Tweet
Lragir, Armenia
Oct 19 2007
WHOSE ADMINISTRATION GIVES INSTRUCTIONS
The society has tried to make the decisions of the Armenian
government fit into some logic for multiple times and has always
failed. Nevertheless, the society continues to look for the link of
many decisions of the government and logic, and recently a new
opportunity arose in connection with a decision, and it is not clear
where it was made, the president administration or the government.
Although it is only suppositions by `reliable sources' and the
reality in Armenia proved for multiple times that this decision was
made by the government. For the reader's information who is not
related to the information sphere, the press clubs have appeared in
the past two or three years, and have become an indispensable part of
the life of reporters, where news conferences and debates of people
from different spheres, mainly political activists are held. The
clubs also pinned up ads of different goods and services which were
shown in TV reports because most of these news conferences, debates
and discussions become in important topic of media reports.
Meanwhile, since October 15 the TV channels have not covered any
event at press clubs. The media reported that the instruction to the
TV channels came from the president administration, namely from the
office of the head of the administration Armen Gevorgyan. Earlier,
the Armenian media had reported, and it was never refuted, that the
TV channels are dealt with by Armen Gevorgyan who was the deputy head
of the president administration then. Therefore, in case of a
unanimous behavior of the TV channels the society logically refers it
to Armen Gevorgyan. Certainly, even if those who reported this
information did not have a source of information, they would
logically suppose from information that had never been refuted that
if the TV channels decide in a night to boycott the press clubs, it
means it is someone's instruction, and this someone is Armen
Gevorgyan, who is known as the unofficial controller of this sphere.
On the other hand, however, the Armenian media have recently reported
that Armen Gevorgyan handed out this function to Serge Sargsyan's
assistant, the leader of the MIAK Party Levon Martirosyan, and now he
is the instructor for the Armenian TV channels. This information was
not refuted either. In other words, it is quite possible that now the
TV channels operate on Levon Martirosyan's instructions which as the
same as Serge Sargsyan's instructions. And the majority of the
citizens of Armenia are convinced that the Armenian TV channels
operate on instructions from some center, otherwise no TV channel
would miss the chance to televise at least part of Levon
Ter-Petrosyan's address, for even a non-specialist knows that the
address of the first president after a decade of silence is a
sensation and will attract audience. There is more evidence that the
Armenian TV channels are pressured by the government. Even the people
who come from foreign countries and commend the progress of Armenia
towards democracy mention the absence of pluralism on television.
Meanwhile, Armenia made another move on this track for progress, and
the TV channels boycotted the news conferences and debates. The
society and especially the journalists are trying to understand the
logic of this decision. According to the information, the decision
was made in the context of the presidential election to remove
undesirable people from television. However, it is a decision with
the weakest logic because one way or another, the opposition figures
appear on TV by a strictly controlled schedule, and if the given
opposition figure should not appear on TV, the TV channels simply do
not cover their news conferences. In other words, it could be
regulated through localized instructions. Meanwhile, the TV channels
are not covering the news conferences of the pro-government
Dashnaktsutyun activists, even when they speak about the Armenian
cause, which is now a government policy. In other words, it is more
logical that the problem is the relation with the clubs. Perhaps the
government wants something from the press clubs. The clubs are still
unable to understand what exactly. It is also difficult to
understand. Apparently, it was a backstage decision that on the eve
of the parliamentary election the clubs earned considerable money
from advertisement pinned up behind the guest and through the guest
and did not share the money with the government. Now the government
has apparently decided to place the clubs in a difficult situation
and make them agree to a deal with the government and pay them,
otherwise the TV channels will not be covering the news conference,
which means that advertising in press clubs becomes meaningless,
threatening the existence of the clubs. If our supposition is true,
many wonder why the government with so much money and levers needs
the peanuts of the clubs. Has it ever occurred to anyone why
Balaganov picked the pocket of a passenger in the tram after getting
50 thousand rubles from Bender?
