I. Broadcasting bill flawed, media professionals say.AZERBAIJAN
I. Private radio stations waiting for frequencies.BELARUS
II. State TV head: main goal to cover president's activities.
I. Glasnost Defense Fund and Belarus Association of Journalists worried by attempts to limit press freedoms.ESTONIA
II. ORT journalist will still face trial in Belarus.
III. Belarus releases Russian Public TV journalist Sheremet.
Speakers at a consultative meeting on issues relating to
the right to broadcast voiced anxiety at the serious omissions in the legal
field of regulating the mass media in Armenia.
The chairman of the Yerevan Press Club, Boris Navasardyan,
pointed in particular to the urgent need to amend civil legislation. Amongst
other omissions in the new bill on radio and television which has been
drawn up by the National Assembly, Navasardyan stressed that the bill envisages
that state, public and private television and radio companies should be
treated the same, regardless of the fact that they pursue different goals.
In his view the air waves are a national boon, over
which the state should exercise control. On the other hand, the restrictions
placed on the activities of state companies should not be applied to private
companies, which must be licensed on a competitive basis. Navasardyan said
that the activity of the body carrying out legislative supervision over
broadcasting should not depend upon the executive authorities.
A representative of the US Information Service,
Morgan Lidik [as received], pointed out that support for independent media
is a necessary factor in the development of democracy in the country, and
in particular, the US Congress cannot pass any law which leads to a restriction
of media freedom.
“Many people think that the experience of the USA
cannot be applied in Armenia, because the situation is totally different.
In my view, democracy and freedom cannot be bought like a coat. Democracy
is a way of thinking which cannot be programmed,” he said. Lidik said it
was a free press that would help form this sort of thinking, and would
become the tribune which would make it possible to preserve “free and honest
relations” between the country’s citizens.
Noyan Tapan news agency, Baku, September 29, 1997
Moscow has 17 independent FM radio stations, Tbilisi--seven
and Almaty--eight. In Azerbaijan, not a single free professional radio
station has been set up in all the six years of independence, the reason
being that matters to do with electronic media are wholly under the personal
jurisdiction of state officials. Not counting provincial radio stations,
we have only two new channels.
Representatives of the press attended the opening
ceremony of the Radio Baku radio station on 14th April this year. The ceremony
was also attended by the former communications minister, the Turkish ambassador,
the well-known Turkish singer Ebru Gundes and others. Sevil Aliyeva was
given the honour of opening the BTR [Baku Television and Radio] studio,
which the Turkish firm RAKS helped equip with modern technology. After
this ceremony everybody expected to hear the radio station, supposedly
staffed with professionals, on air. However, five months have already gone
by and the station is still not operating. According to our information,
Radio Baku has been registered with the Ministry of Press and Information
and the Ministry of Justice for more than a year now.
Under the law, the Ministry of Communications should
have granted the firm a licence for a broadcasting frequency within a month
of registration. We contacted Etibar Babayev, the founder of the Baku-RAKS
joint enterprise, which set up Radio Baku. He gave us the reasons why the
station had not started operating. “We have been told officially that to
go on air, one needs the permission of the presidential staff. We applied
for permission there and a head of department of the presidential staff
came to meet us in the studio, where we gave him detailed information.
He promised the question would be resolved quickly and in our favour. We
have been waiting for a long time, but have not lost hope. . . .” [ellipsis
as published]
We contacted the head of one of the Ministry of
Communications centres, Nikolay Muraveynikov, who admitted that Radio Baku
had gone through registration with the Ministry of Press and Information
and had applied to the Ministry of Communications for a broadcasting frequency.
However, he said his department did not have the right to give anybody
a frequency without the permission of the presidential staff. When we drew
to his attention the fact that no such law exists, he replied: “There is
a special instruction on this from former state adviser Gabil Huseynli.”
A curious situation: Huseynli’s instructions remain in force even after
the authorities have decided to do without his services!
According to our information, Radio Baku is not
the only station waiting for a response to its application. However, this
is not what listeners need, what they need is a good radio station, operating
to a high professional standard.
