On December 3, 1997, the resolution of the Verkhovna Rada “On Creation of a Television and Radio Organization of Public Broadcasting of Ukraine” came into force, thus, opening the way to what may become an attack on independent broadcasting and a plot for a major political dispute for control over the declared freedom of speech.
The Story
On November 21, the parliament adopted its resolution “On Creation of a Television and Radio Organization of Public Broadcasting of Ukraine” and approved the “Program Concept of the Public Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine. The declared goals of the new structure included: “implementation of the system of Public broadcasting as an informational guarantor of human rights for access to pluralistic information and provision for the existence of the independent media, controlled by the society, on the basis of provision of adequate status to nongovernmental television and radio organizations”; “provision of free access to national broadcasting channels to a broad range of local . . . television and radio organizations irrespective of the form of ownership, representatives of political parties, civic and religious associations”; “preservation and propaganda of the best samples of the national culture and art, informational protection of national interests and the national spirituality, development of respect for general human values and general societal interests”; realization of broad informational support for various political and social movements that stand on the position of development of the Ukrainian statehood.” Other slogans included “impossibility of monopolization of management” of the new broadcaster, “financial independence . . . from certain subjects of the state power, enterprises, institutions and associations of citizens,” “priority in obtaining the best technically developed and economically feasible national channels and networks.” According to the Program Concept, the Public broadcasting company is granted 70 hours of weekly TV broadcasting and 140 hours of weekly radio air time. It is expected that the HURT will produce 40% of the programming, broadcast 40% of the programming supplied by regional companies with the addition of 20% of foreign programming. The programming will consist of equal shares (20%) of political and social programs, publicistic and educational programs, culture programs, special programs for children and young people, and entertainment and films.
The Concept envisages new arrangements for the distribution of air time on the national TV channel UT-2 and the radio channel UR-3: 50% of the air time will belong to the HURT, 25% to state-ordered and state-funded programs of regional companies, and the other 25% will be left over for the best creative contribution of national and foreign companies. The HURT is expected to be funded from the state budget as well as by private and corporate donations and revenues from advertising. The volume of advertising time sold by the HURT may not exceed 10% of the total daily broadcasting time.
Political Lining
None of the parties to the conflict denies that the matter is a political one and stems from the current disproportion in access to the much-needed media attention. According to Communist Serhiy Aksionenko, MP and head of the Subcommittee for Audiovisual Media of the Committee for Legal Provisions for the Media Freedom, lawmakers who supported the idea of a public television that hardly has any chance of becoming independent “wanted to achieve equal conditions for all.”
Speaker Oleksandr Moroz, one of the main supporters of the new division of the national air time, believes that currently the second national TV channel, UT-2 that covers about 60% of Ukraine’s territory, may be regarded as “lost for the state,” but will be gradually recovered by the newly-created HURT at the expense of the Studio 1+1, a top Ukrainian broadcaster and one of the most successful foreign investments in this country. Speaker Moroz argued that there must be at least one television channel to stand for “the state’s position.” As protectors of the “state position,” lawmakers selected Volodymyr Cendrovsky, chairman of the Ukrainian Television Union, Oleksandr Kuchmenko, director general of the People’s Television of Ukraine, a marginal Kyiv-based parliament-sponsored TV and radio company, Vadym Tabachuk, general producer of the “Information Service.” While the timing of the recent parliamentary decision suggests the desire of lawmakers to control a major share of broadcasting during the parliamentary election campaign, the long-term objective for Mr. Moroz seems to establish his control over television during the 1999 presidential race.
President Leonid Kuchma has not intervened in the conflict so far, but suggested that “the Ukrainian parliament’s resolution about the provisions for broadcasting by the HURT public television company was dictated by the desire to overtake the control over television for the pre-election campaign period” and an attempt to take the functions of the executive power.
According to Volodymyr Cendrovsky, chairman of the Ukrainian Television Union and one of the founders of the HURT, the matter is the confrontation between “two unequal forces: the parliament and a group of well-known persons” regarded as members of the presidential circle: Studio 1+1 director Oleksandr Rodnyansky, its founder and sponsor Vadym Rabinovich, Minister of Information Zynoviy Kulyk and presidential advisors Dmytro Tabachnyk and Oleksandr Volkov.
The status of the new HURT has caused a number of questions. According to Zynoviy Kulyk, the new law “On Public Television” quoted as the basis for the creation of the HURT, envisaged the would-be public broadcaster as an open joint-stock company controlled by a publicly elected board. Meanwhile, the HURT is a closed joint-stock company that from the very start benefitted a group of private owners.
