Post-Soviet Media Law & Policy Newsletter
Issue 32 Benjamin
N. Cardozo School of Law September 5, 1996
UKRAINE
1. Ukrainian National Culture and Broadcasting
Ukraine’s broadcasting structure should prevent
the airing of anti-Ukrainian broadcasts from Russia and should develop
its own, national, character, according to remarks by an MP and a broadcasting
official. They also said that organizations applying for new broadcasting
licences should give priority to the Ukrainian language. Following
are excerpts from remarks by Yuriy Plaksyuk, secretary of the Ukrainian
National Council for Issues of TV and Radio Broadcasting, and People’s
Deputy Viktor Teren, published in Ukrainian newspaper ‘Holos Ukrayiny’
on 7th August; first paragraph is the newspaper’s introduction; subheadings
inserted editorially:
On behalf of the state, the Ukrainian National Council
for Issues of TV and Radio Broadcasting [UNCITRB] is granting newly-established
television and radio organizations the right to use the broadcasting space
of the country. This and other problems connected with television
and radio broadcasting are discussed by Ukrainian people’s deputy and writer
Viktor Teren and Yuriy Plaksyuk, the UNCITRB secretary.
Need to keep out anti-Ukrainian programmes from Russia
[Viktor Teren] The Ukrainian state cannot and
should not rebroadcast and finance low-quality, immoral or openly anti-Ukrainian
programmes from Moscow which advertise Ukrainophobes like Zhirinovskiy
or Nevzorov. At the same time, a question arises: Why do the Ukrainian
taxpayers have to pay for programmes from newly formed television and radio
organizations that often feed us with primitive productions of diverse
surrogates of art orientated in some way or another towards suppressing
our national character and towards Russification?
I still remember the times when television programmes
were not allowed on the air because they showed a cross somewhere in the
background or a combination of blue and yellow [Ukrainian national colours].
Today, television transmits church holiday services and airs the anthem
of independent Ukraine, but one can hardly call our television truly national.
. . .
[Yuriy Plaksyuk] We will not have national television
unless we have a unifying national idea... Regarding television itself,
I would not put this question so categorically, but in a more specific
way: we primarily have no traditions in this business, we have no experience
to lean on. . . .
Ukraine needs a national television
I fully agree that television and radio should be
our own, national one. This is indisputable. It applies to
all of our television and radio organizations, the very small and the most
powerful alike. Contacts and cooperation with foreign television
and radio companies, as they are throughout the world, should be—and have
to be—of a complementary character. As for the programmes to be broadcast,
they should primarily promote the national interests of our state.
Those are the UNCITRB guidelines for newly created television and radio
organizations. The council also stresses that they should take more
from our spiritual heritage. . . .
Importance of Ukrainian language
[Yuriy Plaksyuk] When new television and radio
organizations apply for licences, we lay down a mandatory condition: they
should give the Ukrainian language priority. Of course, the approach
differs from region to region. What in western Ukraine is self-evident
is making slow progress in eastern Ukraine. It is unrealistic to
broadcast 60 per cent of programmes in Ukrainian in Donetsk or Lugansk
today. As of today, this figure does not exceed 10 per cent there.
I will not even mention Crimea; it is very little. However, even
realizing that a step-by-step approach is needed in this matter, it is
necessary to stress that this approach has to be a step forward, not a
camouflage or an excuse for passivity or even retreat.
Television and radio networks have to employ highly
cultured personnel, well-trained people ready to work with the Ukrainian
language. We assist in looking for such people; they should communicate
with their viewers in a beautiful and literate language, because television
is an organization that can both instill love for the Ukrainian language
and kill this love completely. People should enjoy the beauty of
Ukrainian language, songs and tunes. If they do, the effects will
be long-lasting.
Without a doubt, the Ukrainian language is the future
of our television and radio networks. Yes, the imposed habit that
“it is somewhat easier in Russian” has to be abandoned. . . .
Draft of new broadcasting structure
[Yuriy Plaksyuk] The state needs a law on the
protection of national culture. It also cannot manage without a single
concept for developing its national television and radio broadcasting system.
Such a draft concept has been prepared by the UNCITRB and submitted to
the Ukrainian Supreme Council Permanent Committee for Legislative Ensuring
of the Freedom of Expression and the Media.
This draft was worked out by many excellent experts
as well as writers and other cultural activists. It envisions, in
particular, establishing a clear structure of the broadcasting system in
Ukraine. This will take the following shape: Ukraine is to have three
to five national channels, each of them covering more than half the territory
of our country. Furthermore, there will be regional channels providing
their production to individual regions. Next in line are oblast channels
which will enable every oblast to report on its own life and problems.