“Who is hindering the radio stations?”, ‘Azadlyg,’ Baku, September 14, 1997
II. State TV head: main goal to cover president’s activities.
Our interviewee is the chairman of the state television
and radio company, Nizami Khudiyev:
[Abbasov] You have been working for the television
and radio company in this post for a year. What progress have you made
during this time? What is your view on the quality of our television?
[Khudiyev] Given the quality of Azerbaijani
Television, the work we have done is obvious to everyone and I would like
to speak about the general aspects of this work. First of all, when I started
in this job, my aim was to raise the general level of quality of broadcasts.
I believe our success has been considerable. More than new 50 programmes
have started and many of them are popular with viewers. There is no doubt
that the main goal of our work is to propagandize the ideas of Azerbaijani
statehood widely and to cover professionally the magnificent activity of
the wise head of our country, Heydar Aliyev. All this has promoted the
creation of new patriotic, social and political programmes.
[Q] When you were appointed chairman of Azerbaijani
Television, there were many people who doubted your professionalism. .
. . [ellipsis as published]
[A] It is clear that it was a political appointment
to elect me as chairman because I am a supporter of Heydar Aliyev, who
is the founder of the independent Azerbaijani state and an outstanding
political statesman of our epoch. I consider this to be the main goal in
my activities and work for Azerbaijani television. . . .
[Q] There are many people who complain about
the quality of Azerbaijani Television. For example, they say that Azerbaijani
Television broadcasts too many official reports.
[A] Yes, not only that. There are a lot of
opinions and views about our television. This means that there are as many
opinions as there are viewers. Yes, I agree that a lot of official reports
are broadcast. However, this is a state television company. On the other
hand, is there any other way for people to be aware of the tireless efforts
of our president to strengthen the independence of our country? Therefore
I am sure that we have to cover widely the hard work of our esteemed president
Heydar Aliyev, his tireless activity for the sake of the present and future
life of our people. Let everybody who watches Azerbaijani Television see
that the president they elected works 24 hours a day and has a lot of difficulties
for the sake of our people’s bright future. Let our people know how hard
our wise president works and what difficulties he faces, whom he meets
and what agreements he reaches at various meetings. Unfortunately, some
people have a different view on all this. One should know that Azerbaijani
national television serves Azerbaijani statehood.
I would like to point out another thing. Our experience
has shown that not a single reporter or commentator can give sufficiently
broad and thorough coverage of the president’s speeches. So we have decided
that it is best to broadcast his speeches and meetings in full. As for
shortcomings in our work, there are of course some. We see and try to eliminate
them. So we are ready to hear about our shortcomings and eliminate them.
. . .
At the moment the staff are working with the most
modern equipment. We have repaired and upgraded all our cutting rooms and
replaced a lot of equipment. I have to add that from the engineering and
equipment point of view, Azerbaijani Television is ahead of many of the
CIS countries. . . .
“Azerbaijani Television serves Azerbaijani statehood,” ‘Khalg Gazeti’, Baku, September 6, 1997
On October 15 the Glasnost Defense Fund and the Belarus
Association of Journalists issued a joint declaration in which they expressed
their deep concern about new attempts to limit freedom of the press in
Belarus. The declaration stated that the results of the first draft of
a bill to modify the Republic of Belarus’ law on press and media were perceived
as negative by journalists in Russia and Belarus, as well as by international
human rights organizations.
An excerpt from the statement reads: “The second
draft of the bill will only further our alarm. The proposed modifications
to the law will infringe on the constitutional rights of citizens to receive
and distribute information. The changes and additions to sections 5, 6,
25, 31 and 50 [of the constitution of Belarus] will, in essence, legalize
censorship. Granting the government extralegal rights to halt media activities
represents an attempt to control the media. Additionally, the proposed
registration of all publications with a circulation greater than 500 will
essentially establish total government control over the distribution of
printed materials.”
