Ro
En
Рy11 June 2015
1405 reads
The third local election media coverage monitoring Report that was presented on Thursday, June 11, revealed a slight improvement in TV coverage, as greater impartiality, objectivity, pluralism, diversity and balance of sources were ensured. The online media though have continued the aggressive coverage and promotion of election runners. The report prepared by the Independent Journalism Center covers the period May 31 - June 7.
Nadine Gogu, IJC director, presented the report data on Moldova 1, Prime TV, Canal 2, TV 7 and Accent TV. The analysis of statistical data and of the contents of the Moldova 1 and TV 7 broadcasts showed that these TV channels had a "correct, balanced, fair behavior". There was no overt favoring or disfavoring of any election runner. Moldova 1 aired most electoral news. TV7 featured and mentioned Liberal Democrat runners most, mostly in a positive context; however, the balance of sources has not been ensured. The private TV station, Prime TV and Canal 2, had, in general, "the same editorial policy, the same sources, the same angle", and broadcast, with few exceptions, "carbon copy news". However, the authors noted "a change of editorial policy at these two TV channels, namely there were fewer stories in which the Democrats talked about their accomplishments or came up with solutions to the problems faced by their communities". The number of biased news dropped if compared to the previous monitoring period, and the news were balanced, by and large. The Democrats continued to enjoy most access to air time; they were featured mostly in a positive context. Still, according to the report, there was no big discrepancy between the Democrats and other election runners – they were featured and mentioned in about the same number of news. "In conclusion, Prime TV and Canal 2 favored the Democrats slightly", said Nadine Gogu. Other election runners were mostly featured in a neutral or negative context. As for Accent TV, the monitoring showed, as it has happened before, that there were problems with ensuring impartiality and objectivity; they broadcast "biased news, in which the authors either did not distinguish facts from opinions or acted as experts sometimes". Accent TV showed the Socialists in a positive light, while only mentioning – exclusively in a negative context – the Liberals.
Online media behavior was described by media expert Petru Macovei, who informed that "3 of the 5 monitored web portals, namely OMG.MD, PUBLIKA.MD and partly PAN.MD, have been promoting actively the political agendas of certain election runners, reflecting the election campaign in a selective – and sometimes distorted – manner, and thus disfavored other election runners by not featuring them, not mentioning them in their publications, while featuring their favorites in every minute detail". In the expert's opinion, UNIMEDIA.INFO performed best: during the monitoring period, they ensured most diversity in covering election runners, including the ones running for Chisinau mayor. As for the other portals, OMG.MD covered a small number of candidates, heavily disadvantaging the Democrats, while often covering the Liberal Democrats, Liberals and Communists mostly in a negative light. At the same time, OMG.MD has been actively promoting Partidul Nostru (Our Party) – 13 of the 14 publications regarding this party presented them in a positive context.
PAN.MD has also been selective in covering the election campaign. They have not covered all election runners and criticized fervently the ruling parties. "The Liberal Democrats and Democrats were mostly featured in a negative context. The Communists were mentioned either in a neutral or negative context; PAN.MD often criticizes them. On the other hand, Partidul Nostru (Our Party) and the Socialist Party were almost always mentioned in a positive context". Petru Macovei also said that during a week of monitoring, PUBLIKA.MD has been promoting the Democrats intensely, while all other candidates are almost non-existent on the website. "PUBLIKA.MD features the Democrats from various communities, attempting to provide them massive support by selecting only positive news about the election runners through interviews and user blog posts. Many of these materials are biased and are essentially campaigning materials or concealed advertising".
With regard to TIMPUL.MD, it was found that in the few materials that have been published the Liberal Party was featured in a negative context, but in general there was no favoring or disfavoring of certain election runners.
"Headlines can also be used as campaigning tools; headlines can also be used to manipulate the audience", concluded Ion Bunduchi, who has analyzed some 80 headlines of election-related materials aired by four TV stations (Prime, Canal 2, Accent TV and TV7). As the headline should give the gist of the subject matter, "the wording of the headlines can be a strong manipulation tool", said the expert. He gave numerous examples of such headlines published by the monitored TV stations. He classified them into three groups: "Headline Trouble", "Headline Parade", and "Clumsy Headlines". According to the expert, "some headlines were aptly used for campaigning for certain election runners". In conclusion, Ion Bunduchi said that "headlines can also be used as campaigning tools; headlines can also be used to manipulate the audience". It happened at least two stations - Prime and Canal 2. Accent TV did it less, and TV7 did not have such headlines at all", said the expert.
