Tweet
YEREVAN PRESS CLUB WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
FEBRUARY 15-21, 2013
HIGHLIGHTS:
YPC MONITORING: BROADCAST MEDIA DID NOT EXHIBIT DISCRIMINATION OR OPENLY
BIASED ATTITUDE TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
INCIDENTS WITH JOURNALISTS ON BALLOT DAY
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS STATE BALANCED COVERAGE AS POSITIVE AND LACK OF TV
DEBATES AS NEGATIVE TRENDS OF ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SUES "INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS"
YPC MONITORING: BROADCAST MEDIA DID NOT EXHIBIT DISCRIMINATION OR OPENLY
BIASED ATTITUDE TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
On February 19, in Yerevan, at Congress Hotel, Yerevan Press Club presented
the report on monitoring of Armenian broadcast media coverage of RA
presidential elections in 2013.
THE MONITORING of Armenian broadcast media coverage of RA presidential
elections in 2013 was implemented by Yerevan Press Club. Assistance to this
research was provided by OSCE Office in Yerevan within the framework of the
project "Support to Two Electoral Cycles in Armenia", financed by the
European Union. The monitoring was conducted in three stages: the first
stage covered the period of October 1 - December 15, 2012 (ahead of
pre-election promotion); the second stage covered the period of January
14-20, 2013 (in-between the official registration of the presidential
candidates and the start of the pre-election promotion); the third stage
covered the period of January 21 - February 16, 2013 (period of the
pre-election promotion).
THE RESEARCH included 6 national TV channels - the First Channel of the
Public
Television of Armenia (h1), "Armenia", "Yerkir Media", "Kentron", Second
Armenian TV Channel (h2), "Shant"; one Yerevan TV channel - "ArmNews", as
well as the Public Radio of Armenia and "ArmRadio FM 107" radio channel.
On the first and the third stages of the monitoring of the presidential
elections coverage on the abovementioned TV and radio channels, all
programmes of the evening airtime were studied (from 18:00 to 01:00),
excluding political, commercial and social advertising (for the monitoring
methodology of the third stage see the section "General Information" of the
current YPC Report at http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/). On the second
stage of the monitoring (the last week ahead of pre-election promotion) only
the main issues of news/news and comment programmes and the
social-political/discussion programmes were studied.
THE COVERAGE OF THE WHOLE 2013 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN was heavily influenced
by the non-standard political conjuncture. In a situation of unclear
intentions, when up to the official nomination of the candidates the plans
of numerous leading parties and politicians remained vague, the monitored
media were forced to focus on quite a large group of potential candidates.
Throughout the period from October 1 to December 15, 2012, 41 citizens of
Armenia were mentioned in the monitored media as potential candidates. In
terms of frequency of references in the news/news and comment programmes,
the political figures who were later registered as candidates occupied in
the list respectively the 1st place (President of Armenia Serzh Sargsian),
4th place (leader of the "Heritage" party Raffi Hovannisian), 7th place
(specialist of epic poetry Vardan Sedrakian), 8th place (leader of "National
Self-Determination" Union Paruyr Hayrikian), 19th place (leader of the
"Liberty" party Hrant Bagratian), 25th place (former Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Mountainous Karabagh Arman Melikian), and 28th place (leader of
the "National Accord" party Aram Harutiunian). Before December 15, the
eighth candidate Andrias Ghukasian, Director of Radio "Hay", has not
appeared as a potential candidate at all. It is worth noting that in the
second half of the studied period (November 21 - December 15, 2012) the
leader of "Prosperous Armenia" party Gagik Tsarukian was ahead of all other
the potential candidates in terms of frequency of references, and his name
ultimately did not appear on the list of candidates for the post of the head
of state.
Only two out of six political parties, represented in the RA National
Assembly, had their own candidates, and one of them acted as a
self-nominated candidate. Three out of six parliamentary political forces,
including those that have the second, third and fourth largest parliamentary
factions, not only did not have their own candidates, but also did not
support any of the nominated candidates. Moreover, their position regarding
the participation in elections became clear only 55-67 days before voting.
Five out of the eight registered presidential candidates either did not
represent any of the Armenian political parties, or their parties did not
play a significant role in the political life of the country during the
recent years. Such a list of candidates, naturally, did not contribute to a
meaningful coverage of "the profiles" of the presidential candidates in
advance. On the first stage of the monitoring, about 60% of coverage of the
potential candidates was received by the ones that ultimately were not
nominated. Moreover, the media were focused not so much on the suggested
programmes and positions but rather on the anticipation of decisions by
leading political players regarding their nomination as candidates. The role
of the media in preparing the audience, i.e., the citizens of Armenia to the
elections was limited in October-December 2012.
