Tweet
ELECTION CAMPAIGNING: OLD OBJECTIVES - NEW METHODS
Armen Arakelyan
hetq
14:05, March 22, 2012
With the lowering of internet rates and the entrance of the web into
even the most remote of villages, we must take a new look at the role
of TV in shaping public opinion in the run-up to elections in Armenia.
There are risks in relying only in traditional news outlets and public
relations methodologies to get one's message across.
This reality is understood by the political forces gearing up for
the elections, as well as the government and TV companies.
This new ser of circumstances directly impacts on the functionality
of TV when it comes to election campaigning.
Given the relative absence of sharp political divisions, as was the
case before the 2008 presidential elections, has forced the ruling
regime to review its prior aggressive TV campaign stance and adopt
the appearance of competition.
This review began in 2009-2010, with the changes to the "Law on TV
and Radio" that were aimed at creating a degree of freedom for the
management of the media. While there were no practical results, it
did create a legal basis to show that the authorities had in fact
made changes.
Without doubt, political forces have greater access to TV than in
2007. One month ago, Armenian Public TV and private broadcasters
issued their rate schedule for air-time.
According to the Electoral Code, the price of one minute of air-time
cannot exceed the average price of advertising time for the six months
prior to the scheduling of elections.
This has allowed for a decrease in TV rates for political adverts. But
the private TV stations have adopted a personal approach to the matter
of decreasing rates.
If entertainment-based stations (Armenia, Shant) decreased rates by
20%, the more news oriented stations (Yerkir Media, Kentron, ArmNews)
conditionally decreased rates by 1/3rd.
The high viewing rates of the former forced the latter to respond
with greater accessibility.
The only exception was Armenian Public TV, which kept its 2007 rates.
They are on par with the rates published by the private entertainment
stations.
Thus, Armenian Public TV adopted a business approach to rates rather
than one in the public interest, as stated in its mandate.
With the exception of ArmNews, all other broadcasters offering
political air-time can today reach the farthest village via satellite.
Thus, Armenian Public TV has been deprived of its former advantage
in this regard. Thus, there is no logic to Public TV's adopted rate
schedule.
But it is not paid air-time that impacts on public perceptions of the
electorate as much as the so-called "hidden political advertising"
or the counter-campaigns. This is the sector that has traditionally
spawned manifestations of inequality and discrimination, given that
it remains outside the legal realm of control. It is a formulation
of the programming policies adopted by the TV stations.
In this respect, the ruling regime and political forces aligned to it
have traditionally received better coverage, both quantitatively and
qualitatively, than the rest of the pack. This divide was really big
in the past. TV stations were quite boldfaced in the advantageous
coverage and positive slant it offered those in power. To this we
must add the negatively slanted coverage given to the competition
and the lack of news alternatives.
This aspect isn't so great today, but it's not due to the decrease of
"hidden advertising" or counter-advertising. There are the following
two factors at play
First, there is the so-called "sorting" of TV companies, a certain
difference of political preferences, that weren't apparent before.
Two political forces participating in the elections, the ARF and
Prosperous Armenian Party, have TV stations of their own - Yerkir
Media and Kentron. Armenian Public TV, H2, Armenia and Shant TV fall
under the purview of the ruling regime; under the unofficial control
of the Republican Party. This reality creates a mixed news/campaign
broadcast environment. The true campaign competition in these TV
stations began much earlier and was evidenced by the slanted and
restricted coverage afforded to the outsiders. These stations,
in addition, created unequal conditions for those forces lacking
the necessary financial resources - the Rule of Law Party, Armenian
National Congress or the Communist Party. While TV airtime was not
closed to them, they were restricted to saying the bare minimum.
The second factor dealt with the change of the nature of hidden
advertising, which in turn was based on the change of campaigning
tactics of the ruling authorities.
While allowing for a certain widening of the restricted freedom of
TV and radio stations, the regime started to build its campaigning on
two approaches. The first envisaged a constant, long-term coverage of
the regime's activities but in smaller sound bites. This has been the
approach in operation since 2009, after the fall in ratings of the
regime and its support core due to the economic and political crises.
The benevolent actions of the parties were the main tool that was used
- the social, health and other services paid for by the largesse of
the Republican and Prosperous Armenia parties.
To be sure, all this largesse, the distribution of gifts and charity,
was all for show but it had a certain impact on public perceptions
given the constant coverage such displays were afforded.
The tendency to equate official state and party functions has grown
of late, especially in the run-up to elections.
Just look at the number of trips made by the prime minister,
the secretary of the Security Council, and other officials to the
outlying regions allegedly for work-related reasons. They hand out
party memberships cards, discuss election plans with local party
representatives, and appear before the TV cameras that cover such
events as if they are somehow related to the functioning of the
government and the functions of government officials.
These are typical examples of hidden advertising.
In contrast to TV, radio stations are relatively freer. Armenian
Public Radio operates on the principle of equality amongst the
political forces and unbiased coverage.
Armenia Liberty radio continues to serve as an alternative source of
news and information in Armenia.
The other radio stations, mostly focused on entertainment and music,
restrict their news coverage to short reports lacking any political
context. These stations won't have much of an impact in the election
campaign.
