You are here

The IJC Monitoring Report: Tendentious Headlines Frequently Used by Some Media Institutions

24 May 2021
906 reads
During the first months of this year, tendentious headlines have become more and more frequently formulated by several media institutions monitored by the Independent Journalism Center (IJC), whereas the number of labels in news decreased. However, some newsrooms still cover issues of public interest in terms of their political preferences, judging by an increase in cases of information blurring, according to the organization’s latest monitoring report published on Monday, May 24. 

The monitoring analyzes the way 12 TV channels and information portals covered five events of public interest from February 15 to May 15: the decision of the Constitutional Court (CC) on Natalia Gavrilita’s repeated appointment as the prime minister; political consultations between President Maia Sandu and the parliamentary parties to identify a candidate for the post of the prime minister; establishing a state of emergency in March this year; the decision of the Constitutional Court on the dissolution of the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova; establishment of the PSRM-PCRM electoral bloc.

The 12 monitored media institutions were selected on the basis of the following criteria: coverage area (national), content broadcasting languages (Romanian and Russian), and impact (circulation and audience).

According to the report, the most common breaches are mixing facts and opinions and the failure to ensure the right to reply for mentioned or accused persons; they are followed by selective presentation of information and/or statements, generalization, and referring to unverifiable sources. Tendentious headlines have started to be used more often during this period of time, while labels have almost disappeared from the list of deontological breaches.

Simultaneously, during the three months of monitoring, a noticeable increase in cases of blurred information was detected; according to the researcher Victor Gotisan, the reason is “some media institutions’ tendency to reduce the importance of a particular topic of public interest and/or omit statements by the politicians or political parties not included in their political preferences.” Therefore, “subsequently, editorial boards tend to quote the representatives of the political parties they support, almost entirely ignoring statements by the exponents of the parties they dislike. For this very reason, politicization of topics takes place,” the author of the research concludes. 

The author of the research recommends journalists to report facts fairly, to verify the information, and to present it completely, without applying selective approach or blurring information due to political preferences. At the same time, the Broadcasting Council is recommended to use its own initiative and to monitor TV channels after being notified that they broadcast manipulative information. Press consumers should also use several media sources in order to avoid the risk of disinformation. 

The monitoring report on propaganda, disinformation, and breaches of deontological standards in the local media space can be read on the Media Azi and Mediacritica portals.
________________________
This report is made possible by the generous support of the American and British people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and UK Aid. The contents are the responsibility of the Independent Journalism Center (IJC) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the UK Aid, USAID, or the United States Government.