In general the broadcast media did not exhibit discrimination or openly
biased attitude to the presidential candidates. On the whole, equal
conditions were provided for introducing the electorate to the programmes
and views of the candidates and political forces supporting them. Naturally,
the voters did not receive equal amount of information about all candidates,
however this was a consequence of the capacity and the willingness of the
candidates to wage their campaigns. If at the 2012 parliamentary elections
balanced coverage was provided only during the official pre-election
promotion, this time the period preceding it can also be assessed in the
same way. Taking into account the "scattered" attention to potential
candidates, the coverage of the parties is more revealing. Thus, throughout
October-December 2012 five political forces were in the centre of attention
of Armenian broadcasters: Republican Party of Armenia, "Prosperous Armenia"
party, Armenian National Congress, Armenian Revolutionary
Federation-Dashnaktsutyun and "Heritage" party. The sixth political force,
represented in the Armenian parliament, "Orinats Yerkir" party, received
substantially less attention than the leading five did. This difference can
be explained by the level of expectation of plots in the electoral behaviour
of the parties.
At the same time, the frequent appearances of representatives of executive
authorities in news/news and comment programmes (6,337 times against 4,874
times of appearances of representatives of all parties altogether) is a sign
of information advantage of the ruling coalition in October-December 2012.
During the period of the official pre-election promotion the media,
naturally, focused on the candidates individually (hereafter for the
quantitative data of the monitoring see the current YPC Report at
http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/). The highest amount of attention was
received by the leader of the "National Self-Determination" Union Paruyr
Hayrikian, which can be explained by the intensive coverage of the events,
connected to the assassination attempt against him in the evening of January
31, as well as the ensuing period of expecting whether he would or would not
demand postponing the elections. In terms of airtime, allocated by the 9
media studied, the indicators of the incumbent President of Armenia Serzh
Sargsian, leader of the "Heritage" party Raffi Hovannisian and leader of the
"Liberty" party Hrant Bagratian were close to each other. However, according
to the frequency of references, Serzh Sargsian was significantly ahead of
Raffi Hovannisian and Hrant Bagratian, and in this respect was close to
Paruyr Hayrikian.
The candidates can be divided into two groups of four. The leading four,
both in terms of frequency of references and airtime volume, were the
abovementioned candidates, while the second group was formed by Andrias
Ghukasian, the Radio "Hay" Director, Vardan Sedrakian, who introduced
himself as specialist in epic poetry, Arman Melikian, the former Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Mountainous Karabagh, and Aram Harutiunian, the leader of
"National Accord" party. The latter, naturally, had the lowest indicators:
he withdrew his candidacy, and since February 8 the monitoring team did not
study his coverage. At the same time, it is impossible to say that the
second four candidates were neglected by the media: data reflecting the
frequency and length of their appearances on air show that even in spite of
a limited number of their pre-election events they receive an opportunity to
present their ideas to the voters. This refers also to Andrias Ghukasian,
who went on hunger-strike from the first day of the pre-election promotion
and did not hold any special pre-election events, which did not prevent him
from becoming the fifth according to frequency and volume of coverage.
At the same time, stressing the notion of "the four main candidates" in the
airtime of several broadcasters and, based on that, the planning of certain
programmes of the format "guest-in-studio", is a deviation from the formal
requirements on the coverage of pre-election promotion. Naturally, such
policy can be explained by the desire of the broadcasters to meet the
interests of the audience, but on the other hand, it can be regarded as
attempt to influence the voters.
THE BALANCE OF CONNOTATION REFERENCES to presidential hopefuls suggests that
the attitude of the society (at least its reflection in the airtime of the
media studied) was the most polarized when it came to the candidacy of Serzh
Sargsian (83 positive and 53 negative references). Overall connotation
references to the incumbent President throughout the pre-election promotion
period constituted 6.7% of all cumulative references to him by the media
studied. This is the most intensive expression of an attitude among all
candidates (Raffi Hovannisian has 2.3%, Vardan Sedrakian has 1.6%, Hrant
Bagratian has 1.4%). In general, positive references dominate over negative
ones (127 against 84).
Negative balance of references for Serzh Sargsian was recorded on "Yerkir
Media" and "Kentron" TV channels, on other studied media his balance is
positive, with the exception of the Second Armenian TV channel (one positive
and one negative reference). Raffi Hovannisian, who almost during the
complete period of the pre-election promotion was mentioned in either
neutral or positive context, received negative references during the last
days of the campaign, when Vardan Sedrakian accused him of connections with
the Masons, who, according to Sedrakian, organized the assassination attempt
against Paruyr Hayrikian. In his turn, Sedrakian himself "earned" almost all
his negative references after he suggested this hypothesis. He turned out to
be the only candidate, whose connotation references were exclusively
negative. In case of Paruyr Hayrikian and Andrias Ghukasian the references
were exclusively positive, 3 and 6 accordingly. Of all the candidates, only
Arman Melikian was covered exclusively in the neutral context.
In general, in Armenia the tendency is preserved towards the decreasing
share of connotational coverage of politicians and parties competing in the
elections. If during the pre-election promotion of the 2012 parliamentary
elections this share comprised 3.5% of the aggregate number of references on
all studied channels (which was a significant reduction compared to all
previous national election campaigns), this time it comprised 2.2%.
The coverage of activities of the incumbent President deserves attention.
During the period preceding the pre-election promotion, the media pretty
intensively covered his activities not as a candidate but as an official.