Armen Arakelyan
hetq
14:05, March 22, 2012
With the lowering of internet rates and the entrance of the web into
even the most remote of villages, we must take a new look at the role
of TV in shaping public opinion in the run-up to elections in Armenia.
There are risks in relying only in traditional news outlets and public
relations methodologies to get one's message across.
This reality is understood by the political forces gearing up for
the elections, as well as the government and TV companies.
This new ser of circumstances directly impacts on the functionality
of TV when it comes to election campaigning.
Given the relative absence of sharp political divisions, as was the
case before the 2008 presidential elections, has forced the ruling
regime to review its prior aggressive TV campaign stance and adopt
the appearance of competition.
This review began in 2009-2010, with the changes to the "Law on TV
and Radio" that were aimed at creating a degree of freedom for the
management of the media. While there were no practical results, it
did create a legal basis to show that the authorities had in fact
made changes.
Without doubt, political forces have greater access to TV than in
2007. One month ago, Armenian Public TV and private broadcasters
issued their rate schedule for air-time.
According to the Electoral Code, the price of one minute of air-time
cannot exceed the average price of advertising time for the six months
prior to the scheduling of elections.
This has allowed for a decrease in TV rates for political adverts. But
the private TV stations have adopted a personal approach to the matter
of decreasing rates.
If entertainment-based stations (Armenia, Shant) decreased rates by
20%, the more news oriented stations (Yerkir Media, Kentron, ArmNews)
conditionally decreased rates by 1/3rd.
The high viewing rates of the former forced the latter to respond
with greater accessibility.
The only exception was Armenian Public TV, which kept its 2007 rates.
They are on par with the rates published by the private entertainment
stations.
Thus, Armenian Public TV adopted a business approach to rates rather
than one in the public interest, as stated in its mandate.
With the exception of ArmNews, all other broadcasters offering
political air-time can today reach the farthest village via satellite.
Thus, Armenian Public TV has been deprived of its former advantage
in this regard. Thus, there is no logic to Public TV's adopted rate
schedule.
But it is not paid air-time that impacts on public perceptions of the
electorate as much as the so-called "hidden political advertising"
or the counter-campaigns. This is the sector that has traditionally
spawned manifestations of inequality and discrimination, given that
it remains outside the legal realm of control. It is a formulation
of the programming policies adopted by the TV stations.
In this respect, the ruling regime and political forces aligned to it
have traditionally received better coverage, both quantitatively and
qualitatively, than the rest of the pack. This divide was really big
in the past. TV stations were quite boldfaced in the advantageous
coverage and positive slant it offered those in power. To this we
must add the negatively slanted coverage given to the competition
and the lack of news alternatives.
This aspect isn't so great today, but it's not due to the decrease of
"hidden advertising" or counter-advertising. There are the following
two factors at play
First, there is the so-called "sorting" of TV companies, a certain
difference of political preferences, that weren't apparent before.
Two political forces participating in the elections, the ARF and
Prosperous Armenian Party, have TV stations of their own - Yerkir
Media and Kentron. Armenian Public TV, H2, Armenia and Shant TV fall
under the purview of the ruling regime; under the unofficial control
of the Republican Party. This reality creates a mixed news/campaign
broadcast environment. The true campaign competition in these TV
stations began much earlier and was evidenced by the slanted and
restricted coverage afforded to the outsiders. These stations,
in addition, created unequal conditions for those forces lacking
the necessary financial resources - the Rule of Law Party, Armenian
National Congress or the Communist Party. While TV airtime was not
closed to them, they were restricted to saying the bare minimum.
The second factor dealt with the change of the nature of hidden
advertising, which in turn was based on the change of campaigning
tactics of the ruling authorities.
While allowing for a certain widening of the restricted freedom of
TV and radio stations, the regime started to build its campaigning on
two approaches. The first envisaged a constant, long-term coverage of
the regime's activities but in smaller sound bites. This has been the
approach in operation since 2009, after the fall in ratings of the
regime and its support core due to the economic and political crises.
The benevolent actions of the parties were the main tool that was used
- the social, health and other services paid for by the largesse of
the Republican and Prosperous Armenia parties.
To be sure, all this largesse, the distribution of gifts and charity,
was all for show but it had a certain impact on public perceptions
given the constant coverage such displays were afforded.
The tendency to equate official state and party functions has grown
of late, especially in the run-up to elections.
Just look at the number of trips made by the prime minister,
the secretary of the Security Council, and other officials to the
outlying regions allegedly for work-related reasons. They hand out
party memberships cards, discuss election plans with local party
representatives, and appear before the TV cameras that cover such
events as if they are somehow related to the functioning of the
government and the functions of government officials.
These are typical examples of hidden advertising.
In contrast to TV, radio stations are relatively freer. Armenian
Public Radio operates on the principle of equality amongst the
political forces and unbiased coverage.
Armenia Liberty radio continues to serve as an alternative source of
news and information in Armenia.
The other radio stations, mostly focused on entertainment and music,
restrict their news coverage to short reports lacking any political
context. These stations won't have much of an impact in the election
campaign.