The declaration also states that the proposed bill
isn’t in accordance with international norms or with the current laws governing
the media in the Russian Federation. Furthermore, the bill violates articles
3, 6 and 13 of the Belarus-Russia Union Statutes, which provide for protection
of press freedoms and media organizations, as well as for greater rapprochement
between the legal systems of Belarus and the Russian Federation.
ASI Bulletin, No. 41, October 10-16, 1997
II. ORT journalist will still face trial in Belarus.
Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka indicated
[on 9th October] that director of the Russian Public Television (ORT) bureau
in Minsk, Pavel Sheremet, released from the detention centre in Grodno
[on 8th October], will still stand trial in court in the near future. He
is charged with illegally crossing the state border between Belarus and
Lithuania.
At his meeting with acting ORT general director
Kseniya Ponomareva in Minsk [on 9th], Lukashenka said he was not satisfied
with the video report carried by ORT Wednesday creating the impression
that Sheremet had been released from custody on orders from the Russian
president.” If somebody’s opinion was taken into consideration, it was
that of [Russian] Patriarch Alexiy II,” Lukashenka said. He said the patriarch
had sent him a letter on the issue and had sent his personal envoy to Minsk.
When deciding to release Sheremet from custody and imposing travel restrictions
on him instead, law enforcement agencies also took into account the relevant
request of Russian Security Council Deputy Secretary Boris Berezovskiy,
he said. Lukashenka said Berezovskiy and Belarusian Deputy Prime Minister
Vladimir Zametalin had held a lengthy talk on the subject. Sheremet represents
no danger to society, and therefore it was not reasonable to hold him in
solitary confinement until completion of the investigation, Lukashenka
said. He also said the ORT reporter had never been placed in the same cell
with “persistent law-breakers,” as Sheremet claimed. “If there had been
no treading from Moscow, the case would have been completed much earlier,”
Lukashenka said.
He said he had underlined at the meeting with Ponomareva
that ORT should settle financial issues with Belarus. The NTV Independent
Television is the only Russian TV channel which pays Belarus for broadcasting
services, he said. Ponomareva singled out “the personal courage” of Sheremet.
“Unfortunately, the case of Sheremet is not the only problem in relations
between ORT and Belarus,” she said. However, she cited an agreement with
Lukashenka in which ORT would continue to broadcast its programmes in Belarus.
She also said the Belarusian president had promised that there would be
no problems regarding the accreditation of ORT correspondent Vladimir Foshenko
in Minsk.
Interfax news agency, Moscow, October 9, 1997
III. Belarus releases Russian Public TV journalist Sheremet.
Russian Public Television (ORT) journalist Pavel
Sheremet, who had been arrested in Belarus, was released from custody on
[7th October], Belarusian national radio announced [in the morning on 8th],
referring to the press service of the KGB department for Grodno region.
The measure of restriction for the Russian journalist,
who had been kept in the Grodno investigating ward for more than two months,
was changed to recognizance not to leave town. An ITAR-TASS correspondent
has learnt that Pavel Sheremet was brought home in Minsk in handcuffs at
midnight.
At 0900 Moscow time (0500 gmt) on [8th], Sheremet
was expected to broadcast his first report on the ORT channel since being
released from custody.
ITAR-TASS news agency (World Service), Moscow, October 8, 1997
TeleMedia Eesti AS sold its 34 per cent interest
in the television channel TV3 by selling the shares owned by two of its
subsidiaries to AS Krenno, making Krenno the holder of the biggest stake
in the television channel with 44 per cent.
The sale brings TV3 back into compliance with Culture
Ministry regulations regarding the involvement of foreign capital in Estonian
Media. TeleMedia Eesti is currently 48 per cent owned by the state-owned
Eesti Telekom. Another 48 per cent of its shares belong to Sweden’s Telemedia
East AB and four per cent to the company’s employees.
A recent reduction of Eesti Telekom’s interest in
TeleMedia led to an increase in foreign ownership of TV3 above the 50 per
cent limit. Krenno made the purchase by buying the TV3 shares from OU Eesti
Fakta and TKEF Investment, both of whom held stakes of 17 per cent.