Thus, during the last week before the pre-election promotion (January 14-20)
coverage of Serzh Sargsian in the capacity of the President of Armenia
constituted 65.6% (or almost two thirds) of all cumulative airtime,
allocated to him by 9 channels studied. Moreover, on "Shant" this indicator
constituted 93.4%, and on PTA First Channel it constituted 85.3%. As a
result, Serzh Sargsian received significant information advantage against
his competitors, whose activities - not in the capacity of candidates - were
not covered in any way, with the exception of 30 seconds of coverage of
Raffi Hovannisian. Predominance of the coverage of Serzh Sargsian as
President over his coverage as candidate was recorded on 8 out of 9 media
studied. The only exception during that week was "ArmRadio", where in the
airtime, allocated to Serzh Sargsian, the share of his coverage as President
constituted only 5.4%.
However, coverage of the incumbent President in the media studied changed
dramatically with the start of the pre-election promotion. Appearances of
Serzh Sargsian in the capacity of the President within January 21 - February
16 already constituted 8.7%, remaining within the acceptable limits on all
studied channels. Moreover, as the day of the voting was getting closer, the
coverage of the incumbent President in his official capacity was becoming
less active. This fact suggests that, unlike all previous elections, to a
certain extent there is attention towards the unwritten rule, according to
which an official running for office needs to limit his public appearances
unconnected to the pre-election campaign, and media need to cover such
appearances more concisely.
At the same time, the contrast between the period directly before the
pre-election promotion and the rapid pre-election promotion itself another
time proves the necessity of regulation and monitoring of a more lengthy
period than the 4 weeks of pre-election promotion. Otherwise, it would be
difficult to talk about equal information opportunities for candidates.
THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF ATTENTION to the presidential race during the
pre-election promotion was given by "ArmNews" TV channel and "ArmRadio",
which with a large gap were followed by "Yerkir Media" and "Kentron" - the
traditional leaders in covering political life. The fact that these two
significantly lagged behind the "new leaders" can namely imply a decrease in
the level of interest of their owners towards these elections, as compared
to the parliamentary elections of 2012, when both of these channels stood
out as specifically active. This circumstance indicates a problem common for
the Armenian broadcasting sphere: while covering political processes, TV
companies are oriented toward the interests of their owners rather than the
demands of the audience.
Other studied broadcasters showed roughly the same level of activeness in
covering the electoral processes. Taking into account that 6 out of 7
channels studied (except "ArmNews") have similar broadcasting licenses, the
differences in the quantitative indexes of their attention to pre-election
processes are manifestation of the fact that there are problems in the field
of regulation of the broadcasting sphere in Armenia.
ANALYSIS OF THE LISTS OF PARTICIPANTS OF DISCUSSION PROGRAMMES of the format
"guest-in-studio" suggests an extreme deficit of pre-election debates and
clash of opinions (whether candidates themselves or their supporters). This
problem was especially strongly manifest in the context of the political
uncertainty, which existed before the registration of the candidates.
Focusing since mid-January on the coverage of the eight registered
candidates, the broadcasters to a certain extent compensated the uncertainty
and "scattered" attention, which were a consequence of the fact that
numerous names of potential presidential hopefuls were circulated in
October-December 2012. However, the minimal attention of programmes of
various profile towards pre-election platforms of the presidential hopefuls
(except Hrant Bagratian, none of the candidates was stressing his specific
platform provisions) limited the opportunity for an informed and conscious
choice by Armenian citizens. In essence, the statements of the candidates in
pre-election promotion videos, pre-election meetings and press conferences,
even in TV and radio interviews were repeating each other.
Perhaps the absence of debates remains the main problem of coverage of the
pre-election promotion by the broadcasting media of Armenia. This issue was
more vividly apparent in the specific political conjuncture, which emerged
in Armenia in the run-up to the current presidential elections.
The current, as well as the previous interim reports on monitoring the
coverage of 2013 presidential elections are available at
http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/eng.
INCIDENTS WITH JOURNALISTS ON BALLOT DAY
On February 18, on the voting day of RA presidential elections, attempts to
harass and impede the activities of journalists were observed.
Particularly, at about 16.00 at the 17/5 precinct of Artashat, Ararat
region, an incident occurred with the journalist Artak Hambardzumian,
representative of "Journalists for Human Rights" NGO. Some unknown men
pinioned the journalist's arms and took him aside so that he has no
possibility to record the ballot stuffing.
Over 19.00, at Khorenatsi street of Yerevan, a group of people, standing at
the electoral headquarters of the presidential candidate, incumbent
President Serzh Sargsian, prohibited the entry of Marineh Kharatian,
correspondent of "1in.am" news portal, and Gayaneh Saribekian, correspondent
of "Hraparak" daily. Afterwards, they took away the video and photo cameras
from the journalists and forced them to leave (later the devices were
returned to the journalists).
"These facts come to prove once again that whenever there are political
tensions in Armenia, the pressure and violence against media, as a rule,
exacerbate", emphasized the statement of some journalistic and human rights
NGOs, released on February 20.
