EurasiaNet Civil Society - Azerbaijan: Television is a Campaign Battleground

CIVIL SOCIETY

AZERBAIJAN: TELEVISION IS A CAMPAIGN BATTLEGROUND
Rufat Abbasov and Mina Muradova 10/28/05

With Azerbaijan’s November 6 parliamentary vote just a week away, a battle between pro-government and pro-opposition media groups over television access is raging at full force. Opposition candidates claim that they have been blocked from television broadcasts, while pro-government candidates claim that the opposition is using television to promote revolution. Meanwhile, independent experts and monitoring groups report that political bias and smear tactics characterize all campaign coverage, regardless of the outlet’s political leanings.

Censorship has headlined the charges brought by the opposition against state-run or affiliated television channels. At an October 23 press conference, Popular Front Party Chairman Ali Kerimli claimed that state broadcaster AzTV and public television were both denying airtime to the leaders of the Azadlig (Freedom) bloc, which comprises the Popular Front Party, Musavat Party and Democratic Party of Azerbaijan.

Such claims have become increasingly frequent since October 17, the day initially planned for the return of exiled opposition leader Rasul Guliyev, chairman of the Democratic Party. Two cabinet ministers and several top government officials have since been arrested and charged with plotting a coup together with Guliyev. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

On October 17, Central Election Commission Chairman Mazahir Panahov told reporters that the Commission had decided to ask television stations, radio channels and newspapers to not disseminate remarks deemed incendiary. "It has reached the point whereby some candidates have even called for the overthrow of the current system and the abolition of the constitutional order via some TV channels," ANS reported Panahov as saying. "They have directly urged the public and the Azerbaijani people to take to the streets, which is totally inadmissible, as you know."

That same day, Azadlig members were not allowed to make live broadcasts on AzTV. An official reason for the decision, however, was not given. The bloc has appealed the action to the Central Election Commission.

Authorities have rejected the opposition’s complaints as groundless. Political parties with more than 60 candidates are entitled to free airtime on state-funded television. But candidates cannot appear in political debates on television channels that are financed from the state budget.

Other opposition complaints have focused on the suspension of programs broadcast by satellite Azadlig TV, the first opposition television channel, which began broadcasting on September 27. According to Azadlig newspaper, a publication associated with the opposition bloc, the broadcast of Azadlig TV in Azerbaijan was blocked after Guliyev was interviewed by the channel on October 1. No public information exists about the channel’s registration or its source of financing. Some media experts have said that authorities used special jamming signals to cut off the broadcast.

The political stakes involved in television broadcasts are sizeable. A media monitoring project done by the Najaf Najafov Fund, a local non-governmental organization, reported that 88 percent of Baku’s residents and 93 percent of the population outside of the capital name television as their main source of information. There are six national television and five radio companies operating in Azerbaijan. Two of them, including public television, are funded from the state budget. The rest are privately owned and funded companies, but often with certain political or business interests, the report claims.

"The majority of media organizations have lost their independence and this factor widely affects their news coverage," said project coordinator Samir Ismailov. "Most media reports are one-sided and unbalanced and meet the interests of candidates from one or another political camp."

Ismailov added that the situation is worse in the regions, where the 12 television and radio companies in operation often lack the resources for adequate coverage of the elections.

"News coverage on regional TV is worse than on the national channels," commented Ismailov. "They produce very few media reports about the election campaign in the regions and mostly re-transmit programs of television broadcasts from the capital. There are no analytical programs or talk shows." Many of the regional television stations are even set up by people close to the local executive committees that govern each region, he added.

Troubles encountered by media companies on the national level are often played out at the local level. On October 1, about 50 people staged a picket in the northern town of Sheki against the closure of a station run by ANS CM Radio, part of the private ANS television and radio company, a frequent target of complaints by the National TV and Radio Council (NTRC). The local radio studio was closed down under instructions from the head of the Sheki district executive authorities on the basis of a letter from the NTRC.

At an October 4 press conference, NTRC Chairman Nusiravan Maharramli said that the station was broadcasting illegally since it did not have a special license. Though opposition publications have portrayed the closure as an attempt to curtail freedom of speech, Maharramli argued that technical reasons alone were the cause. At the same time, he accused ANS CM and ANS TV of carrying out a "campaign of slander" against him. Warned Maharramli: "This may result in harsh consequences for them."

The Sheki struggle captured the attention of the international community. "Objective information is very important at the moment at least to enable citizens to make a right choice in the November parliamentary election," US Ambassador Reno Harnish said on October 3. He described the closure of radio stations as an obstacle to the development of democracy. "This [closure] is the creation of [a] monopoly in the alternative information sphere. We know that attempts were made to use this method during the Soviet time. I think that the NTRC should pay major attention to the regional studio to ensure that the problems of the Sheki people are heard and covered."

Regardless of their political affiliation, both pro-government and pro-opposition media have made use of "black PR" to cast aspersion on their rivals, the Najaf Najafov Fund’s monthly monitoring project, "Parliament Elections as a Reflection of Mass Media," reports. The monitoring, which began in May, evaluates the objectivity of news coverage broadcast and published by a variety of media outlets in Azerbaijan.

The report claims that pro-government stations are responsible for the bulk of black PR; in particular, Lider (Leader) TV and the state-owned AzTV (Channel 1). At the same time, newspapers are the domain of black PR that favors the opposition. The Najaf Najafov Fund report found that Baki Xabar, Azadlig, Yeni Musavat and Bisim Yol are overtly pro-opposition newspapers, which rely primarily on hearsay and anonymous sources rather than facts for their articles.

International organizations and journalist rights watchdogs say that the parliamentary election campaign has raised concerns about the objectivity of information available to voters. "Campaign rhetoric is often heated and negative, reflecting a polarized political atmosphere," according to a September 23 report published by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights’s election observation mission.

Although Azerbaijani media organizations signed a Code of Ethics for coverage of election campaigns in July, both pro-governmental and pro-opposition media outlets still use unethical methods of news coverage, journalists say. The code was signed on the initiative of the Council of Europe and aimed to promote independent and constructive news coverage of the forthcoming elections.

"We are trying to eliminate the policy of ’black PR,’ and we have already seen a little progress," said Zeynal Mammadli, a member of the Press Council and head of a group of local experts sponsored by the Council of Europe to monitor election coverage. The publication of the results of weekly monitoring performed by the group has coincided with a decline in media violations of the Code of Ethics, Mammadli said. "However, we should not relax our vigilance."

Mammadli listed the main violations of the Code as one-sided and unbalanced news coverage, slander and use of news programs for political advertisements. "Every time after a demonstration by the opposition, pro-government TV channels do not adhere to the principle of balanced and accurate news coverage and reporters do not control their own opinions," Mammadli said.

The Council of Europe group reports that Lider TV and the state-owned AzTV have the highest number of violations of the code among TV channels. The pro-government newspapers Ses, Bakinski Rabochiy, Azerbaijan, Respublika and Khalg Gazeti and the privately owned, pro-opposition Yeni Musavat, Hurriet, Tezadlar and Rating newspapers have the highest number of violations among print media.

Reports on public television, which started broadcasting on August 29, appear less biased, however, said the Najaf Najafov Fund’s Ismailov. "Free airtime on public TV is being distributed [to parties and blocs] as required by law. They give airtime to both pro-government and pro-opposition parties and blocs," Ismailov said. However, many experts lamented the fact that there are no political debates or talk shows related to the elections on public television.

Editor�s Note: Rufat Abbasov and Mina Muradova are freelance journalists based in Baku.

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.