SPECULATIONS PURSUING POLITICAL GOALS
Lilit Poghosyan
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
Oct 23 2007
Armenia
When Armenian TV stations rose against becoming the press adjuncts to
the business programs of the press clubs that multiply as mushrooms,
the speculations that "they are trying to "shut the mouth" of the
opposition" by subjecting them to informational blockade" over again
became "actual".
At our request Presidential Press Secretary Victor Soghomonyan touches
upon the hullabaloo regarding the cruel attempts to suppress the press.
"It is evident that this is a regular attempt to speculate the name
of the Presidential staff in the context of "suppressing the freedom"
of Mass Media, particularly the private TV companies. I have already
spoken about it and I have already expressed doubt regarding these
rumors and I have nothing to add.
Anyway I have to state the following; first I must say that I have
been following the publications in all the newspapers including your
newspaper, where those responsible for TV companies introduce their
viewpoints regarding this issue. And I don’t think the arguments with
which they ground their personal attitudes are baseless. Moreover the
motives that made the TV companies take this step are quite acceptable
to me.
Second, I consider a pure political speculation the announcements
made by certain political powers, social organizations and Mass
Media, saying that it is because of an interference of an "invisible
hand" that the TV companies are boycotting the activity of the press
clubs. Even if we take as read that the authorities can really instruct
the TV companies, it is evident that the press clubs actually don’t
bring ideological or moral damage to the authorities.
Therefore here we deal with a regular speculation.
In this context I would like to remind you of the data published
recently by one of the international organizations that our opposition
activists favor so much. The matter is addresses to the latest report
published by the international organization "Reporters without Borders"
according to which, in terms of the freedom of speech Armenia gained
the 77th place in 169 countries and the second in the territory of
CIS. This is by the way our best record during those years. After
all this, in my view to speak about the existence or non-existence
of the freedom of speech in Armenia is an evidently bygone stage
but in today’s political situation these announcements pursue pure
political goals.
It is another question that in any, even the most developed country
you can speak about the degree of the freedom of speech, depending
on different circumstances and phenomena. But this is another topic
of conversation.
To sum up whatever has been said I can record that I evaluate all
this hullabaloo as a speculation pursuing political goals and I
categorically disagree with all those accusations addressed to the
authorities. And, why not, as a colleague, I also consider unacceptable
the accusations addressed to the TV companies.
"Can the "boycott" of the TV companies give rise to adequate response
among the international circles that reiterate those TV companies?"
"First of all the word "boycott" is simply not proper here. Last week
for example many TV companies broadcasted different press conferences
in different press-clubs. Maybe their number has reduced, but we
can’t say that they are not elucidated.
Second: last week I was following the political programs of the
private TV companies and what was really interesting, leader of "Nor
Jamanakner" party Aram Karapetyan was saying on the live airtime of
"Kentron" TV that I don’t allow the TV companies to provide live
airtime for him. By the way the same "Kentron" TV has hosted secretary
of "Heritage" fraction Stepan Safaryan, if I’m not mistaken, leader of
"Orinats Yerkir" party Arthur Baghdasaryan, leader of "National Unity"
Artashes Geghamyan etc.
In case of necessity I don’t think it is difficulty to inquire from
the TV companies who have been the guests of their political programs.
What I mean is that it is simply ridiculous to speak about the
opposition being deprived of tribune. At least I don’t remember a
period when not one but more than one opposition activists haven’t had
the chance to appear on not one but several TVs, where they usually
introduce their attitudes and ruthlessly criticize the authorities. I
repeat, if one moment we presume that the authorities really control
these processes, in my view it would have been better for them to
control those airtimes rather than the activities of the press clubs.
Summing up the topic I would like to say the following, I don’t
think we will ever be able to avoid political speculations. I’m sure
this interview will also become a topic of discussions, but this
is secondary.