"The state authorities, especially the law enforcement bodies, usually
overlook such kinds of incidents and instead of revealing and punishing the
insulters, they come up with strange "arguments" for withdrawing the cases.
Meanwhile, impunity leads to new transgressions.
We, the undersigned, express our concern regarding the cases of violence
against the journalists, who covered the elections, and demand the
authorities to take immediate measures for conducting a thorough and
objective investigation and bring the insulters to account", said the
statement, which was signed by the Committee to Protect Freedom of
Expression, Yerevan Press Club, "Asparez" Journalists Club, Internews Media
Support NGO, Media Diversity Institute-Armenia, "Journalists for Human
Rights" NGO, Goris Press Club, "Journalists for the Future" NGO, "EcoLur",
Helsinki Committee of Armenia, Vanazdor Office of Helsinki Citizen's
Assembly, "Rule of Law" NGO, "Yerashkhik" Civil Society Center, "Public
Information and Need of Knowledge" NGO and "Agat" NGO.
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS STATE BALANCED COVERAGE AS POSITIVE AND LACK OF TV
DEBATES AS NEGATIVE TRENDS OF ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN
On February 19, the International Election Observation Mission (OSCE/ODIHR,
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European
Parliament) released the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions
about the Armenian presidential elections, held on the eve (see
http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/99676). According to the observers, "the
election was generally well-administered and was characterized by a respect
for fundamental freedoms": contestants were able to campaign freely, media
fulfilled their legal obligation to provide balanced coverage, and all
contestants made use of their free airtime. At the same time, the observers
expressed their concern with the lack of impartiality of the public
administration, misuse of administrative resources, and cases of pressure on
voters; during the election day some serious violations were observed, too.
Referring to the opinions of local experts, the EOM welcomed the existence
of a freer media environment and the variety of information available,
especially on the Internet; however, the Mission also pointed out persisting
problems, including self-censorship and media ownership affecting editorial
independence.
Based on the monitoring results, conducted by the OSCE/ODIHR, the observers
specifically stressed that the studied media paid significant attention to
the elections, covered all candidates, predominately focusing on their
campaign events. (The research includes 6 national TV channels - the First
Channel of the Public Television of Armenia, Second Armenian TV Channel,
"Armenia", "Shant", "Kentron" and "Yerkir Media"; 2 radio stations - Public
Radio of Armenia and Radio "Free Europe"/Radio "Liberty" Armenian Service; 3
national dailies - state-funded "Hayastani Hanrapetutiun", "Aravot" and
"Haykakan Zhamanak" and 2 online media - www.news.am and www.1in.am.)
The EOM highlighted the statement of Yerevan Press Club of January 25, 2013,
which called upon broadcasters and presidential candidates to organize TV
debates (see YPC Weekly Newsletter, January 25-31, 2013). Some private
stations offered to do so, but the candidates, including the incumbent
President, decided not to avail themselves of this option. As a result,
voters were not given the opportunity to see meaningful exchange about the
contestants' platforms, the observers noted.
The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Election Observation Mission also considered
the lack of debates as a shortcoming of the electoral campaign. When making
their Post-Election Statement on the Presidential Elections in Armenia on
February 19 (see
http://www.oscepa.org/news-a-media/press-releases/1209-armenia-2013), the
observers stressed that the elections in Armenia represent an improvement
compared to previous presidential elections, however, they were not
genuinely competitive.
"The total lack of direct debates between candidates and a limited amount of
critical journalism limited voters' ability to compare and contrast
political platforms", emphasized the OSCE PA Election Observation Mission.
At the same time, the observers noted that the media coverage enabled voters
to inform themselves regarding the campaign, the broadcast media generally
provided balanced coverage of presidential candidates, and an array of
private media also enabled candidates to present their views and
qualifications.
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SUES "INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS"
On February 14, "Hetq" online informed about the lawsuit versus its founder,
"Investigative Journalists" NGO
(http://hetq.am/arm/news/23344/shinforumy-dati-e-tvel-hetqin-pokhhatucman-gu
mary-2-mln-dram-e.html). According to the notification that the
"Investigative Journalists" received from the Court of General Jurisdiction
of Kentron and Nork-Marash Administrative Districts of Yerevan, the lawsuit
was submitted by the "ShinForum" LLC construction company. The company,
represented by its Director Tigran Gasparian, contested two pieces published
in "Hetq": "Fatal Fraud: Tsitsernakaberd Highway Constructed with Kickbacks"
(January 26, 2013) and "Clarifications on the Article about the
Tsitsernakaberd Highway" (February 1, 2013). The Director of "ShinForum"
demanded from the "Investigative Journalists" refutation of the statements,
discrediting his business reputation, as contained in the pieces,
compensation of moral loss, caused by libel in the amount of 2 mln AMD
(about $ 4,800) and court fees of 44,000 AMD. "Hetq" also noted that after
the articles were published, the construction company did not request any
refutation or reply, "preferring to seek protection of business reputation
at court".
