Ro
En
Рy20 May 2015
1291 reads
Aneta GROSU, editor in chief, Ziarul de Garda
The international organization Freedom House stated within an annual report, that in 2014, Moldova remained, just like in 2013, in the category of world countries with partly free press. The report ranks Moldova 188 out of 199 countries, included in this research. At the same time, a simple comparison shows that, in 2014, Moldova made six steps backwards, as compared to 2013, when the same organization ranked it 112 in the world as regards the press freedom index. Usually, the main criteria underpinning the placement of one or another country in the category of “free”, “partly free” to “not free” press countries are: legal environment, namely the drafting and adoption of laws and legal regulations that can influence the media content and support authorities to use these laws to the detriment of the free press activity, political influence, specifically the political control over the information and the economic pressure, in other words, the economic barriers faced by the media institutions.
What meant those six steps made backwards? What does this regression mean for our press beneficiaries?
First of all, this demonstrates that the society believes less that the media, is indeed, the fourth power in the state. As long as people expect the authorities to react to the articles published in newspapers, on TV and Radio, addressing the society’s complicated problems, and this does not happen or happens only as a formality, their conviction that the press is a true power is destroyed and their confidence, yet, is much more difficult to restore.
The officials targeted in the articles about corruption are pleased that their colleagues from the government, by avoiding reacting, are “covering” their sins
Each week, Ziarul de Garda receives plenty of letters or phone calls where we are being asked how did the authorities react on subjects such as the undeclared wealth of some officials or the files framed-up in certain courts of law, the auctions rigged within some state institutions or on the articles about the state profiteers, beneficiaries of millions from the budget. What should we answer them? We used to tell that we also look forward to know the reactions of the institutions responsible for the investigation of such issues. Nevertheless, we continue we to wait in vain, the readers get tired of asking us the same questions, and the officials approached in the articles about corruption rejoice because their colleagues from the government avoid giving a reaction and “cover” their sins. And other media institutions, the few from Moldova that are not politically or economically dependent on parties or mediocre economic agents, face a similar situation, even if a professional study on this subject was not yet carried out. In such circumstances, the press can not be classified as free, but at most partly free, fact that corresponds to the conclusions of the Freedom House recent report.
The press consumers’ confidence loss means, directly, a poorer information thereof. A doubtful freedom of the press entails insufficient public information on the social and political issues, the right to a fair justice or the corruption phenomenon adverse effects upon themselves. Several researches conducted in this area show a direct relationship between the press freedom and the good governance, fight against poverty, combating corruption or discrimination.
A doubtful freedom of the press ranks Moldova among the democratically degraded states such as, according to the report cited above, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan or North Korea, and separates it, at the same time, from the Community of European states, towards which, although shyly, the current government of Moldova is said to aspire. It is undisputed that the free press is the only one that can provide an effective liaison between the citizens and the government and this is yet poorly understood.
What meant those six steps made backwards? What does this regression mean for our press beneficiaries?
First of all, this demonstrates that the society believes less that the media, is indeed, the fourth power in the state. As long as people expect the authorities to react to the articles published in newspapers, on TV and Radio, addressing the society’s complicated problems, and this does not happen or happens only as a formality, their conviction that the press is a true power is destroyed and their confidence, yet, is much more difficult to restore.
The officials targeted in the articles about corruption are pleased that their colleagues from the government, by avoiding reacting, are “covering” their sins
Each week, Ziarul de Garda receives plenty of letters or phone calls where we are being asked how did the authorities react on subjects such as the undeclared wealth of some officials or the files framed-up in certain courts of law, the auctions rigged within some state institutions or on the articles about the state profiteers, beneficiaries of millions from the budget. What should we answer them? We used to tell that we also look forward to know the reactions of the institutions responsible for the investigation of such issues. Nevertheless, we continue we to wait in vain, the readers get tired of asking us the same questions, and the officials approached in the articles about corruption rejoice because their colleagues from the government avoid giving a reaction and “cover” their sins. And other media institutions, the few from Moldova that are not politically or economically dependent on parties or mediocre economic agents, face a similar situation, even if a professional study on this subject was not yet carried out. In such circumstances, the press can not be classified as free, but at most partly free, fact that corresponds to the conclusions of the Freedom House recent report.
The press consumers’ confidence loss means, directly, a poorer information thereof. A doubtful freedom of the press entails insufficient public information on the social and political issues, the right to a fair justice or the corruption phenomenon adverse effects upon themselves. Several researches conducted in this area show a direct relationship between the press freedom and the good governance, fight against poverty, combating corruption or discrimination.
A doubtful freedom of the press ranks Moldova among the democratically degraded states such as, according to the report cited above, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan or North Korea, and separates it, at the same time, from the Community of European states, towards which, although shyly, the current government of Moldova is said to aspire. It is undisputed that the free press is the only one that can provide an effective liaison between the citizens and the government and this is yet poorly understood.
_________________
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.
