Tweet
YEREVAN PRESS CLUB WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
APRIL 16-22, 2010
HIGHLIGHTS:
ELEVEN TV COMPANIES OF ARMENIA SIGNED ETHICAL CHARTER
NATIONAL CENTER OF AESTHETICS BANNED THE SHOW OF THE FILM "CHOICE"
ELEVEN TV COMPANIES OF ARMENIA SIGNED ETHICAL CHARTER
On April 21 heads of 11 TV companies of Armenia signed Charter of Ethical
Principles of TV and Radio Broadcasters of the Republic of Armenia, upon the
initiative of the Public Council at the RA President. The document was
signed by "Hayrenik TV", "Hay TV", ATV, "AR", "DAR-21", "Yerevan", "Yerkir
Media", "Kentron", Public Television of Armenia, "Shant" and "Shoghakat". It
is expected that the Charter will be joined by five more TV channels.
YPC Comment: The wish of media to follow ethical norms is always
commendable, yet only when it is truly their wish and sincere commitment to
following professional standards. Also, when such initiatives are based on
an appropriate institutional base. In this very case the collective singing
of professional ethics norms by TV companies raises a number of questions.
Firstly, this initiative brings back the question: what is the status and
functions of the Public Council? In Armenia there are no naive people who
believe that this is an independent body capable of making its own public
initiatives, including those in media domain. If this is a consultative body
at the head of the state, its activities should be restricted to
recommendations to the President, with the latter making decisions within
his mandate. Yet the development of an ethical charter for TV channels is
not in the President's mandate. If this is an organ of governing and
regulating, including broadcasting, its governing or regulating competence
should be stipulated by some law or other official act. Yet there are no
provisions of the kind. Therefore, the Charter, too, is nothing more but an
awkward attempt to actually influence television, coming from authorities,
but disguised as voluntary safeguarding of public interest by our
broadcasters. Such "dubiousness" cannot be productive by definition. There
should be a law enforced that complies with modern democratic standards.
Besides, the protection of public interest, rights of citizens can be
fostered only by an independent, voluntary and comprehensive media
self-regulation institute. When none of these components is present, no
surrogate initiatives can help the improvement of the TV quality.
Secondly, what has suddenly happened to our leading broadcasters that for
many years were denying the idea of unified professional standards and now
rush to sign the Charter all together?! This is certainly not the reputation
of the Public Council that affected them. It is just that our leading
broadcasters have grown so used to the role of obedient implementers that
they have learned to decipher the will "from the above" even with no direct
instructions. Their behavior becomes more topical now that the broadcast
licensing competitions are at hand.
Another question prompts itself: what is so bad about the Charter? In the
worst case scenario, nothing will change on our air, in the best one - a
couple of tasteless programs would disappear. Yet, unfortunately, such
initiatives are never harmless. Appearance of any, even, at first glance,
very weak illegitimate lever of influencing the media deteriorates the
freedom of expression in our country, which is poor as it is. And most
importantly, the replacement of real reforms in broadcasting by bad make-up
does little more than distantiate the prospect of improvement of Armenian TV
air.
Suppose such Charter, with the same initiators and signatories appeared two
years ago. Would we have the same unimpeded and immoral propaganda as during
the presidential election campaign of 2008 and particularly after what
happened on March 1? Would the authors of the document try to apply the
principles they now declare and stop that dirt torrent in the air? And how
and in what ways would they do that? Because this is when our media went on
to another circle of diminishing morals that gave a reason for both the
Charter and legislative initiatives to increase the responsibilities of
journalists. We shall leave these questions open for further debate.
NATIONAL CENTER OF AESTHETICS BANNED THE SHOW OF THE FILM "CHOICE"
The road show of the documentary "Choice", announced on April 16 at the hall
of the National Center of Aesthetics, was cancelled by the instructions of
the Center management. The producer and the scriptwriter of the film is
Tigran Paskevichian, member of Creative Board, Director of film and program
production of "Shoghakat" TV company. As Tigran Paskevichian informed YPC,
the documentary was shot with the assistance of US National Endowment for
Democracy Foundation within the project "The Wives of Repressed". The story
is about the families of political prisoners and the situation in Armenia
before and after the presidential elections 2008. According to Tigran
Paskevichian, the RA Ministry of Education and Science the ban was
determined by the Model Regulations of State Non-Commercial Organizations
which applies to state educational institutions, as well. The document
prohibits forming and running political and religion organizations in such
institutions. As to the journalist, the documentary, regardless of its
content, cannot be considered as "forming and running political and religion
organizations", therefore the restriction on its show runs counter Article
27 of RA Constitution, ensuring the freedom of expression, freedom to seek,
receive, and impart information. In the statement, released regarding the
ban of the film ""Choice", Tigran Paskevichian called upon the RA Ministry
of Culture to provide a hall for the film premiere.
In its turn, Levon Igitian, Director of the National Center of Aesthetics,
told YPC that the prior agreement on the premiere was made with the head of
the Center hall without his consent. According to Levon Igitian, as soon as
he learnt about that, he forbade the show of the film "Choice" for the
institution, engaged in aesthetic education of teenagers, cannot carry out
any other activities.
