Stats
-
-
Jul
3
Reports about how the CIS is dangerous for journalists are so common that their worthy efforts are starting to sound like a bad pop song. Freedom House is the newest NGO/think tank to give its evaluation of media freedom. To no one’s surprise its report, Muzzling the Media: The Return of Censorship in the CIS, “makes the assertion that most former Soviet states, including those in Central Asia and the
But media control in the CIS is not like the old Soviet model where what was and wasn’t allowed is directed from a central agency. Now successful media control is accomplished through a combination of methods to ensure self censorship. That mix includes “state-enabled oligarchic control, broadcast monopolies of presidential “families,” judicial persecution and subtle and overt forms of intimidation.” The report paints a picture is so bleak, outside of the few “courageous journalists,” that the only refuge for unadulterated information lies on the internet and among bloggers. But even Internet might have hit its freedom peak since it too is “fast becoming a target of greater interest for new regulatory intervention by the authorities.”
Still, while the report is certainly correct to lambaste censorship in the CIS, Freedom House’s own ideological position should not be overlooked. The group has a long history of being a mouthpiece for US interests since its founding in 1941. Its annual “Comparative Survey of Freedom” has been charged with basically boosting the “freedom rating” of US allies. For example, according to one evaluation of Freedom House’s reports, “On the 1989 survey, for example, South Africa’s “freedom rating” was worse than Nicaragua’s, but South Korea–where there has been government sponsored violence and corruption at levels unheard of in Nicaragua under the Sandinistas–was rated “more free” than Nicaragua by several points. The same held true vis-a-vis
More recently, Freedom House has been charged with being the ideological arm of the Bush Administration and is said to have received funds for “for clandestine activities inside
The group’s political connections aside, there is one aspect of the report that is more telling: the fact that it excludes “active war zones” from evaluation. As of late 2006, there are 20 armed conflicts around the world, many of which have been the main reason for journalists deaths. The Committee to Protect Journalists states that 56 journalists were confirmed killed in 2006, of them 45 were killed in counties with armed conflicts. Of those 45, 32 journalists were killed in
Still, such jostling doesn’t belie the seriousness of the poor state of journalism in the CIS. It is only to remind us that not only should we know who is speaking but how they are speaking.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Comments
26 Comments so far
-
Subscribe
RIA Novosti- Global Voices: Russia
-
-
Freedom House?
What the heck is this? A polite name for ???????
PS. Sean, I’m wondering what the picture (man sitting in circle) next to Word verification window means?
Are you getting a lot of comments from people uncapable to read? :))
Back in the 19 sixties, FH received CIA funding. A point which it now acknowledges. During that period, I recall reading somewhere that it employed McCarthyite tactics against the anti-war movement.
Its main NY office is downtown, near the East Village’s relatively large west Ukrainian emigre neighborhood. Adrian Karatnycky, FH’s long time head is from that neighborhood. Over the years, FH has had a west Ukrainian (particularly Galician) slant towards Russia.
The FH web site http://www.freedomhouse.org makes for some interesting reading.
In a Jan. ‘05 Newsday article, the FH’s Karatnycky likened Yushchenko to Walesa, Mandela and King.
At their political zenith, the latter mentioned three were far more popular in their respective country when compared to Yushchenko’s status in Ukraine back in late ‘04, early ‘05.
When you read something like this, its easy to see why the Russian government have clamped down on NGO’s, and who can blame them. The statement about South Korea is particularily telling. As a point of interest, does anyone know any example of a Russian funded organisation carrying out politically motivated activities in the US?) Wouldnt that be funny!
There is Radio Svoboda in totalitarian Moscow. But Radio Mayak couldn’t get permission to open station in democratic US ….
The only Russian funded organization of some kind of political activity in US - ??? (Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki) :))
“But Radio Mayak couldn’t get permission to open station in democratic US ….”
Do you have any facts and documents to back this up? I presume the insinuation is that it is not allowed to “open up” a station for political reasons.
I have been involved in radio business in the US for over a decade and I find this extremely unlikely when there is virtually no restrictions on radio speech except few profanities.
As for US based NGO funded from Russia, Pavlovsky tried to set something up with Deripaska’s money; I don not know if anything came out of it. It really does not matter much. Considering GDP and budget differences, Russia would do much better spending at home what little money it can spare on propaganda. After all it needs more nuclear submarines to fight the Chechen war. Or, what a novel idea, maybe some NGO activities would reduce corruption. Too bad these NGO would probably be funded from abroad.
Yo Cyrill:
The Russian “state giant” Gazprom owns Ekho Moskvy.
