Ro
En
Рy
The report released by the Association of Independent Press (API) on March 15, in Chisinau, contains a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mass media NAP implementation for the December 2017 - February 2018 period. Its authors, media experts Ion Bunduchi and Aneta Gonţa, were concerned that the new NAP, currently being finalized, proposed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration (MFAEI), does not contain consistent proposals on the written and online press. According to the experts, this shows a total lack of interest of the authorities towards these media segments.
„Mass media is perceived only from the broadcasting perspective, separated from other social institutions”, stated Ion Bunduchi.
Aneta Gonta added that it is necessary to extend the number of institutions responsible for the drafting of the the NAP because naming only the Broadcast Coordinating Council as the responsible party in most actions is insufficient. "In these activities, including the review, involve more important actors - the legislature, the government, public authorities, academia, relevant university departments".
MFAEI Representative Maia Cuceaidze, present at the launching event of the report, voiced her hope that by the end of March 2018 the new NAP will be finalized and approved by the government.
The authors of the monitoring report reached the following conclusions:
• The partial impact on the state of the broadcast field is due, in fact, to unplanned actions and not, as it should, to the planned ones;
• the proposals for the revision of the NAP on the media segment, again, concern only the broadcasting, written and online media remaining outside the state's concerns;
• there is a risk for the NAP mass media component not to contain certain actions, which other entities could commit to and implement besides the BCC, as the legislature, certain ministries, certain autonomous public authorities, academia or relevant non-governmental organizations;
• the media component of the NAP is viewed / perceived as something separate from other social institutes, which reveals an inappropriate approach to the problem.
Here are the main recommendations made by experts:
• The media component of the NAP, should be revised and supplemented with actions covering the entire media sector;
• all major actors should be involved in the review of the media component of the NAP: the legislature, the government, certain autonomous public authorities, academia, non-governmental organizations, etc.;
• the media should be perceived not as a separate sector, but as a social institute that interacts with other social institutes and influences each other.
