Tweet
Trend, Azerbaijan
Dec 3 2009
Euronews' spirit
Political Analysis and Informational Provision Department head at the
Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Elnur Aslanov.
2009 is coming to its logical end. When analyzing the year remaining
in the memory with the global financial turmoil, it becomes apparent
that everything around us is changing with catastrophic speed.
Not having time to get used to e-mail and blogging culture, we have
been creating new space and correspond with each other through social
networks. 4G replaces 3G, innovations transform our perception of
reality day by day, television channels transforms to 3D, mobile
phones became simple tube that no longer satisfy us. The Internet has
become such an integral part of our lives that sometimes it is
impossible to imagine yourself outside of the virtual space. All this
affects the modernization of consciousness, emergence of new
behavioral norms and attitudes in our way of life and relations with
the outside world. We have become easier to communicate with each
other in the virtual world, but we lose a sense of closeness to the
real world.
However, it changes not only the attitude toward themselves and each
other. As expected, it changes the attitude in general to a system of
international relations. The relations between the subjects of
international law, states, transnational corporations and other
organizations acquire a different hue. It is clear that international
relations in general have never shone high moral definitions and
clearly has never been a lesser degree of priority quotes by Lord
Palmerston (about friends and interests). But today they have become
even more cynical and self-seeking.
All this naturally affects the behavior of an individual who receives
information from the media. Today the mass media determine its own
agenda anticipating the policy of the powerful. Thus, strangely
enough, but at a time when humanity is facing one of the most peaceful
periods of coexistence, since the number of wars and conflicts on the
planet is much less than 50 or 100 years ago, it is the media
escalates new confrontation and conflict.
If we say that the media is a system of transmission and analysis of
information, but today there is a reasonable question - To whose
interests this or other information serves? Independent, unbiased and
objective information has now become the same rarity as the vegetation
in the Sahara. It is difficult to meet the international news agency,
the percentage of news which, basically, would consist of unbiased
information on the processes in a particular region or country. In
this position the one hand is more subjective, it is most true, that
meets the interests of lobby groups and reflects the interest of
various political power centers.
I recall the insistence of no more than a year ago had to seek
publication of the article on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict at
Radio Liberty in response to a number of articles of representatives
of Armenia. Nearly a week after the publication of article reflecting
Azerbaijan's fair position the site has posted an article of the
so-called "NKR Representative in the United States" without a similar
reduction, which in turn was subjected to my article. Radio Liberty
was not interested in publication of response article of the
Azerbaijani side.
Naturally, we can not forget the Machiavellian principle determining
that the basis of the universe is to use all possible means to achieve
goals, and the mass media in the 21st century is the most significant
weapon in this matter.
Thus, today it is the media that become the mouthpiece of increased
conflict, unresolved global issues, the escalation of violence, etc.
The mass media broadcasts the ideas that excite the public and sow
enmity. Every day we are confronted with how some news channels
broadcast the one-sided information, while neglecting the position of
the other side. Bogus representations of various issues are organized
under the brand of democracy. The rights and freedoms, protection of
mass media in general has become a business for a number of
international NGOs, government and organizations that receive huge
funds for various projects and initiatives. Fortunately you can always
find a problem, but if it does not, so think of.
The more powerful and independent nation, the harder the dispute with
him are. If the country prefers to put national interests above the
interests of mercantile international officials tied to the political
interests of certain centers of power in its foreign policy, then you
can always find a reason to accuse and denigrate it. Above all, you
need to have the willingness and the right to the media.
The 21st century became dependent on press, which increasingly
resembles the Cold War, when we shared the curtain. What divides us
today? Nothing. But does anything change? Nothing.