On what’s wrong with “Russian government controlled media”:
Ariel Cohen at Front Page Magazine: http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28659
Ariel Cohen on RTTV: http://www.russiatoday.ru/spotlight/release/461/video
American style TV journalism would’ve questioned Ariel Cohen on his Front Page Magazine commentary. Why the soft pedal? This isn’t the kind of a Russian media review point being stressed on either side of the Atlantic Ocean.
“Dance, dance, dance, dance.” 19 seventies disco tune.
Huh?
I fail to see how does this in any way relates to what I said…
As a comparison, I always found the Reporters Without Borders Annual Press Freedom ranking to be an interesting read, and it is unlikely that they are in the pocket of the CIA or any other US interests.
On their ranking, Russia scores a woeful 147th out of 168 countries.
Also worth mentioning from the RSF ranking is that for the all talk of Estonia’s slipping into Facism, they manage to achieve 6th position in the world for press freedom. I wish the UK could boast of this.
“virtually no restrictions on radio speech except few profanities.”
Yeah … except for that teensy weensy restriction of actually becoming licensed to own and operate a radio station in the US.
FCC strictly regulates approval for operating licenses of new stations. Approximately 30,000 permit applications were filed with the FCC last year for the construction of radio stations. The FCC website doesn’t indicate how many were actually approved. Considering that they make a point of saying they aren’t allowing any further expansion of AM/FM frequencies, i would say it isn’t very man. Currently the FCC is not accepting any further permit applications for AM stations at all. Period.
Easier bet would be to attempt to purchase an existing radio station. That also would require FCC approval. Of course, the current owner doesn’t have to sell to a Russian organization that might be broadcasting what many Americans would still consider “anti-American propaganda”.
These days, they can always do internet radio. I listen to Russian radio stations in this fashion rather often. It sure catches the attention of coworkers.
The ultimate topic of journalists being killed, threatened, beaten, what have you in Russia and CIS countries plays out as a multi-faceted problem. Some of it is cultural, where I’ve often had the sense that many Russian citizens consider journalists who actually INVESTIGATE news as troublesome nosey people, etc. The mixture of organized crime or organized crime practices with business combined with a government and police apathy, corruption, or incompetence (take your pick) also creates an environment where reporters had better watch what they say and about whom they say it.
Until those willing to resort to violence to silence a journalist .. actually face a strong chance of being caught and convicted … we are unlikely to see any change.
One little tidbit - when did the 2nd Chechen war actually end? Did it “officially” or is it just set to a low simmer?
I remember the Radio Mayak story, but can’t find it. But my memory was that the possibility of starting a Radio Mayak station in the US was rhetorical. In a statement in May 2000, Konstantin Vetrov, the chairman of the State Duma’s Information Policy Committee, said “Notably, Radio Liberty, the Voice of America, the BBC and other foreign media operate in Russia. It would be fair if Russian radio stations such as Mayak or Radio Rossii could operate, say, in Washington or London.” To this Mikhail
Seslavinskiy, first deputy minister, added, “One cannot imagine Mayak broadcasting in English, covering political developments in the United States and criticizing the domestic or foreign policy of the Clinton administration. In this respect, Russia is one of the most liberal countries.” I couldn’t find any more recent mention of Radio Mayak starting a US affiliate. I don’t think the idea was serious looked into anyway.
Plus, Russian television does broadcast in the US. For about $10 extra I can get Russian TV on my cable service.
That said, according to US radio licensing law, “The station license required under this chapter shall not be granted to or held by any foreign government or the representative thereof.” So the US law forbids at home what it does in other countries. Which of course isn’t surprising.
I agree with Tim’s referencing of Reporters without Borders. I tend to take them as more of an authority. But I should reiterate that just because Freedom House gets US money, it doesn’t mean that their assessment of Russian media is entirely wrong. I find bias good and people should be aware of it. Bias, at least in my opinion, doesn’t make something untrue. It’s the opportunistic belief in objectivity and the using it as a rhetorical tool to undermine another’s opinion that I find more dishonest.
Russian television does broadcast in the US.
Good point Sean. I’ve looked into these … aren’t most of them Russian language Jewish stations? Not to be too pointed about that, but I think there is some difference. Katja looked over the programs offered on the 2 stations we could subscribe to and rolled her eyes …
It’s one of the reasons why we subscribe to Netflix … so we can watch Russian movies. After a year, we’ve watched most of their catalog, however.