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
FEBRUARY 15-21, 2013
HIGHLIGHTS:
YPC MONITORING: BROADCAST MEDIA DID NOT EXHIBIT DISCRIMINATION OR OPENLY
BIASED ATTITUDE TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
INCIDENTS WITH JOURNALISTS ON BALLOT DAY
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS STATE BALANCED COVERAGE AS POSITIVE AND LACK OF TV
DEBATES AS NEGATIVE TRENDS OF ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SUES "INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS"
YPC MONITORING: BROADCAST MEDIA DID NOT EXHIBIT DISCRIMINATION OR OPENLY
BIASED ATTITUDE TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES
On February 19, in Yerevan, at Congress Hotel, Yerevan Press Club presented
the report on monitoring of Armenian broadcast media coverage of RA
presidential elections in 2013.
THE MONITORING of Armenian broadcast media coverage of RA presidential
elections in 2013 was implemented by Yerevan Press Club. Assistance to this
research was provided by OSCE Office in Yerevan within the framework of the
project "Support to Two Electoral Cycles in Armenia", financed by the
European Union. The monitoring was conducted in three stages: the first
stage covered the period of October 1 - December 15, 2012 (ahead of
pre-election promotion); the second stage covered the period of January
14-20, 2013 (in-between the official registration of the presidential
candidates and the start of the pre-election promotion); the third stage
covered the period of January 21 - February 16, 2013 (period of the
pre-election promotion).
THE RESEARCH included 6 national TV channels - the First Channel of the
Public
Television of Armenia (h1), "Armenia", "Yerkir Media", "Kentron", Second
Armenian TV Channel (h2), "Shant"; one Yerevan TV channel - "ArmNews", as
well as the Public Radio of Armenia and "ArmRadio FM 107" radio channel.
On the first and the third stages of the monitoring of the presidential
elections coverage on the abovementioned TV and radio channels, all
programmes of the evening airtime were studied (from 18:00 to 01:00),
excluding political, commercial and social advertising (for the monitoring
methodology of the third stage see the section "General Information" of the
current YPC Report at http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/). On the second
stage of the monitoring (the last week ahead of pre-election promotion) only
the main issues of news/news and comment programmes and the
social-political/discussion programmes were studied.
THE COVERAGE OF THE WHOLE 2013 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN was heavily influenced
by the non-standard political conjuncture. In a situation of unclear
intentions, when up to the official nomination of the candidates the plans
of numerous leading parties and politicians remained vague, the monitored
media were forced to focus on quite a large group of potential candidates.
Throughout the period from October 1 to December 15, 2012, 41 citizens of
Armenia were mentioned in the monitored media as potential candidates. In
terms of frequency of references in the news/news and comment programmes,
the political figures who were later registered as candidates occupied in
the list respectively the 1st place (President of Armenia Serzh Sargsian),
4th place (leader of the "Heritage" party Raffi Hovannisian), 7th place
(specialist of epic poetry Vardan Sedrakian), 8th place (leader of "National
Self-Determination" Union Paruyr Hayrikian), 19th place (leader of the
"Liberty" party Hrant Bagratian), 25th place (former Minister of Foreign
Affairs of Mountainous Karabagh Arman Melikian), and 28th place (leader of
the "National Accord" party Aram Harutiunian). Before December 15, the
eighth candidate Andrias Ghukasian, Director of Radio "Hay", has not
appeared as a potential candidate at all. It is worth noting that in the
second half of the studied period (November 21 - December 15, 2012) the
leader of "Prosperous Armenia" party Gagik Tsarukian was ahead of all other
the potential candidates in terms of frequency of references, and his name
ultimately did not appear on the list of candidates for the post of the head
of state.
Only two out of six political parties, represented in the RA National
Assembly, had their own candidates, and one of them acted as a
self-nominated candidate. Three out of six parliamentary political forces,
including those that have the second, third and fourth largest parliamentary
factions, not only did not have their own candidates, but also did not
support any of the nominated candidates. Moreover, their position regarding
the participation in elections became clear only 55-67 days before voting.
Five out of the eight registered presidential candidates either did not
represent any of the Armenian political parties, or their parties did not
play a significant role in the political life of the country during the
recent years. Such a list of candidates, naturally, did not contribute to a
meaningful coverage of "the profiles" of the presidential candidates in
advance. On the first stage of the monitoring, about 60% of coverage of the
potential candidates was received by the ones that ultimately were not
nominated. Moreover, the media were focused not so much on the suggested
programmes and positions but rather on the anticipation of decisions by
leading political players regarding their nomination as candidates. The role
of the media in preparing the audience, i.e., the citizens of Armenia to the
elections was limited in October-December 2012.