Players
In the eyes of proponents and supporters of the broadcasting revolution, the Ukrainian television has been captured by forces that are alien to the noble ideas declared as the goals of the Public television (see above): UT-1 is controlled by the government and presidential advisor Oleksandr Volkov, UT-2 is sponsored by Vadym Rabinovich, a rich person with a questionable record; the Inter channel is believed to be controlled by Russian media tycoon Boris Berezovsky, and 50% of shares in the ICTV make the channel subordinate to Minister of Information Zinoviy Kulyk. Together with ex-presidential chief of staff Dmytro Tabachnyk, now adviser to Leonid Kuchma, these persons are reported to be providers of informational support to Kuchma.
Questions
The amended law “On Television and Radio Broadcasting” defines the public broadcasting as “broadcasting on one channel according to a single program concept, funded by the state (which is entitled to the control stock) and public organizations, television and radio organizations, individuals, each of which may not hold more than 10% of the stock.” The Public Broadcasting is to be managed by an independent and unbiased Public Council through its authorized executive body. For some strange reason, the notorious resolution orders the Parliamentary Committee for Legal Provisions for the Freedom of Speech and the Media to submit nominations to the Public(?) Council to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada.
Mr. Cendrovsky who is sorry for “the whole nation” that is denied access to “juicy bits” of the national broadcasting, gets very emotional when asked by journalists about the HURT’s sources of funding and suggests they ask Rodnyansky instead. Half of the Studio 1+1 prime time would suffice to cover the lacking funding, said he. The issue of funding still remains unclear. According to Levko Lukianenko, MP, honorary chairman of the Ukrainian Republican Party who joined this obviously left-wing initiative in the hope to win extra coverage and air time for his usually neglected party, there are three possibilities of financing the HURT:
1. Political parties of the parliamentary type and
nationwide NGOs will join the HURT, though they will not be able to become
its sponsors since they lack the money themselves;
2. The HURT will be financed by entrepreneurs(?);
and
3. It will be sustained by the Verkhovna Rada (i.e., the
state budget).
According to Cendrovsky, US$ 35 to 40 million is needed to launch the HURT, of them US$ 10 million are expected to arrive from the state budget, i.e., from the taxpayers’ money which obviously could have a better use in the country that owes its citizens about US% 5 billion in back wages.
Another controversy arises in connection with a broadcasting licence which is issued and may be revoked by the National TV and Radio Broadcasting Council (NTVRBC)—four members of which are nominated by the Speaker and other four by the President—in case the licence holder fails to abide by is obligations with regard to quality and volume of programming. According to the law, the Council is fully independent and any interference with the NTVRBC activities is illegal. Meanwhile, the controversial parliamentary resolution orders “partial alteration” of the broadcasting legislation and commands the National TV and Radio Broadcasting Council to “solve the question of issuing a licence to the television and radio organization of Public broadcasting “Public Ukrainian Radio and Television (HURT)” at the national channel UT-2—10 hours per day and the national radio channel UR-3—22 hours per day.” Contrary to the law, no competition for the attractive air time is envisaged.
Worst-Case Scenario
According to a recent media rating by Socis-Gallup, 32% of Ukrainian viewers watch the Studio 1+1, while the joint rating of programs produced by the constituents of the HURT—the People’s radio and Television, the People’s Television of Ukraine and the TV Tabachuk amounts only to 3.4%. If the parliament’s resolution to have its broadcaster is implemented, instead of a number of original and imaginative programs like the Pislyamova, the Fifth Corner and the Telemania, Ukrainian viewers will have to watch the Region (assorted contributions of regional TV stations) for almost 16 hours a week, official chronicles “Parliament on the Eve of the Week” and “The Government’s Tribune” that are likely to become replicas of their tremendously boring analogues broadcast by the UT-1, and a weekly sermon hour. The new radio channel will present the daily “Good Morning, Bread-maker!” and the audio version of the Region. If the parliament’s resolution is implemented, Studio 1+1, before being squeezed out of the air completely and losing the multimillion investment in the equipment and studio design, may be given unfavorable air time: from midday to 6 p.m. and from 11 p.m. to 2 a.m. Last year the Studio 1+1 was given a licence for 10 years of broadcasting with fixed daily air time from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 6 p.m. to midnight. Studio 1+1 general producer Oleksandr Rodnyansky is going to sue the HURT for attacks and moral damages. Although there is little possibility that the Studio 1+1 may be forced to leave the UT-2, the parliament’s resolution creates a dangerous precedent of limiting the media freedom.
Research Update No. 94, December 8, 1997
Copyright (c) 1997 Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research
(UCIPR)
Reprinted with Permission