One point I wanted to add about radio stations for sale. Most of the stations for sale in the US are smaller, low power stations (which is why they are for sale, they can’t attract as large an audience as more powerful stations). The power and frequency of these stations are very strictly regulated, of course. So, while I seem to recall something like 7 or 8 AM Russian language radio stations when traveling through Chicago … I couldn’t listen to any of them for more than about 15 or 20 minutes while driving as I quickly fell out of their broadcast area.
Also - kudos on finding that section of the US law, regarding radio station ownership. I was looking for the same, wound up at the FCC website, and that is just a fricking maze (no surprise that).
I guess Russia could resort to night-time, south of the border, high-power, pirate radio broadcasts. That would be a switch.
FCC strictly regulates approval for operating licenses of new stations.
This is not necessarily for the purposes of censorship though, although I’m quite sure the licensing system can be and is used as such. The main reason for regulating the airwaves, or at least the original reason, was to avoid radio stations competing with each other willy-nilly on the same frequencies, rendering any attempt to listen to a single station impossible.
In the UK, they make sure that radio stations don’t ‘overlap’ one another and you can listen to a single station cleanly and without interference from another. In Dubai, by contrast, you couldn’t listen to an FM iPod transmitter for more than a few minutes before some Indian woman started howling over the top of whatever it was you were listening to.
Therefore, it is pretty difficult to tell how much the regulations are used to put some discipline in the airwaves and how much they are used to prevent anti-government radio stations from springing up.
Sorry Cyrill. I jumped the gun. Nevertheless, those previously mentioned points do relate to a Russian media which is imperfect in a way different from what’s typically presented in Eng. lang. mass media.
Nick Petro and Justin Raimondo have provided details on the relative openness of Russian media at large. Not too long ago, the BBC had a feature with Misha Fishman of Russian Newsweek and an editor of a Russian tabloid whose name escapes me. They both pretty much said what Petro and Raimondo expressed.
To followup on my previously posted comments, the “state owned giant” Gazprom owns Ekho Moskvy. That station is certainly not on the Russian government friendly side. Overall, Gazprom appears a more open minded media owner than say the non-Russian owned Sanoma/Independent Media group involved with The Moscow and St. Petersburg Times, as well as Russia Profile. In Gazprom’s case, it can be argued that they’re too open in terms of the slant that’s evident at Ekho Moskvy. In some circles, Russia has been accused (rather dubiously) of favoring Pridnestrovie over Moldova. On Ekho Moskvy, one is more likely to get the Modovan view of the Pridnestrovie-Moldovan dispute as opposed to the Pridnestrovie perspective. A point confirmed to me by non-Tiraspol Times sources in Moscow.
As per Russian lang. US radio stations, in the NY market, 87.9 FM, plays Russian top 40, with local cultural event announcements. It has a pretty strong frequency. At last notice (been awhile since I last checked), the not as strong frequency 570 AM, is essentially WKGB (Khodorkovsky, Gusinsky and Berezovsky).
”To followup on my previously posted comments, the “state owned giant” Gazprom owns Ekho Moskvy. That station is certainly not on the Russian government friendly side. ”
It’s quite true, and I’ve often wondered why Gazprom bought it in the first place - it must be literally to make money, come what may. I wonder also if Ekho Moscow is simply a court jester - deliberately bought by the state, but allowed to pump out its anti-government rhetoric anyway, simply as a pretence. Its not half as popular as it once was though and I could be wrong, but it seems to me a lot of ordinary Russians lump it into the liberal crowd, along with Kasyanov, Yavlinsky etc. Which means nobody cares about it, basically.
”One little tidbit - when did the 2nd Chechen war actually end? Did it “officially” or is it just set to a low simmer?”
I would say its simmering on a very low gas mark, maybe until the next generation comes along. The Chechens have been beaten before but came back again. I dont actually know though if it was officially called ‘over’. I imagine Putin didnt make any formal announcement, unlike Bush on the aircraft carrier in 2003 re Iraq. We all know how that didnt end.
There’re some who say that Gazprom and the Russian government have some different agendas, which are at odds with each other.
In the US, more government isn’t necessarily always so bad. For years, the US government affiliated VOA has had the reputation of being more objective than the largely Amercian government funded, but not American government affiliated RFE/RL. Sergie Roy, among others has noted this. Mind you, this is the contrasting reputation the two have had over a lenghy period. Of recent note, RFE/RL has improved.
This is not necessarily for the purposes of censorship though, although I’m quite sure the licensing system can be and is used as such. The main reason for regulating the airwaves, or at least the original reason, was to avoid radio stations competing with each other willy-nilly on the same frequencies, rendering any attempt to listen to a single station impossible.