In general the broadcast media did not exhibit discrimination or openly
biased attitude to the presidential candidates. On the whole, equal
conditions were provided for introducing the electorate to the programmes
and views of the candidates and political forces supporting them. Naturally,
the voters did not receive equal amount of information about all candidates,
however this was a consequence of the capacity and the willingness of the
candidates to wage their campaigns. If at the 2012 parliamentary elections
balanced coverage was provided only during the official pre-election
promotion, this time the period preceding it can also be assessed in the
same way. Taking into account the "scattered" attention to potential
candidates, the coverage of the parties is more revealing. Thus, throughout
October-December 2012 five political forces were in the centre of attention
of Armenian broadcasters: Republican Party of Armenia, "Prosperous Armenia"
party, Armenian National Congress, Armenian Revolutionary
Federation-Dashnaktsutyun and "Heritage" party. The sixth political force,
represented in the Armenian parliament, "Orinats Yerkir" party, received
substantially less attention than the leading five did. This difference can
be explained by the level of expectation of plots in the electoral behaviour
of the parties.
At the same time, the frequent appearances of representatives of executive
authorities in news/news and comment programmes (6,337 times against 4,874
times of appearances of representatives of all parties altogether) is a sign
of information advantage of the ruling coalition in October-December 2012.
During the period of the official pre-election promotion the media,
naturally, focused on the candidates individually (hereafter for the
quantitative data of the monitoring see the current YPC Report at
http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/). The highest amount of attention was
received by the leader of the "National Self-Determination" Union Paruyr
Hayrikian, which can be explained by the intensive coverage of the events,
connected to the assassination attempt against him in the evening of January
31, as well as the ensuing period of expecting whether he would or would not
demand postponing the elections. In terms of airtime, allocated by the 9
media studied, the indicators of the incumbent President of Armenia Serzh
Sargsian, leader of the "Heritage" party Raffi Hovannisian and leader of the
"Liberty" party Hrant Bagratian were close to each other. However, according
to the frequency of references, Serzh Sargsian was significantly ahead of
Raffi Hovannisian and Hrant Bagratian, and in this respect was close to
Paruyr Hayrikian.
The candidates can be divided into two groups of four. The leading four,
both in terms of frequency of references and airtime volume, were the
abovementioned candidates, while the second group was formed by Andrias
Ghukasian, the Radio "Hay" Director, Vardan Sedrakian, who introduced
himself as specialist in epic poetry, Arman Melikian, the former Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Mountainous Karabagh, and Aram Harutiunian, the leader of
"National Accord" party. The latter, naturally, had the lowest indicators:
he withdrew his candidacy, and since February 8 the monitoring team did not
study his coverage. At the same time, it is impossible to say that the
second four candidates were neglected by the media: data reflecting the
frequency and length of their appearances on air show that even in spite of
a limited number of their pre-election events they receive an opportunity to
present their ideas to the voters. This refers also to Andrias Ghukasian,
who went on hunger-strike from the first day of the pre-election promotion
and did not hold any special pre-election events, which did not prevent him
from becoming the fifth according to frequency and volume of coverage.
At the same time, stressing the notion of "the four main candidates" in the
airtime of several broadcasters and, based on that, the planning of certain
programmes of the format "guest-in-studio", is a deviation from the formal
requirements on the coverage of pre-election promotion. Naturally, such
policy can be explained by the desire of the broadcasters to meet the
interests of the audience, but on the other hand, it can be regarded as
attempt to influence the voters.
THE BALANCE OF CONNOTATION REFERENCES to presidential hopefuls suggests that
the attitude of the society (at least its reflection in the airtime of the
media studied) was the most polarized when it came to the candidacy of Serzh
Sargsian (83 positive and 53 negative references). Overall connotation
references to the incumbent President throughout the pre-election promotion
period constituted 6.7% of all cumulative references to him by the media
studied. This is the most intensive expression of an attitude among all
candidates (Raffi Hovannisian has 2.3%, Vardan Sedrakian has 1.6%, Hrant
Bagratian has 1.4%). In general, positive references dominate over negative
ones (127 against 84).
Negative balance of references for Serzh Sargsian was recorded on "Yerkir
Media" and "Kentron" TV channels, on other studied media his balance is
positive, with the exception of the Second Armenian TV channel (one positive
and one negative reference). Raffi Hovannisian, who almost during the
complete period of the pre-election promotion was mentioned in either
neutral or positive context, received negative references during the last
days of the campaign, when Vardan Sedrakian accused him of connections with
the Masons, who, according to Sedrakian, organized the assassination attempt
against Paruyr Hayrikian. In his turn, Sedrakian himself "earned" almost all
his negative references after he suggested this hypothesis. He turned out to
be the only candidate, whose connotation references were exclusively
negative. In case of Paruyr Hayrikian and Andrias Ghukasian the references
were exclusively positive, 3 and 6 accordingly. Of all the candidates, only
Arman Melikian was covered exclusively in the neutral context.
In general, in Armenia the tendency is preserved towards the decreasing
share of connotational coverage of politicians and parties competing in the
elections. If during the pre-election promotion of the 2012 parliamentary
elections this share comprised 3.5% of the aggregate number of references on
all studied channels (which was a significant reduction compared to all
previous national election campaigns), this time it comprised 2.2%.
The coverage of activities of the incumbent President deserves attention.
During the period preceding the pre-election promotion, the media pretty
intensively covered his activities not as a candidate but as an official.