“We bought the shares at market price,” Krenno’s
owner Rein Kaarepere told BNS. But he refused to give the exact figure.
The other shareholders in TV3 are MTG Broadcasting AB with 42 per cent,
AS Eesti Finantsinvest with eight per cent and MTV OY with six per cent.
. . .
BNS news agency, Tallinn, October 26, 1997
II. Estonian TV’s head of news resigns.
Vallo Toomet, the head of Estonian Television’s [ETV]
news programme, has submitted a letter of resignation to Hagi Sein, the
[outgoing] ETV’s director-general, since he has some differences of opinion
over principles held by Toomas Lepp, the new ETV director-general. . .
.
[Vallo Toomet also applied for the job of ETV director-general
and, as reported in the “Postimees” newspaper on 4th October, an opinion
poll carried out among ETV staff favoured him among the three candidates
for the post.]
TV3, Tallinn, October 8, 1997
III. New state TV head; failure to appoint radio director.
The Estonian Broadcasting Council on [6th October]
favoured Toomas Lepp as the new director-general of the state television
with votes of seven in favour and two against. Lepp is the leader of the
commercial TV company Meediapress that produces programmes to all Estonian
TV channels. He was one of the founders of the commercial EVTV channel
which changed its name to the current TV3, the second-largest channel in
Estonia. The state channel ETV enjoys the highest ratings in Estonia despite
competition from three commercial channels. It draws its revenue from the
state budget and advertising.
A new competition will be held for the director
of the state radio because none of the four candidates could gather a sufficient
support. The deadline of the competition was set at 31st October.
[Estonian radio added in a report on 6th October
that the mandate of the current director of radio, Peeter Sookruus, which
was due to expire on 1st November, had been extended until a replacement
could be found.]
Estonian Radio, Tallinn, October 6, 1997
IV. European media experts criticize broadcasting bill.
Experts of the media section of the Council of Europe,
who are in Estonia at the request of the [Estonian] Ministry of Culture,
have criticized the Estonian broadcasting bill. According to Culture Minister
Jaak Allik, the experts expressed their amazement that the authors of the
Estonian broadcasting bill have opted for the American model as their basis,
albeit America has practically no public service broadcasting. The experts
have recommended the use of the European model as the basis, which includes
also the state’s responsibility in providing public service broadcasting
as a service.
The experts think that the bill does not provide
adequate assurances that the bodies issuing broadcasting licences and permits
are completely independent of both the executive authority and interested
groups in broadcasting.
Estonian Radio, Tallinn, September 19, 1997
V. Parliament amends language law.
The Estonian parliament on [11th September] amended the language law, dropping an earlier requirement to provide an Estonian translation to all non-Estonian spoken text in audiovisual programmes. The amendment will make it possible to air live TV and radio programmes with non-Estonian, including Russian, speakers and readers. Non-Estonian spoken text in language-learning programmes and programmes intended for non-Estonian audiences was permitted also under the original version of the law. The amendment was adopted with 30 votes in favour, with no one abstaining or voting against. The Estonian TV this spring had to pay a fine because of missing Estonian subtitles in a Russian news programme.
BNS news agency, Tallinn, September 11, 1997
The head of Kazakhstan’s Advertising Public Fund
and of the Khabar TV channel, and daughter of Kazakh President Nursultan
Nazarbayev, has said that advertising is needed for the survival of independent
media if “a fourth estate” is to emerge in Kazakhstan. Khabar TV’s popularity
and independence are largely due to its commercial outlook, she says adding
that piracy and dumping are still common on TV channels in spite of a recently
adopted copyright law. The following are excerpts from a report headlined
“Kazakh head’s daughter flexes advert muscles” by ‘Kazakhstanskaya Pravda’
newspaper; subheadings inserted editorially.
Advertising on television . . . We have asked the
director-general of Khabar agency and president of the Kazakhstanskaya
Reklama [Kazakhstan’s Advertising] Public Fund, Dariga Nazarbayeva to give
her opinion on this.