The media's dependence on outside interests and the total lack of
objectivity is increasingly becoming a determining factor in the
century, where information plays a priority role. The movie that
Euronews broadcasted few days ago is example for it. The movie was
devoted to the issue of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict. I will not touch the issue that it is Armenian occupied the
Azerbaijani territory, although the movie appears in a completely
different light. I will not address the question that the movie lacked
the Azerbaijani position and that the authoritative channel such as
Euronews is obliged to adhere to the parity in informing. What is
confusing is that all this is happening on the backdrop of the
president's negotiations, the OSCE Minsk Group's statements, active
participation of the heads of major powers and possibility to change
something, to break the deadlock in the region for security and
stability
Accordingly, the question arises - Whose interests do not satisfy the
peace in the South Caucasus? Who does not want to bring justice and
peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia? Who needs to see the tears of
mothers losing their sons on both sides of the front?
A week earlier, the Armenian Diaspora in the U.S. has collected more
than $ 15 million donation to restore the Shusha city and after a few
days Euronews showed a plot about the Karabakh. I do not think there
is a need to question how the diaspora spends the collected money or
what earns Euronews, but the information supplied by such an
authoritative channel must differ with strict objectivity, or at least
a minimal statement of facts. I do not rule out that the journalist,
preparing material the channel's leadership, allowing such broadcasts?
Today it is obvious that Armenia, which is too heavy is going through
domestic political and economic situation, seeks to preserve the
status quo in the region. Peace in the region does not meet its
interests. The presence of war, even in conditions of the armistice -
is always a very large finance, which can be "to lower" not only on
weaponry, but also ensuring the political future of the regime. The
Armenian leadership understands this and acts contrary to the
interests of the Armenian society, which expects peace and stability
in the region for their own welfare.
Unfortunately, this truth is difficult to understand and heads of
media resources such as Euronews, which put their mercantile interests
above the possible positive transformations in the South Caucasus. It
is clear that for a number of the Western media, particularly for
Euronews, still tenacious spirit of ideas "Arthashastra", which reads:
"If your neighbor is loyal and calm, try to attack and harass him,
even if there are no serious reasons for this. If, on the contrary, it
is a source of aggression and violent behavior, try to calm the sweet
persuasion."
Dec 3 2009
Euronews' spirit
Political Analysis and Informational Provision Department head at the
Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Elnur Aslanov.
2009 is coming to its logical end. When analyzing the year remaining
in the memory with the global financial turmoil, it becomes apparent
that everything around us is changing with catastrophic speed.
Not having time to get used to e-mail and blogging culture, we have
been creating new space and correspond with each other through social
networks. 4G replaces 3G, innovations transform our perception of
reality day by day, television channels transforms to 3D, mobile
phones became simple tube that no longer satisfy us. The Internet has
become such an integral part of our lives that sometimes it is
impossible to imagine yourself outside of the virtual space. All this
affects the modernization of consciousness, emergence of new
behavioral norms and attitudes in our way of life and relations with
the outside world. We have become easier to communicate with each
other in the virtual world, but we lose a sense of closeness to the
real world.
However, it changes not only the attitude toward themselves and each
other. As expected, it changes the attitude in general to a system of
international relations. The relations between the subjects of
international law, states, transnational corporations and other
organizations acquire a different hue. It is clear that international
relations in general have never shone high moral definitions and
clearly has never been a lesser degree of priority quotes by Lord
Palmerston (about friends and interests). But today they have become
even more cynical and self-seeking.
All this naturally affects the behavior of an individual who receives
information from the media. Today the mass media determine its own
agenda anticipating the policy of the powerful. Thus, strangely
enough, but at a time when humanity is facing one of the most peaceful
periods of coexistence, since the number of wars and conflicts on the
planet is much less than 50 or 100 years ago, it is the media
escalates new confrontation and conflict.
If we say that the media is a system of transmission and analysis of
information, but today there is a reasonable question - To whose
interests this or other information serves? Independent, unbiased and
objective information has now become the same rarity as the vegetation
in the Sahara. It is difficult to meet the international news agency,
the percentage of news which, basically, would consist of unbiased
information on the processes in a particular region or country. In
this position the one hand is more subjective, it is most true, that
meets the interests of lobby groups and reflects the interest of
various political power centers.