Thus, during the last week before the pre-election promotion (January 14-20)
coverage of Serzh Sargsian in the capacity of the President of Armenia
constituted 65.6% (or almost two thirds) of all cumulative airtime,
allocated to him by 9 channels studied. Moreover, on "Shant" this indicator
constituted 93.4%, and on PTA First Channel it constituted 85.3%. As a
result, Serzh Sargsian received significant information advantage against
his competitors, whose activities - not in the capacity of candidates - were
not covered in any way, with the exception of 30 seconds of coverage of
Raffi Hovannisian. Predominance of the coverage of Serzh Sargsian as
President over his coverage as candidate was recorded on 8 out of 9 media
studied. The only exception during that week was "ArmRadio", where in the
airtime, allocated to Serzh Sargsian, the share of his coverage as President
constituted only 5.4%.
However, coverage of the incumbent President in the media studied changed
dramatically with the start of the pre-election promotion. Appearances of
Serzh Sargsian in the capacity of the President within January 21 - February
16 already constituted 8.7%, remaining within the acceptable limits on all
studied channels. Moreover, as the day of the voting was getting closer, the
coverage of the incumbent President in his official capacity was becoming
less active. This fact suggests that, unlike all previous elections, to a
certain extent there is attention towards the unwritten rule, according to
which an official running for office needs to limit his public appearances
unconnected to the pre-election campaign, and media need to cover such
appearances more concisely.
At the same time, the contrast between the period directly before the
pre-election promotion and the rapid pre-election promotion itself another
time proves the necessity of regulation and monitoring of a more lengthy
period than the 4 weeks of pre-election promotion. Otherwise, it would be
difficult to talk about equal information opportunities for candidates.
THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF ATTENTION to the presidential race during the
pre-election promotion was given by "ArmNews" TV channel and "ArmRadio",
which with a large gap were followed by "Yerkir Media" and "Kentron" - the
traditional leaders in covering political life. The fact that these two
significantly lagged behind the "new leaders" can namely imply a decrease in
the level of interest of their owners towards these elections, as compared
to the parliamentary elections of 2012, when both of these channels stood
out as specifically active. This circumstance indicates a problem common for
the Armenian broadcasting sphere: while covering political processes, TV
companies are oriented toward the interests of their owners rather than the
demands of the audience.
Other studied broadcasters showed roughly the same level of activeness in
covering the electoral processes. Taking into account that 6 out of 7
channels studied (except "ArmNews") have similar broadcasting licenses, the
differences in the quantitative indexes of their attention to pre-election
processes are manifestation of the fact that there are problems in the field
of regulation of the broadcasting sphere in Armenia.
ANALYSIS OF THE LISTS OF PARTICIPANTS OF DISCUSSION PROGRAMMES of the format
"guest-in-studio" suggests an extreme deficit of pre-election debates and
clash of opinions (whether candidates themselves or their supporters). This
problem was especially strongly manifest in the context of the political
uncertainty, which existed before the registration of the candidates.
Focusing since mid-January on the coverage of the eight registered
candidates, the broadcasters to a certain extent compensated the uncertainty
and "scattered" attention, which were a consequence of the fact that
numerous names of potential presidential hopefuls were circulated in
October-December 2012. However, the minimal attention of programmes of
various profile towards pre-election platforms of the presidential hopefuls
(except Hrant Bagratian, none of the candidates was stressing his specific
platform provisions) limited the opportunity for an informed and conscious
choice by Armenian citizens. In essence, the statements of the candidates in
pre-election promotion videos, pre-election meetings and press conferences,
even in TV and radio interviews were repeating each other.
Perhaps the absence of debates remains the main problem of coverage of the
pre-election promotion by the broadcasting media of Armenia. This issue was
more vividly apparent in the specific political conjuncture, which emerged
in Armenia in the run-up to the current presidential elections.
The current, as well as the previous interim reports on monitoring the
coverage of 2013 presidential elections are available at
http://www.ypc.am/media_research/ln/eng.
INCIDENTS WITH JOURNALISTS ON BALLOT DAY
On February 18, on the voting day of RA presidential elections, attempts to
harass and impede the activities of journalists were observed.
Particularly, at about 16.00 at the 17/5 precinct of Artashat, Ararat
region, an incident occurred with the journalist Artak Hambardzumian,
representative of "Journalists for Human Rights" NGO. Some unknown men
pinioned the journalist's arms and took him aside so that he has no
possibility to record the ballot stuffing.
Over 19.00, at Khorenatsi street of Yerevan, a group of people, standing at
the electoral headquarters of the presidential candidate, incumbent
President Serzh Sargsian, prohibited the entry of Marineh Kharatian,
correspondent of "1in.am" news portal, and Gayaneh Saribekian, correspondent
of "Hraparak" daily. Afterwards, they took away the video and photo cameras
from the journalists and forced them to leave (later the devices were
returned to the journalists).
"These facts come to prove once again that whenever there are political
tensions in Armenia, the pressure and violence against media, as a rule,
exacerbate", emphasized the statement of some journalistic and human rights
NGOs, released on February 20.