Nadine Gogu, IJC director, presented the report data on Moldova 1, Prime TV, Canal 2, TV 7 and Accent TV. The analysis of statistical data and of the contents of the Moldova 1 and TV 7 broadcasts showed that these TV channels had a "correct, balanced, fair behavior". There was no overt favoring or disfavoring of any election runner. Moldova 1 aired most electoral news. TV7 featured and mentioned Liberal Democrat runners most, mostly in a positive context; however, the balance of sources has not been ensured. The private TV station, Prime TV and Canal 2, had, in general, "the same editorial policy, the same sources, the same angle", and broadcast, with few exceptions, "carbon copy news". However, the authors noted "a change of editorial policy at these two TV channels, namely there were fewer stories in which the Democrats talked about their accomplishments or came up with solutions to the problems faced by their communities". The number of biased news dropped if compared to the previous monitoring period, and the news were balanced, by and large. The Democrats continued to enjoy most access to air time; they were featured mostly in a positive context. Still, according to the report, there was no big discrepancy between the Democrats and other election runners – they were featured and mentioned in about the same number of news. "In conclusion, Prime TV and Canal 2 favored the Democrats slightly", said Nadine Gogu. Other election runners were mostly featured in a neutral or negative context. As for Accent TV, the monitoring showed, as it has happened before, that there were problems with ensuring impartiality and objectivity; they broadcast "biased news, in which the authors either did not distinguish facts from opinions or acted as experts sometimes". Accent TV showed the Socialists in a positive light, while only mentioning – exclusively in a negative context – the Liberals.
Online media behavior was described by media expert Petru Macovei, who informed that "3 of the 5 monitored web portals, namely OMG.MD, PUBLIKA.MD and partly PAN.MD, have been promoting actively the political agendas of certain election runners, reflecting the election campaign in a selective – and sometimes distorted – manner, and thus disfavored other election runners by not featuring them, not mentioning them in their publications, while featuring their favorites in every minute detail". In the expert's opinion, UNIMEDIA.INFO performed best: during the monitoring period, they ensured most diversity in covering election runners, including the ones running for Chisinau mayor. As for the other portals, OMG.MD covered a small number of candidates, heavily disadvantaging the Democrats, while often covering the Liberal Democrats, Liberals and Communists mostly in a negative light. At the same time, OMG.MD has been actively promoting Partidul Nostru (Our Party) – 13 of the 14 publications regarding this party presented them in a positive context.
PAN.MD has also been selective in covering the election campaign. They have not covered all election runners and criticized fervently the ruling parties. "The Liberal Democrats and Democrats were mostly featured in a negative context. The Communists were mentioned either in a neutral or negative context; PAN.MD often criticizes them. On the other hand, Partidul Nostru (Our Party) and the Socialist Party were almost always mentioned in a positive context". Petru Macovei also said that during a week of monitoring, PUBLIKA.MD has been promoting the Democrats intensely, while all other candidates are almost non-existent on the website. "PUBLIKA.MD features the Democrats from various communities, attempting to provide them massive support by selecting only positive news about the election runners through interviews and user blog posts. Many of these materials are biased and are essentially campaigning materials or concealed advertising".
With regard to TIMPUL.MD, it was found that in the few materials that have been published the Liberal Party was featured in a negative context, but in general there was no favoring or disfavoring of certain election runners.
"Headlines can also be used as campaigning tools; headlines can also be used to manipulate the audience", concluded Ion Bunduchi, who has analyzed some 80 headlines of election-related materials aired by four TV stations (Prime, Canal 2, Accent TV and TV7). As the headline should give the gist of the subject matter, "the wording of the headlines can be a strong manipulation tool", said the expert. He gave numerous examples of such headlines published by the monitored TV stations. He classified them into three groups: "Headline Trouble", "Headline Parade", and "Clumsy Headlines". According to the expert, "some headlines were aptly used for campaigning for certain election runners". In conclusion, Ion Bunduchi said that "headlines can also be used as campaigning tools; headlines can also be used to manipulate the audience". It happened at least two stations - Prime and Canal 2. Accent TV did it less, and TV7 did not have such headlines at all", said the expert.
