EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Armenian Opposition: TV Campaign Ad Prices a Political Handicap

EURASIA INSIGHT

ARMENIAN OPPOSITION: TV CAMPAIGN AD PRICES A POLITICAL HANDICAP
Marianna Grigoryan 2/14/07

As Armenia’s parliamentary election campaign takes shape, opposition parties are crying foul after public and private television broadcasters set what leading government critics consider to be exorbitantly high prices for campaign ads.

One minute of airtime will cost candidates and political parties about $225 (80,000 drams) on public television and as much as approximately $366 (130,000 drams) per minute on private television stations. The parliamentary election will be held May 12. The prices are more than double the approximate $120 per minute charged during Armenia’s 2003 parliamentary elections. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Armenia’s election law grants political parties an hour of free airtime on state television and two hours on state radio during the campaign season. Parties must pay for any airtime over that limit. A 5-million-dram (roughly $14,000) limit set on each candidate’s campaign spending could pose an additional obstacle for opposition parties. Assuming no other campaign expenses, each candidate would only have enough money to pay for about one hour of advertising during the campaign, based on the current pricing structure.

Opposition politicians claim that the rates are designed to keep their views off the air. "Such prices are the greatest disgrace," said Arshak Saroyan, representative of the parliamentary faction for the National Democratic Bloc "It is done only to prevent the opposition from being seen in the field. Pro-government politicians always appear on television on this or that occasion, but opposition members are rarely given that opportunity."

The opposition Ardarutyun (Justice) parliamentary faction secretary, Grigor Harutyunian, seconds that position, arguing that pro-government parties favor higher prices because they have greater means of communicating their political messages to the people. "All financial resources are in the hands of the authorities. The opposition has no such possibilities," Harutyunian said.

According to Armenia’s Election Code, television companies were to announce their prices for campaign ads by February 11. "We have set the prices and we don’t think they are high for political ads," said Ruzanna Stepanyan, a spokesperson for ALM Holding, which runs television stations throughout Armenia. "If some parties want to boycott television, let them do it."

Public television management maintains that their prices are competitive compared with other options, though television officials provided no explanation as to how the prices were set. "I cannot speak about the price-setting mechanisms, as it is a very complicated issue," Public Television Deputy Executive Director Gnel Nalbandian said at a February 13 roundtable in Yerevan on media coverage of the elections. "But this price was decided, and it [public television’s price] is 40-50 percent lower than the price of other TV companies."

One prominent opposition leader has said that his party will not air ads on public television, saying that to do so would cost the party voter sympathy. "We consider it immoral when 70 percent of the population lives a half-starved life and you ignore them and pay that sum for one minute of airtime to talk about their being hungry," Artashes Geghamian, leader of the National Unity Party, stated recently in parliament. The opposition Hanrapetutyun (Republic) Party has also called for a boycott of television advertising.

But Galust Sahakyan, head of the parliamentary faction of the governing Republican Party of Armenia (HHK), has dismissed the contention that the prices are part of a campaign to weaken the opposition’s chances at the polls.

"People think that they don’t need to have anything but their clever thoughts and that they should come to power, but there is no such thing," Sahakyan told legislators in response. "If you don’t have either political or financial capital, but have good thoughts, you can write books. Or, if you have no money, don’t use the airtime on television, use your own feet, go to the villages, and communicate with people directly."

Opposition members say that they are ready to campaign in villages, but that an "unfavorable" situation awaits them there as well. To date, only 11 out of 29 regional television companies have posted prices for campaign ads. Some have said they have no plans to allocate airtime for campaign ads, while others have not given a reason for not posting prices.

"I don’t provide airtime for political ads. It was my decision and there was no pressure," said Margarita Minasian, chairperson of the Tsayg television company, based in Armenia’s northern Shirak region. "Not providing airtime for political ads does not mean that there will be nothing about politics on our air. We have � programs during which we will invite politicians and there will be discussions."

Some pro-opposition analysts argue that providing no airtime for ads already implies that there will be shadow advertisement and that TV companies will carry out a pre-determined policy. According to them, such a decision comes from pressure from "above."

"These are mechanisms the government uses to present their favorite candidates to the audience," said Suren Surenyants, a political analyst from the opposition Hanrapetutyun Party.

Meanwhile, international watchdogs are taking note of developments. Commenting on the high prices for political ads at a February 13 press conference in Yerevan, Bojana Urumova, special representative in Armenia for the Council of Europe’s Secretary General, told reporters that "[i]t is a circumstance for observers to take into account."

Editor�s Note: Marianna Grigoryan is a reporter for the Armenianow.com weekly in Yerevan.

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.