspaper space to election participants, i.e., in most media one
candidate or party received several times more coverage than others, with no
due reasoning behind that. This is primarily true to the broadcast media
that did not develop and were not guided by transparent democratic
principles of inviting representatives of different parties to take part in
the programs.
2. On March 10, 2007 18 media (who were later joined by two other media)
signed a common Code of Conduct and appendix to it, the Declaration on
Election and Referendum Coverage Principles. The media, who signed the Code
of Conduct, strove to follow the requirements of the Declaration, as well as
the election reporting legislation.
3. At the same time none of the Armenian media developed its own open policy
to cover the elections. This refers primarily to the TV companies that
failed to define the norms of reporting the pre-election events, official
meetings during the election runup, the activities of officials, running for
seats at the NA, the access to the air of the media owners, heads and
journalists running in elections. At the same time there are grounds to
suppose that many broadcast media were guided by hidden agenda that
conditioned in some cases the biased coverage and unequal opportunities for
candidates and parties. In essence, only the Public TV and Radio Company of
Armenia had a schedule of provision of free and paid airtime, approved by
the RA Central Election Commission in accordance with the requirements of
the RA Election Code.
4. None of the TV companies made restrictions on the production and
broadcasting of entertaining TV shows with the participation of politicians.
Thus, some politicians, taking part in entertaining shows, received an
additional opportunities to gain the likes of the voters during the
campaign, and hence – enjoyed an advantage over their rivals.
5. For the reasons, described in the two preceding clauses, the principle of
equal opportunities for all candidates and parties was breached, situations
arose that give serious reasons to speak about the use of administrative
resource.
6. In late June 2007 on the initiative of the MEO a poll was made among all
23 parties/bloc running in elections to find out their opinions and
assessments regarding the election campaign coverage in Armenian media.
According to the findings of the survey, only one party assessed the work of
the media as `excellent’, 5 – as `good’, 11 – as `mediocre’, 6 – as
`unsatisfactory’. The respondents were also offered to name three media that
were most successful in providing objective information about the election
participants to their audience. Here the list was headed by `Aravot’ daily
(12 votes) and the Armenian Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (10
votes). The third place was shared by the First Channel of the Public
Television of Armenia, the Public Radio of Armenia and `Yerkir Media’ TV
company (6 votes). The respondents were also asked to name three media that
were most biased in covering the campaign. Most negative assessments were
received by `ALM’ TV company (9 parties), followed by `Haikakan Zhamanak’
daily (6). The third ranking was taken by `Golos Armenii’ newspaper and the
PTA First Channel (5 votes each). Out of the media, involved in the
self-regulation initiative, three negative assessments were received by the
Second Armenian TV channels and `Aravot’ daily each. In the course of the
survey representatives of 5 parties quoted one example each of journalistic
ethics violation by media in pieces dealing with elections. Two of them
referred to the media involved in the self-regulation initiative, the
Lragir.am web-site and `Azg’ daily. In both cases the MEO, having studied
the appeals, did not reveal violations of the Code of Conduct and the
Declaration.
7. Proceeding from the fact that in just a few months presidential
elections await Armenia, the MEO – as a step ahead towards to the formation
of an effective self-regulation system – calls on all media to develop their
own transparent rules and in the process of elections coverage to be guided
by the principles of objectiveness and impartiality.
THE SECOND JUDGMENT was adopted by the MEO after the consideration of the
appeal of `Cooperation for Democracy’ Center versus `Azg’ daily. The appeal
of the NGO referred to a number of publications of the daily that, in the
opinion of the applicant, contributed to the incitement of religious
intolerance and contained inaccurate information. This referred to the
following pieces, published in `Azg’ in 2007: `Thou Shalt Not Lie,
Particularly When Your Legs Are Shorter Than Your Tongue’ (February 9),
`Regardless of Dink’s Religion, Manipulating the Murder Is Vicious’
(February 22), `Heretic the `Evangelist” (May 15) and `Sect Members and
Globalists Against the National Church’ (February 3).
`Any private medium can have a direction of its own and express a viewpoint
on any public issue. In this regard the focus of `Azg’ daily on religious
matters and its consistent coverage are acceptable; however, when presenting
facts and giving opinions (particularly in case of such subject matter), the
daily should be more sensitive’, the judgment of the Media Ethics
Observatory said in particular. Further the MEO noted a number of
shortcomings of the publications above and stressed that the statements in
the pieces, `if considered in isolation, could have been regarded as
acceptable as a journalistic observation or a conclusion, but together they
leave an impression of bias’. While emphasizing the right of `Azg’ to
consider religious subjects and to express its own point of view the MEO
thought it necessary to remind some of the provisions of the Code of Conduct
to the daily.
On September 19 `Azg’ published the full text of the judgment.
When reprinting or using the information above, reference to the Yerevan
Press Club is required.
You are welcome to send any comment and feedback about the Newsletter to:
pressclub@ypc.am
Subscription for the Newsletter is free. To subscribe or unsubscribe from
this mailing list, please send a message to: info@ypc.am
Editor of YPC Newsletter – Elina POGHOSBEKIAN
_____________________________________ _______
Yerevan Press Club
9B, Ghazar Parpetsi str.
0002, Yerevan, Armenia
Tel.: (+ 374 10) 53 00 67; 53 35 41; 53 76 62
Fax: (+374 10) 53 56 61
E-mail: pressclub@ypc.am
Web Site: