Some say press freedom better in current parliamentary race, but others say it's worse than ever
The OSCE`s office for Democratic Initiatives and Human Rights has praised what it calls an improvement in the “plurality of views” offered on radio and television during the current parliamentary race compared to previous elections.
“The basis for the observation is statistics compiled by the OSCE/ODIHR team assessing media coverage of the campaign,” said Gerard Stoudmann, who heads the human rights organization. Stoudmann wound up a two‑day assessment tour in Kyiv on March 5.
“This does not mean everything is perfect,” Stoudmann said. “The fact that the mission’s media adviser has prepared for me a page and a half of problems arising over the last month means he is not blind to existing issues.”
Stoudmann’s comments came on the heels of warnings and criticism about media intimidation lobbed at the government by U.S. and European officials in recent weeks.
On Feb. 6 U.S. Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky was the first Westerner since the campaign kicked off in January to travel to Ukraine to underscore the need for equal media access for all candidates.
Two weeks later, former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said she had received credible evidence of a “pronounced imbalance” in the media exposure available to parties and candidates. A delegation from the Council of Europe drew attention to the issue on March 2, when it expressed concern about what it called a lack of confidence in the democratic process.
The Crimean Association of Journalists released a statement March 5 condemning attempts to muzzle local TV stations. The group said at least four station directors had been approached by political groups in the last two weeks and given a choice: either “cooperate” or take leave until after the election.
Following the presidential elections in 1999, the OSCE human rights mission found that state media and private broadcasters breached Ukrainian law and OSCE recommendations by comprehensively failing to meet their obligations to provide balanced coverage of the campaign.
One year later, two polls conducted by the Razumkov Ukrainian Center for Economic and Political Studies showed that the public believed there was a high amount of political censorship.
According to the surveys, 72 percent of respondents were convinced that media were unable to publish materials critical of criminal clans without facing serious repercussions. Similarly, 63 percent said the same was true for articles critical of President Leonid Kuchma.
According to Natalia Lihacheva, the editor of Telekritika, a news Web site specializing in television and radio, says that little has changed since the 1999 presidential elections. What media observers describe as a plurality of views, she said, includes only parties that support Kuchma.
Lihacheva added that while Internet publications have fostered debate, they are not accessible to most citizens.
“While more information from different sources has been reported, it hasn’t improved the quality of journalism,” said Oleksandr Chekmyshev, deputy chairman of the Journalism Institute at Shevchenko University in Kyiv.
“Most journalists have again been asked to choose between participating in the election process or being out of a job,” said Chekmyshev, whose institute has measured political media coverage since October.
According to the Journalism Institute, two pro‑presidential parties, For a United Ukraine and the Social Democratic Party of Ukraine (united), have received the most favorable coverage on state‑run channels UT‑1, UT‑2, and UT‑3.
The trend continued in February, according to Chekmyshev, who said Panorama, the prime time evening news show on UT‑1, delivered 96 minutes of positive or neutral coverage of For a United Ukraine, 15 minutes about Our Ukraine and about 7 minutes on the SDPU(u).
The competing show on 1+1 spent 47 minutes on positive coverage of For a United Ukraine and about half an hour each on the SDPU(u) and Our Ukraine. Inter’s regular evening news program, Podrobnosti, had 53 positive minutes on the SDPU(u), 17 minutes on For a United Ukraine and 12 minutes on Our Ukraine.
None of the stations had negative coverage of For a United Ukraine, the institute said.
Second‑tier stations with foreign investors, such as STB and Novy Kanal, have provided more balanced coverage, according to Chekmyshev. He said ICTV, a station linked to powerful businessman Viktor Pinchuk, has supported For a United Ukraine and the Winter Crop Generation Team.
