Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Former Soviet Union Media Still Under Assault -- Freedom House

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Former Soviet Union Media Still Under Assault -- Freedom House

    Former Soviet Union Media Still Under Assault -- Freedom House

    Created: 29.04.2006 14:04 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:04 MSK

    MosNews

    Independent media in the countries of the former Soviet Union have
    come under further assault over the course of the last year, Freedom
    House said in its annual report. The political, legal, and economic
    environments in most of the non-Baltic former Soviet countries remain
    distinctly inhospitable to independent journalism, Christopher Walker,
    the organization's director of studies, wrote in an article for Radio
    Liberty's web-site.

    Of the 12 non-Baltic former Soviet states only Georgia and Ukraine,
    which are categorized as "Partly Free," escape the Not Free
    designation. No country in the region achieves the designation of
    "Free." The degree to which each country permits the free flow of
    information determines the classification of its media as "Free,"
    "Partly Free," or "Not Free."

    The downward trend was particularly evident in countries with
    regimes that place a premium on controlling the airwaves. Among
    the Not Free states, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Russia, Tajikistan, and
    Uzbekistan experienced declines. Uzbekistan and Russia suffered the
    most dramatic backslide.

    Russia slipped due to the Kremlin's ongoing obstruction of journalists
    from reporting on sensitive topics and its tightening of control
    over news sources. According to this year's report, the Russian
    "authorities continued to exert direct influence on media outlets and
    determine news content, as the state owns or controls the country's
    three main national television networks --- Channel One, RTR, and
    NTV." In 2005, Russian journalists continued to be subjected to
    detention or physical attack, ostensibly from coverage of sensitive
    topics such as corruption. The Russian government's posture toward
    the media has also led to increased self-censorship.

    Critical coverage of the Kremlin on national broadcast media is
    virtually nonexistent today.

    The government in Uzbekistan, which has crushed independent voices
    throughout society, paid particular attention to the elimination of
    independent media. The Uzbek press freedom rating for the last year
    dropped accordingly.

    The Andijan massacre, which occurred one year ago, was the trigger
    for the further crackdown on the media in Uzbekistan. In the
    immediate aftermath of the events in Andijan, the regime of President
    Islam Karimov instituted a news blackout, preventing virtually any
    information about the violence in the eastern Uzbek city from reaching
    wider audiences.

    Western-funded media in Uzbekistan drew particularly intense attention
    from the government. The Karimov regime refused to renew the agreement
    that allowed Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to operate a bureau in
    Tashkent. It likewise forced other international news and media support
    organizations, including the Institute for War and Peace Reporting
    (IWPR) and Internews, to close their operations in the country.

    Manipulation of television news content in Uzbekistan, as in a number
    of neighboring repressive countries, reached new heights over the
    last year. The television medium was a favored tool in regime security
    efforts. The report on Uzbekistan in this year's press-freedom survey
    cites the September trial of 15 men accused of involvement in the
    Andijan unrest, where "prosecutors charged that the BBC, Institute
    of War and Peace Reporting, and RFE/RL had advance knowledge that
    violence would break out in the city.

    State-controlled media gave prominent coverage to these unsubstantiated
    charges."

    In Belarus, the autocratic government of Alexander Lukashenko
    intensified its control over the country's media, at least in part
    due to elections taking place this spring. Last year, among the
    measures taken by the Belarusian authorities was passage of broadly
    defined legislation that makes it a crime punishable by up to two
    years in jail to "discredit Belarus" in the eyes of international
    organizations and foreign governments. The same prison terms apply
    to those convicted of distributing "false information" about Belarus'
    political, economic, social, or international situation.

    Among the regulatory tricks relied upon by media-unfriendly regimes,
    the Belarus press-freedom report relates a May 2005 decree issued
    by Lukashenko that banned all privately owned, but not state, media
    from using the words "national" or "Belarus" in their names, forcing
    a number of publications to reregister.

    In a region where good news on the news media is hard to come
    by, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan were the only countries to register
    improvement. In Kyrgyzstan, given the larger questions concerning the
    country's overall political direction, the durability of the positive
    press-freedom change was far from certain, however.

    Kyrgyzstan remains in the Not Free category.

    Ukraine enjoys a wide range of state and private television and radio
    stations, as well as print and electronic news outlets. While Ukraine's
    media ownership is diverse, it still confronts the challenges that
    accompany oligarchic ownership structures.

    Nevertheless, since the end of 2004 the media in Ukraine, while today
    still designated Partly Free, have achieved a degree of pluralism
    and independence that would have been unthinkable in the pre-Orange
    Revolution era.

    Ukraine, now with the strongest press-freedom rating among the former
    Soviet states, therefore remains a critical media case study. Just 1.5
    years ago, the country suffered from many of the same pathologies that
    continue to confront most of the media in the region today. In the
    run-up to Ukraine's pivotal 2004 elections, for example, "temnyky" -
    editorial theme directives from the president's office -- were standard
    operating procedure. This practice was purged from the Ukrainian media
    landscape but remains a blight on many other former Soviet states'
    media systems.

    The significant yet incomplete progress in Ukraine should serve as
    a reminder that overcoming deeply entrenched Soviet-era habits and
    practices will be a trying, long-term effort for reform of the media,
    as well as for other key institutions that form the building blocks
    of democratic societies.
Working...
X