[Q] Dariga Nursultanovna, a little over a year
ago in an interview with ‘Kazakhstanskaya Pravda’you said that the country
needed a strong national TV channel. The development of any TV channel
is impossible without advertising. Obviously, the Khabar [TV channel] that
you head is no exception.
[A] Of course, the development of any mass
media today depends, to a great extent, on revenues from advertising. Whereas
the state mass media are partially funded from the budget, the non-state
ones fully depend on advertising. We say that we need “a fourth estate,”
that we need independent mass media, but we will never have “a fourth estate”
in the country if we do not develop the advertising industry.
The famous [Russian television] studio VID has an
excellent motto: “Your advertisement is our independence.” In other words,
in receiving absolutely legal commercial revenues a TV channel or a radio
station can decide by itself how to develop and be free in their actions,
in protecting public interests. These things do not go one without the
other.
Khabar’s commercial profits key to its success
[Q] Unfortunately, our colleagues from non-public-funded
mass media say sometimes that we, the state newspapers and television,
earn money through advertising in addition to budget funds, that we are
“ raking in the shekels” and live an easy life.
[A] I have happened to hear such remarks too.
They said so also in discussing the draft law on advertising with a parliament
working group. What can I say to this? Give us enough money to develop,
to buy modern equipment and interesting programmes, and to employ qualified
specialists from the state budget. We will be thankful to the state and
with pleasure get rid of the headache of having to sell our advertising
capacity.
So far the budget money is only enough to remain
afloat. Despite the prevailing opinion, my family name does not help in
this case. If it makes any difference, then it is rather negative.
To a significant degree, it is precisely Khabar’s
commercial profits that have enabled it to become a popular channel in
Kazakhstan.
Of course, there are shortcomings, there is always
room for improvement. Nevertheless, there are things to be proud of and
there are developments. In May 1994 Khabar’s news programme team within
the State Television and Radio Corporation produced 30 minutes of news
a day (15 minutes in Kazakh and 15 minutes in Russian) with 300 staff.
Add to this the channel’s engineering and technical staff. Now the independent
Khabar channel has about 400 staff who ensure 14 hours of broadcasting
a day. This is a professional and mobile team which is able sensitively
to react to the processes going in the society. The board of directors
is directly involved in drawing up the advertising budget. Each of its
members knows how much money we have and to what ends they are being spent.
It is easier to work on the basis of mutual trust . . .
[Q] It is obvious today that in the mass media
most of advertisement is in Russian, and this puts the Kazakh language
in an unfavourable position. Do you think the problem can be solved legislatively?
[A] Article five of the draft law under discussion
says: “On the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan advertisements shall
be disseminated in Kazakh and Russian at the discretion of the advertiser,
and in other languages.” I think that the problem will be settled, as we
have adopted a language law under which 50 per cent of broadcasting should
be in Kazakh, although major explanatory work should be carried out with
advertisers, especially with foreign ones, and advertising in Kazakh should
be encouraged. . . . As for advertisements in English, it is complete nonsense.
Who is it meant for? Will you agree that it would not occur to anyone to
advertise Taraz Vodka in the centre of London in Kazakh? All this is growing
pains.
[Q] Apparently, Kazakhstan’s Advertising, which
you head, is encountering some of these “growing” pains?
[A] The Fund was set up in order to protect
the interests of distributors and producers of advertisements and advertisers,
to raise their professional level and to take part in drafting a law on
advertising. . . .
Piracy still a problem in spite of copyright laws
We have adopted a copyright law, but so far there
are no real levers to ensure its observation. Besides, Kazakhstan has not
signed the corresponding international convention. I am very concerned
about these issues, because they prevent Khabar from moving on further.
Since the first days of its existence Khabar has been showing only licensed
programmes. Yes, today we are the most expensive channel for advertisers,
but our expenditures are commensurate.
These are the problems our fund should help solve.
At meetings my colleagues agree with the idea of protecting the market
from piracy and dumping, but as soon as they get to their offices they
forget all their good intentions. I understand that they need money, and
now. In my view living for today has no prospects. . . .
‘Kazakhstanskaya Pravda,’ Alma-Ata, October 14, 1997