I don’t think that I implied that such regulation is censorship. However, the FCC does have certain requirements for radio station ownership, as indicated by Sean’s quoting of the actual law. And you certainly can not just build a radio station and begin broadcasting whatever content you wish, for the reasons you indicate.
There is censorship of public airwaves in the US, but it is generally limited to vulgar language, etc. Stations self-censor to avoid fines and possible lawsuits, etc.
“The station license required under this chapter shall not be granted to or held by any foreign government or the representative thereof.” So the US law forbids at home what it does in other countries. Which of course isn’t surprising.
I stand corrected on the Mayak issue. If Mayak is indeed state owned and operated. Comparison to RFE/RL is hardly applicable since it is a private non-profit corporation and receives funding like many other non-profit grantees. If RFE/RL is a government operation, then PBS is also a government media outlet.
In the UK, they make sure that radio stations don’t ‘overlap’ one another and you can listen to a single station cleanly and without interference from another.”
A couple of years ago I spent almost three weeks driving around UK and I was amazed at how little selection was available in the AM band. BBC 1 through 6 I think plus a couple of local BBC affiliates. There was one talk station of note that was mostly sports.
That station is certainly not on the Russian government friendly side.
I have listened to Ekho Moskvy a lot both in Russia as well as over the Internet. It is not an anti government side. They have an extremely balanced lineup of guests. Hell, Prokhanov is on there at least once a week it seems. It always surprises me how biases in perception skew those perceptions. That Ekho Moskvy does not sing the same tune as ORT or NTV does not mean it is anti-government. It only means ORT and NTV are pro-government. Ekho is nowhere near Air America or Pacifica Radio in the US in terms of being anti anything. Check out vitriol towards either Bush or Clinton from fringes like Randy Rhodes or Michael Savage for comparison. I have never heard anything of the kind from Ekho.
There is censorship of public airwaves in the US, but it is generally limited to vulgar language, etc. Stations self-censor to avoid fines and possible lawsuits, etc.
This is true. There are only a few guidelines imposed on me when I host my radio show. No profanity, however even that has eroded vs. a decade ago. Carlin’s list of deadly worlds has shrunk. There is absolutely no political censorship, except calls to rebellion, overthrow of government or murder of political figures. However, even these can happen from time to time. Especially with anonymity of callers to talk shows.
Prokhanov’s antigovernment, although I’m not sure if that was Cyril’s point or not.
Regarding Cyrill’s point: with the Albats-Latynina lineup in mind, Ekho Moskvy is on par with the Pacifica Foundation.
My local Pacifica Foundation affiliate does get conservative, neoliberal and neoconservative views on. Granted, it’s overall slant is in a certain direction.
Is Air America still around? I suspect a comparison of its funding with Ekho Moskvy will show the latter to receive much more in moolah.
To Cyrill.
You sound very like Felgenhauer (according to BBC - “military” analizator). I’m sorry but I have no interest to “argue” with him….
As to Reporters Without Brains and Freedom House ratings - who cares? Will it change anything? They are free to play their games :))
Fortunatelly, Internet and My Brains are out of their control.
As to radio stations - my point was simple. US law doesn’t allow foreign governments to run radio stations overthere.
As to TV - every person in Russia can watch anything that broadcasted from the skies. And CCN, BBC etc. are included in standard package for cable/digital subscribtion. Simply because satellites are out of US law :)) As well as Internet.
Private radio stations are run by Americans - of Soviet origin but Americans! So this is another story.
PS. last time Mayak was mentioned by Puting at G8 (if I recall right).
Therefore, it is pretty difficult to tell how much the regulations are used to put some discipline in the airwaves and how much they are used to prevent anti-government radio stations from springing up.
Tim. You mixing two different matters.
Licensing is not aimed at “anti-government” stations. It’s pure technical reasons - to regulate frequency. And not about “clear sound” but avoiding interference between civil, military and other allocated sectors of waves.
Not letting foreign governments OPERATE radio stations - is pure political matter.
This doesn’t mean that Russia is more democratic. This means that in Yeltsin era there were far too many idiots and traitors in Kremlin.
This “two terms president” rule - just stupid copy from US constitution. If you don’r agree that it’s stupid - look at Tony Blair :))
“You sound very like Felgenhauer (according to BBC - ‘military’ analizator). I’m sorry but I have no interest to “argue” with him….”
****
He’s one of several who serve as a Russian answer to Cyrill’s statement about America hating American media people.
The Moscow Times tired of Felgenhauer, only to have him replaced with Alexander Golts, who is pretty much the same.