Lost of Freedom of Speech for Georgian Media

Will TV Companies Be Still Censured?

Nona Suvariani, Tbilisi

Georgian media sources had expected that parliamentary elections on May 21 were going to be some kind of examination for them. How did Georgian TV Companies pass the exam? Why do journalists think that Georgian TV Media will be censured once more? How does the Georgian authority manage to create the acceptable environment for itself?

On April 27 a group of opposition rushed into the office of the Director General of the Public Broadcasting and Levan Kubaneishvili, the Director General, assessed it as being on the level of “suppression against Georgia Public Broadcasting.”  The opposition demanded that they be provided with one-hour live-air-time and that a film taken Election Day be shared with the wider Georgian viewing audience. They also requested to establish a council of journalists that would control editorial policy in the public TV Company. Almost every journalist describes the activities of GPB as representing media repression.  However, several journalists see that the Public Broadcasting does not show all facts what are shown fail to be done on an adequate level For others, either they do not or cannot see a problem. It is also possible that some may have reduced standards and they don’t have high expectations in the first place.

Although Irakli Tripolski was appointed director of the Board of Trustees of GPB after the elections, he decided to resign after the parliamentary elections. He explained his decision as follows:

“The main reason for my decision was vast responsibilities I should have under the public broadcasting law. However, I was not empowered with such rights.  The society elected me to lead the Board of Trustees. I expected to change something but finally I could not see any perspective for this opportunity. Under such circumstances it is not possible for me to stay in a position where I am not able to do the job. Being a chairperson, having vast responsibilities on paper but to be actually deprived of all right, and such a situation is unbearable.”

Irakli Tripolski pointed out that reorganization of the GPB aimed to attract society to the company and raise the level of public trust. The TV Company had to reveal the facts adequately and should be impartial on each and every issue.
 
However, “what I saw that it did not conform in this manner. I was not given the right to make changes as provided under law. I could only approve priorities and budget; appointing or firing director, and nothing more. Nowadays, you cannot dismiss a director even though you want to; I did not want to interfere with editorial policy. At least I should have had some control mechanism in the public company. When I remarked about some mistakes, they only excused themselves and then promised to correct the problem the next day. In fact, they never did anything.”

When the council of the GPB was just set up and Levan Kubaneishvili was appointed as Director Genera, journalist Ia Antadze doubted about the impartiality of the TV Company. She stated parliamentary elections would be kind of an exam for the company. However, the elections tested not only GPB but many stakeholders in Georgian society.  Pre-election campaign was also very important. Ia Antadze reported the National Movement managed to expose its positive side with the support of Georgian TV Companies and hid all negative features during the run-up to the election. Nobody heard about the suppression on teachers; about mass release of prisoners from prisons and how observers were abused. However, none of Georgian TV Stations discussed above-mentioned violations, including GPB.

“Many people claimed that GPB maintained balanced news during the pre-election campaign. However, I think it was not enough. The initial responsibility of the media is to describe pre-election environment in details and to an adequate degree. People should know the real situation where they are going to vote and to not base their decision on the biased information. They should be able to make an informed choice of whom to or not to vote for.  When it was announced that government had repressed Georgians TV companies did not show the real situation to voters. Thus, we have similar result. 120 mandate candidates out of total 150 were again won by the National ruling party again.”

Ia Antadze said the most important questions were not asked during the pre-election campaign.

“TV Company “Mze” was too smooth when covering pre-election campaign. Rustavi 2 was very biased. Only talk shows of the Rustavi 2 are enough to prove it. For example, talk-show “Triangle” did not raise important questions.”

Journalist did not like how the demonstration of May 26 was revealed. She cannot appreciate when the number of demonstrators is increased in news-items. She cannot accept when Georgian population does not have information about the arranged demonstration where people protest the results of the elections.

While covering pre-election campaign TV Stations exposed how easily controlled they are. However, since Rose Revolution so much is said about controlled TV Companies that the topic has become a bit old-fashioned.

Ia Antadze considers one-party government in the country can be efficient only when there is not information provided. Thus, the journalist expects one more wave of censure that will attack TV Stations. Consequently, talk-shows might also be closed down.

“They will do it in various ways. Some of talk-shows will expire their contract term like it happened about Inga Grigolia’s show. In other cases new licenses will not be granted to new political programs.”

Journalist Eka Kevanishvili investigated how TV frequencies were seized from their owners since Rose Revolution.

“TV Channels where normal public programs and debates could have been showed (I mean TV Company 202, Obiektiv and other regional TV companies) were closed down. The government seized channels, license from owners and threatened them. The directors of the TV Companies were made to sign contracts on transfer their property under shady circumstances. Consequently, the authority was able to obtain broadcasting frequencies and used them according to its own interests. Now we have new TV Companies “Alania”, “Sakartvelo”… and these are basically the mouthpieces of the government for its own narrowly defined agenda.

Evidently, the government applies to same methods they used soon after the revolution. One of the methods is manipulating with licenses.

On May 22, National Commission of Communications ceased administrative processing of license and modification applications of the TV Radio Company “Trialeti”, Broadcasting Company “Hereti”, Studio “Maestro,” TV-Radio Company Evrika, Ltd”, “Patriarchate of Georgia,” “Igrika, Ltd”, “Sarke Consulting”, “Georgian University.”

Representatives of the National Commission of Communications explained the delay on issuing new licenses was caused by the need to surveying public opinion. However, based on the Law on Broadcasting similar survey shall be carried out once in two years. Last survey was implemented in 2004. Since that nobody took the time to recall the necessity of the survey, it does seem odd that now they want to follow the rules.  National Commission could not define why they needed to investigate public opinion only four years later and to refuse granting licenses to the companies. They could not answer as nobody knew when the survey would be finished and when TV Stations would receive licenses. By the way, the survey serves to find out programming priorities. Thus, the survey is likely to decide that they want to see only entertainment programs and political or social programs will be in short supply.  Consequently, license on social-political programs will not be issued at all. “Small recourse has remained and only requested license must be issued. The implemented survey aims to estimate it,” – this was the reply from the Communication Commission.

Joni Nanetashvili, director of the TV Company “Trialeti” is one of those who were refused a license. He still cannot understand why the regulation commission refused him.

“There are places in the area we broadcast where population cannot watch our channel. The Regulation Commission demanded to provide the population with normal broadcasting. We requested additional frequencies to resolve the problem.”

When license was granted to the TV Company “Alania” the survey had not been yet completed. However, the Regulation Commission chose not to pay attention this little problem whatsoever.

Mamuka Ghlonti, director general of the TV Company “Maestro”, stated his company is a cable TV Station and it should not be restricted in its priorities.

“By the way, TV Company “Alania” has been illegally broadcasting for two years. When I asked the lawyer of the Regulation Commission why the Alania worked he replied he had no idea that it was broadcasting outside of the law”.

Based on the situation of the freedom of expression in the country, Mamuka Ghlonti thinks “Georgian media will face an even worse situation in the nearest future, which will be even direr than what was the situation after the 2003 Rose Revolution. What was the standard in the period of the Soviet Union is now happening in Georgia.  Freedom of expression will soon die in Georgia.”