JAMES HAKOBYAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Oct 19 2007
WHOSE ADMINISTRATION GIVES INSTRUCTIONS
The society has tried to make the decisions of the Armenian
government fit into some logic for multiple times and has always
failed. Nevertheless, the society continues to look for the link of
many decisions of the government and logic, and recently a new
opportunity arose in connection with a decision, and it is not clear
where it was made, the president administration or the government.
Although it is only suppositions by `reliable sources' and the
reality in Armenia proved for multiple times that this decision was
made by the government. For the reader's information who is not
related to the information sphere, the press clubs have appeared in
the past two or three years, and have become an indispensable part of
the life of reporters, where news conferences and debates of people
from different spheres, mainly political activists are held. The
clubs also pinned up ads of different goods and services which were
shown in TV reports because most of these news conferences, debates
and discussions become in important topic of media reports.
Meanwhile, since October 15 the TV channels have not covered any
event at press clubs. The media reported that the instruction to the
TV channels came from the president administration, namely from the
office of the head of the administration Armen Gevorgyan. Earlier,
the Armenian media had reported, and it was never refuted, that the
TV channels are dealt with by Armen Gevorgyan who was the deputy head
of the president administration then. Therefore, in case of a
unanimous behavior of the TV channels the society logically refers it
to Armen Gevorgyan. Certainly, even if those who reported this
information did not have a source of information, they would
logically suppose from information that had never been refuted that
if the TV channels decide in a night to boycott the press clubs, it
means it is someone's instruction, and this someone is Armen
Gevorgyan, who is known as the unofficial controller of this sphere.
On the other hand, however, the Armenian media have recently reported
that Armen Gevorgyan handed out this function to Serge Sargsyan's
assistant, the leader of the MIAK Party Levon Martirosyan, and now he
is the instructor for the Armenian TV channels. This information was
not refuted either. In other words, it is quite possible that now the
TV channels operate on Levon Martirosyan's instructions which as the
same as Serge Sargsyan's instructions. And the majority of the
citizens of Armenia are convinced that the Armenian TV channels
operate on instructions from some center, otherwise no TV channel
would miss the chance to televise at least part of Levon
Ter-Petrosyan's address, for even a non-specialist knows that the
address of the first president after a decade of silence is a
sensation and will attract audience. There is more evidence that the
Armenian TV channels are pressured by the government. Even the people
who come from foreign countries and commend the progress of Armenia
towards democracy mention the absence of pluralism on television.
Meanwhile, Armenia made another move on this track for progress, and
the TV channels boycotted the news conferences and debates. The
society and especially the journalists are trying to understand the
logic of this decision. According to the information, the decision
was made in the context of the presidential election to remove
undesirable people from television. However, it is a decision with
the weakest logic because one way or another, the opposition figures
appear on TV by a strictly controlled schedule, and if the given
opposition figure should not appear on TV, the TV channels simply do
not cover their news conferences. In other words, it could be
regulated through localized instructions. Meanwhile, the TV channels
are not covering the news conferences of the pro-government
Dashnaktsutyun activists, even when they speak about the Armenian
cause, which is now a government policy. In other words, it is more
logical that the problem is the relation with the clubs. Perhaps the
government wants something from the press clubs. The clubs are still
unable to understand what exactly. It is also difficult to
understand. Apparently, it was a backstage decision that on the eve
of the parliamentary election the clubs earned considerable money
from advertisement pinned up behind the guest and through the guest
and did not share the money with the government. Now the government
has apparently decided to place the clubs in a difficult situation
and make them agree to a deal with the government and pay them,
otherwise the TV channels will not be covering the news conference,
which means that advertising in press clubs becomes meaningless,
threatening the existence of the clubs. If our supposition is true,
many wonder why the government with so much money and levers needs
the peanuts of the clubs. Has it ever occurred to anyone why
Balaganov picked the pocket of a passenger in the tram after getting
50 thousand rubles from Bender?
JAMES HAKOBYAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress