You are here

Usurped journalism: the common sense without audience in Moldova

20 October 2015
1078 reads
 

Vitalie CALUGAREANU
Deutsche Welle journalist

On Friday, certain articles were issued in the mass media, clearly showing how much the „maintenance” of an analyst who serves the interests of a certain political party costs - 384 787 MDL (17063 Euro). For this amount, a certain “analyst” played with the public opinion for quite a while, spread lies and even found arguments to back them up – as if he generated value judgments, which would help the viewer better understand the socio-political phenomena undermining the society.

 We pay „analysts”. Where's the harm in that?”
The “analyst” paid with 384 787 MDL was serving the interests of the Liberal Democratic Party of Moldova (PLDM), and the accounting document posted on the Internet (which is evidence in a judicial case) reveals the names of certain media institutions sponsored by the same party. It seems though that PLDM is not the leader when it comes to subordinating the mass media. On October 17, “ziarulnational.md” published a declaration of Marian Lupu - the leader of the Democratic Party (PD), where he admitted that PD “has enough analysts” who can appear on cameras “and comment on various topics”. And he is wondering: “Where's the harm in that? Everybody has analysts!”

Other “troubadours” with expressive faces are included in this list. Their role is to pass the ball to the mercenaries dubbed “political analysts”. Usually, these are employed in different editorial offices as journalists, editors, producers or show moderators. Lately, the leaders of the parties took up the habit of hiring a bag-carrier who synchronizes the analysts with the vassal journalists. Periodically, our moderators and talk-show producers are given lists of “analysts” that must be invited to shows (to earn their money) and lists with public persons, which must never appear in such shows. The lists are different depending on the TV channel and the party served.

“Prowlers” and “lice” have their part to play
There is one more category (but not the least) of shoeblacks who eat from the parties’ hand - the vassal bloggers. The parties call them “prowlers”. They make online manipulation possible. Their mission is to spread gossips, to create expectations, commotion on the Internet. Sometimes they are sent some documents to post on their blogs, as if obtaining them is the result of their work.
Bloggers “maintenance” does not cost much. Some of them are satisfied with a tablet, others with a phone, with a scholarship to study abroad or a voucher for a trip to the sea. We can’t talk about principles here.

The forth category are nicked the “lice”- because there is a lot of them. Usually they are the members of the youth organizations of the parties. Their role is to contest every negative statement about the party, published on the Internet. These people infiltrate into friends lists of public persons on social networks, keep watch over and report about the information posted and when a post is about the party, they react and defend it. Their reactions are most of the times rough and vulgar. They want the leaders to hear about their feat, if possible, because their remuneration and, maybe, the progress up the ladder, from “lice” to “prowlers”, depends on it.

In critical circumstances, in order to send a strong message, with an immediate impact and effect, the parties turn to so-called “VIP- analysts”. These are surnamed “international political analysts” and they can be from USA, Russia or Romania. Some of them, compromised in other countries, have been “imported” to Moldova, warts and all. They were showered, make up applied on their faces and put in front of the cameras. Their messages aim at manipulating the elite. Those who remained abroad, are seldom called in, not because of the costs (though it can be a reason), but avoid compromising their image involving them in insignificant and daily routine topics. That is why it is very difficult (if you do not keep an eye on political changes) to separate the ones from abroad who address Moldova’s realities on their own account.

Solutions
Generally, the Moldovan journalism and media have been usurped. The population is almost exclusively given false information, and the journalists who remained loyal to their principles either work “for export” (in the best case) or changed their profession, or live in poverty. There could be a solution. The problem is that in Moldova, a journalist can be everyone with an identity card that says “press”. This type of document is not issued by a competent authority - I do not mean a state institution. God forbid! In Germany, for example, a journalist’s identity card is issued by the journalists' trade union. The same union is entitled to withdraw the identity card if the journalist gave up his professional freedom. We do not have such a trade union. Actually, we do. More than one. I do not mean formal institutions. This way anyone can be a journalist.

There is a solution for media institutions, as well: the press patronage should undertake the principles which underlie true journalism. Only in this case, we will be able to say that we have an honest media business, to say that in Moldova the media is a business, too, which sells, because the audience brings advertising, money. But the business cannot and is not allowed to eliminate journalism ethics. Only when the patronage identifies itself with the politics and comes to dictate according to the interests of a specific group, we deal with the usurpation of journalism.

 
The article was published within the Advocacy Campaigns Aimed at Improving Transparency of Media Ownership, Access to Information and promotion of EU values  and integration project, implemented by the IJC, which is, in its turn, part of the Moldova Partnerships for Sustainable Civil Society project, implemented by FHI 360.This article is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The content are the responsibility of author and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.