"The state authorities, especially the law enforcement bodies, usually
overlook such kinds of incidents and instead of revealing and punishing the
insulters, they come up with strange "arguments" for withdrawing the cases.
Meanwhile, impunity leads to new transgressions.
We, the undersigned, express our concern regarding the cases of violence
against the journalists, who covered the elections, and demand the
authorities to take immediate measures for conducting a thorough and
objective investigation and bring the insulters to account", said the
statement, which was signed by the Committee to Protect Freedom of
Expression, Yerevan Press Club, "Asparez" Journalists Club, Internews Media
Support NGO, Media Diversity Institute-Armenia, "Journalists for Human
Rights" NGO, Goris Press Club, "Journalists for the Future" NGO, "EcoLur",
Helsinki Committee of Armenia, Vanazdor Office of Helsinki Citizen's
Assembly, "Rule of Law" NGO, "Yerashkhik" Civil Society Center, "Public
Information and Need of Knowledge" NGO and "Agat" NGO.
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS STATE BALANCED COVERAGE AS POSITIVE AND LACK OF TV
DEBATES AS NEGATIVE TRENDS OF ELECTORAL CAMPAIGN
On February 19, the International Election Observation Mission (OSCE/ODIHR,
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European
Parliament) released the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions
about the Armenian presidential elections, held on the eve (see
http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/99676). According to the observers, "the
election was generally well-administered and was characterized by a respect
for fundamental freedoms": contestants were able to campaign freely, media
fulfilled their legal obligation to provide balanced coverage, and all
contestants made use of their free airtime. At the same time, the observers
expressed their concern with the lack of impartiality of the public
administration, misuse of administrative resources, and cases of pressure on
voters; during the election day some serious violations were observed, too.
Referring to the opinions of local experts, the EOM welcomed the existence
of a freer media environment and the variety of information available,
especially on the Internet; however, the Mission also pointed out persisting
problems, including self-censorship and media ownership affecting editorial
independence.
Based on the monitoring results, conducted by the OSCE/ODIHR, the observers
specifically stressed that the studied media paid significant attention to
the elections, covered all candidates, predominately focusing on their
campaign events. (The research includes 6 national TV channels - the First
Channel of the Public Television of Armenia, Second Armenian TV Channel,
"Armenia", "Shant", "Kentron" and "Yerkir Media"; 2 radio stations - Public
Radio of Armenia and Radio "Free Europe"/Radio "Liberty" Armenian Service; 3
national dailies - state-funded "Hayastani Hanrapetutiun", "Aravot" and
"Haykakan Zhamanak" and 2 online media - www.news.am and www.1in.am.)
The EOM highlighted the statement of Yerevan Press Club of January 25, 2013,
which called upon broadcasters and presidential candidates to organize TV
debates (see YPC Weekly Newsletter, January 25-31, 2013). Some private
stations offered to do so, but the candidates, including the incumbent
President, decided not to avail themselves of this option. As a result,
voters were not given the opportunity to see meaningful exchange about the
contestants' platforms, the observers noted.
The OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Election Observation Mission also considered
the lack of debates as a shortcoming of the electoral campaign. When making
their Post-Election Statement on the Presidential Elections in Armenia on
February 19 (see
http://www.oscepa.org/news-a-media/press-releases/1209-armenia-2013), the
observers stressed that the elections in Armenia represent an improvement
compared to previous presidential elections, however, they were not
genuinely competitive.
"The total lack of direct debates between candidates and a limited amount of
critical journalism limited voters' ability to compare and contrast
political platforms", emphasized the OSCE PA Election Observation Mission.
At the same time, the observers noted that the media coverage enabled voters
to inform themselves regarding the campaign, the broadcast media generally
provided balanced coverage of presidential candidates, and an array of
private media also enabled candidates to present their views and
qualifications.
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SUES "INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISTS"
On February 14, "Hetq" online informed about the lawsuit versus its founder,
"Investigative Journalists" NGO
(http://hetq.am/arm/news/23344/shinforumy-dati-e-tvel-hetqin-pokhhatucman-gu
mary-2-mln-dram-e.html). According to the notification that the
"Investigative Journalists" received from the Court of General Jurisdiction
of Kentron and Nork-Marash Administrative Districts of Yerevan, the lawsuit
was submitted by the "ShinForum" LLC construction company. The company,
represented by its Director Tigran Gasparian, contested two pieces published
in "Hetq": "Fatal Fraud: Tsitsernakaberd Highway Constructed with Kickbacks"
(January 26, 2013) and "Clarifications on the Article about the
Tsitsernakaberd Highway" (February 1, 2013). The Director of "ShinForum"
demanded from the "Investigative Journalists" refutation of the statements,
discrediting his business reputation, as contained in the pieces,
compensation of moral loss, caused by libel in the amount of 2 mln AMD
(about $ 4,800) and court fees of 44,000 AMD. "Hetq" also noted that after
the articles were published, the construction company did not request any
refutation or reply, "preferring to seek protection of business reputation
at court".
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