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:
[email protected]
Subscription for the Newsletter is free. To subscribe or unsubscribe from
this mailing list, please send a message to: [email protected]
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: [email protected]
Web Site: www.ypc.am
APRIL 16-22, 2010
HIGHLIGHTS:
ELEVEN TV COMPANIES OF ARMENIA SIGNED ETHICAL CHARTER
NATIONAL CENTER OF AESTHETICS BANNED THE SHOW OF THE FILM "CHOICE"
ELEVEN TV COMPANIES OF ARMENIA SIGNED ETHICAL CHARTER
On April 21 heads of 11 TV companies of Armenia signed Charter of Ethical
Principles of TV and Radio Broadcasters of the Republic of Armenia, upon the
initiative of the Public Council at the RA President. The document was
signed by "Hayrenik TV", "Hay TV", ATV, "AR", "DAR-21", "Yerevan", "Yerkir
Media", "Kentron", Public Television of Armenia, "Shant" and "Shoghakat". It
is expected that the Charter will be joined by five more TV channels.
YPC Comment: The wish of media to follow ethical norms is always
commendable, yet only when it is truly their wish and sincere commitment to
following professional standards. Also, when such initiatives are based on
an appropriate institutional base. In this very case the collective singing
of professional ethics norms by TV companies raises a number of questions.
Firstly, this initiative brings back the question: what is the status and
functions of the Public Council? In Armenia there are no naive people who
believe that this is an independent body capable of making its own public
initiatives, including those in media domain. If this is a consultative body
at the head of the state, its activities should be restricted to
recommendations to the President, with the latter making decisions within
his mandate. Yet the development of an ethical charter for TV channels is
not in the President's mandate. If this is an organ of governing and
regulating, including broadcasting, its governing or regulating competence
should be stipulated by some law or other official act. Yet there are no
provisions of the kind. Therefore, the Charter, too, is nothing more but an
awkward attempt to actually influence television, coming from authorities,
but disguised as voluntary safeguarding of public interest by our
broadcasters. Such "dubiousness" cannot be productive by definition. There
should be a law enforced that complies with modern democratic standards.
Besides, the protection of public interest, rights of citizens can be
fostered only by an independent, voluntary and comprehensive media
self-regulation institute. When none of these components is present, no
surrogate initiatives can help the improvement of the TV quality.
Secondly, what has suddenly happened to our leading broadcasters that for
many years were denying the idea of unified professional standards and now
rush to sign the Charter all together?! This is certainly not the reputation
of the Public Council that affected them. It is just that our leading
broadcasters have grown so used to the role of obedient implementers that
they have learned to decipher the will "from the above" even with no direct
instructions. Their behavior becomes more topical now that the broadcast
licensing competitions are at hand.
Another question prompts itself: what is so bad about the Charter? In the
worst case scenario, nothing will change on our air, in the best one - a
couple of tasteless programs would disappear. Yet, unfortunately, such
initiatives are never harmless. Appearance of any, even, at first glance,
very weak illegitimate lever of influencing the media deteriorates the
freedom of expression in our country, which is poor as it is. And most
importantly, the replacement of real reforms in broadcasting by bad make-up
does little more than distantiate the prospect of improvement of Armenian TV
air.
Suppose such Charter, with the same initiators and signatories appeared two
years ago. Would we have the same unimpeded and immoral propaganda as during
the presidential election campaign of 2008 and particularly after what
happened on March 1? Would the authors of the document try to apply the
principles they now declare and stop that dirt torrent in the air? And how
and in what ways would they do that? Because this is when our media went on
to another circle of diminishing morals that gave a reason for both the
Charter and legislative initiatives to increase the responsibilities of
journalists. We shall leave these questions open for further debate.
NATIONAL CENTER OF AESTHETICS BANNED THE SHOW OF THE FILM "CHOICE"
The road show of the documentary "Choice", announced on April 16 at the hall
of the National Center of Aesthetics, was cancelled by the instructions of
the Center management. The producer and the scriptwriter of the film is
Tigran Paskevichian, member of Creative Board, Director of film and program
production of "Shoghakat" TV company. As Tigran Paskevichian informed YPC,
the documentary was shot with the assistance of US National Endowment for
Democracy Foundation within the project "The Wives of Repressed". The story
is about the families of political prisoners and the situation in Armenia
before and after the presidential elections 2008. According to Tigran
Paskevichian, the RA Ministry of Education and Science the ban was
determined by the Model Regulations of State Non-Commercial Organizations
which applies to state educational institutions, as well. The document
prohibits forming and running political and religion organizations in such
institutions. As to the journalist, the documentary, regardless of its
content, cannot be considered as "forming and running political and religion
organizations", therefore the restriction on its show runs counter Article
27 of RA Constitution, ensuring the freedom of expression, freedom to seek,
receive, and impart information. In the statement, released regarding the
ban of the film ""Choice", Tigran Paskevichian called upon the RA Ministry
of Culture to provide a hall for the film premiere.
In its turn, Levon Igitian, Director of the National Center of Aesthetics,
told YPC that the prior agreement on the premiere was made with the head of
the Center hall without his consent. According to Levon Igitian, as soon as
he learnt about that, he forbade the show of the film "Choice" for the
institution, engaged in aesthetic education of teenagers, cannot carry out
any other activities.
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:
[email protected]
Subscription for the Newsletter is free. To subscribe or unsubscribe from
this mailing list, please send a message to: [email protected]
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: [email protected]
Web Site: www.ypc.am