Finally, there will be city, rayon and settlement television and radio
networks.
Such a structure is tenable and it will enable us to
cast off mediocrity and products lacking in spiritual values—as the requirements
for television and radio companies will be commensurate to the particular
company’s status. These requirements were considered in the course
of formulating the very principles of granting licences.
For instance, a licensing contest for regional channels
was recently launched. It is being organized by so-called contest
commissions. First, they select competitors, study their documents,
review their production and carry out public opinion polls in regions where
these companies are to broadcast. We also familiarize ourselves with
their technical capabilities. Thus, if we grant a licence for a regional
channel, the chosen company is aware of its really high responsibility,
since the selection criteria are quite demanding.
When the UNCITRB began its work, Ukraine’s broadcasting
system was already in place, albeit chaotic. Everything was distributed
and redistributed. We are now trying to determine how much room and
for whom exists in this system, and how much, as well as who—excuse me
for saying it—has not only channels but is making money without paying
anything to the state. Which country can afford such a luxury or,
to be more precise, such flagrant robbery?
We cannot allow our national broadcasting system to
become a source of big nontaxable profits. We also cannot make it
a prey to those for whom the Ukrainian state is foreign and unacceptable.
For this reason, the UNCITRB has been set up to protect the Ukrainian language,
morals, culture, independence and national interests.
‘Holos Ukrayiny,’ Kiev, August 7, 1996
2. The relationship between Russian television and Ukraine was
the subject of a press conference at the Russian-American Press and Information
Center on August 14, 1996.
ORT television [Russian Public TV] is currently
covering only 65 per cent of Ukraine’s territory, instead of the former
100 per cent. This is not the result of some pressure from above,
but of normal market competition, Volodymyr Tsendrovskyy [as received]
said in the Russian-American information press centre in Moscow today.
Tsendrovskyy is chairman of the Ukrainian Television
Union, a public organization grouping non-state television companies.
According to him, “ORT’s gradual withdrawal does not
mean arrival of other Russian TV companies,” for “its positions are being
won over by national Ukrainian and western competitors.”
After expressing surprise at the fact that “the Russian
side could not seem to react to the situation,” Tsendrovskyy predicted
“complete disappearance of Russian television in Ukraine in a year and
a half.”
If Russia wants to call the shots in Ukraine’s television,
it should wake up now, he said.
New chances for Western television to come to Ukraine
emerged following the country’s joining the European convention on trans-boundary
broadcasting. Ukraine has become the first CIS member to sign the
document.
Aleksey Samokhvalov, Russian television and radio broadcasting
federal service adviser and Council of Europe expert, believes that Russia’s
expected joining the convention “will bring no revolutionary changes in
its television cooperation with Ukraine,” but “create better conditions
for dealing with problems on a civilised international legal basis.”
RIA news agency, Moscow, August 14, 1996
3. In a related development, in Latvia, the program of ORT, Russian
Public Television was terminated as free to air broadcasting on August
29. According to TASS, on “Black Thursday” ORT will be replaced by
Latvian Independent Television which, however, promised to acquire the
rights to play some popular Moscow television productions. ORT will
be available, in some places, by satellite or cable television, though
“those displeased argued that the alternative was much too expensive for
many people.”
TASS quote Ojar Rubenis, Chair of the National Council
for Television and Radio Broadcasting as saying “Russian people in Latvia
must be quite clear about what country they are living in.”
A few words about the problems of television.
Back in 1989, most European countries signed the Convention on Transfrontier
Television or, to put it more simply, television without frontiers.
This year, Russia and Ukraine decided to accede to the convention.
[Correspondent] Ukraine was the first of the CIS
countries to sign the document. Russia plans to follow the Ukrainian
example at the end of this year. At a news conference devoted to
the event, the representatives of Russia and Ukraine pointed out that no
bilateral agreement on TV broadcasting has been concluded between their
countries since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Vladimir Tsendrovskiy,
chairman of the Ukrainian TV union, predicted the total disappearance of
Russian TV broadcasting in Ukraine in a year or 18 months’ time.
Its place will be taken by Western and Ukrainian competitors, which are
flourishing in market conditions.
According to Tsendrovskiy, it is time for Russia to
wake up if it wishes to remain in Ukraine’s television space. It
is possible that acceding to the European Convention will help the two
states to agree not only with Europe, but also with one another.
It is far easier for Ukraine to integrate with the European
TV broadcasting structures than it is for Russia. In Ukraine, a law
on radio and TV broadcasting was passed two years ago, while Russia has
been struggling to create one for five years now, without any result.
Russia TV channel, Moscow, August 15, 1996