I recall the insistence of no more than a year ago had to seek
publication of the article on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict at
Radio Liberty in response to a number of articles of representatives
of Armenia. Nearly a week after the publication of article reflecting
Azerbaijan's fair position the site has posted an article of the
so-called "NKR Representative in the United States" without a similar
reduction, which in turn was subjected to my article. Radio Liberty
was not interested in publication of response article of the
Azerbaijani side.
Naturally, we can not forget the Machiavellian principle determining
that the basis of the universe is to use all possible means to achieve
goals, and the mass media in the 21st century is the most significant
weapon in this matter.
Thus, today it is the media that become the mouthpiece of increased
conflict, unresolved global issues, the escalation of violence, etc.
The mass media broadcasts the ideas that excite the public and sow
enmity. Every day we are confronted with how some news channels
broadcast the one-sided information, while neglecting the position of
the other side. Bogus representations of various issues are organized
under the brand of democracy. The rights and freedoms, protection of
mass media in general has become a business for a number of
international NGOs, government and organizations that receive huge
funds for various projects and initiatives. Fortunately you can always
find a problem, but if it does not, so think of.
The more powerful and independent nation, the harder the dispute with
him are. If the country prefers to put national interests above the
interests of mercantile international officials tied to the political
interests of certain centers of power in its foreign policy, then you
can always find a reason to accuse and denigrate it. Above all, you
need to have the willingness and the right to the media.
The 21st century became dependent on press, which increasingly
resembles the Cold War, when we shared the curtain. What divides us
today? Nothing. But does anything change? Nothing.
The media's dependence on outside interests and the total lack of
objectivity is increasingly becoming a determining factor in the
century, where information plays a priority role. The movie that
Euronews broadcasted few days ago is example for it. The movie was
devoted to the issue of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict. I will not touch the issue that it is Armenian occupied the
Azerbaijani territory, although the movie appears in a completely
different light. I will not address the question that the movie lacked
the Azerbaijani position and that the authoritative channel such as
Euronews is obliged to adhere to the parity in informing. What is
confusing is that all this is happening on the backdrop of the
president's negotiations, the OSCE Minsk Group's statements, active
participation of the heads of major powers and possibility to change
something, to break the deadlock in the region for security and
stability
Accordingly, the question arises - Whose interests do not satisfy the
peace in the South Caucasus? Who does not want to bring justice and
peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia? Who needs to see the tears of
mothers losing their sons on both sides of the front?
A week earlier, the Armenian Diaspora in the U.S. has collected more
than $ 15 million donation to restore the Shusha city and after a few
days Euronews showed a plot about the Karabakh. I do not think there
is a need to question how the diaspora spends the collected money or
what earns Euronews, but the information supplied by such an
authoritative channel must differ with strict objectivity, or at least
a minimal statement of facts. I do not rule out that the journalist,
preparing material the channel's leadership, allowing such broadcasts?
Today it is obvious that Armenia, which is too heavy is going through
domestic political and economic situation, seeks to preserve the
status quo in the region. Peace in the region does not meet its
interests. The presence of war, even in conditions of the armistice -
is always a very large finance, which can be "to lower" not only on
weaponry, but also ensuring the political future of the regime. The
Armenian leadership understands this and acts contrary to the
interests of the Armenian society, which expects peace and stability
in the region for their own welfare.
Unfortunately, this truth is difficult to understand and heads of
media resources such as Euronews, which put their mercantile interests
above the possible positive transformations in the South Caucasus. It
is clear that for a number of the Western media, particularly for
Euronews, still tenacious spirit of ideas "Arthashastra", which reads:
"If your neighbor is loyal and calm, try to attack and harass him,
even if there are no serious reasons for this. If, on the contrary, it
is a source of aggression and violent behavior, try to calm the sweet
persuasion."