Every
\nyear, in early May, we celebrate World Press Freedom Day, an event that
\nprovides an opportunity to measure to what extent journalists’ rights and
\nfreedom of speech are observed. The Media Pluralism Monitor, developed and
\nfunded by the European Commission and the European Parliament, is one such
\nmeasurement tool. The report looks at case studies from the 19 member countries
\ncovered by the analysis, and is aimed at identifying potential threats to media
\nfreedom in the European Union. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Four
\nbig risk areas are examined: basic protection, media pluralism, political
\nindependence and social inclusion. The indicators used to measure the threats
\nto basic protection are freedom of speech, the observance of the right of
\naccess to public information, journalistic standards and independence from
\nnational authorities. As regards political independence, the report looks at
\npolitical control over media channels and broadcasting networks and the degree
\nof independence in funding public media institutions. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The
\ngeneral conclusion is that the only field where the risks are low is basic protection
\nin the media, and the risks for the other fields are average at European level.
\nStill, against this background, Romania is faced with an average risk in all
\nfour main fields. Moreover, the basic protection indicators place Romania on a
\nunique position, as Adina Marincea, a researcher with Media Research Centre has
\ntold us. Media Research Centre is the institution that has drawn up the country
\nreport for Romania:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Out
\nof the 19 countries analysed, Romania is the only one facing an average risk when
\nit comes to basic protection and observing journalistic standards. Among the
\nmost pressing issues that we have identified, and which journalists in Romania
\nhave to deal with, especially in the printed press, is the precarious economic
\nsituation. This translates into situations in which the payment of salaries is
\ndelayed and unreliable, in job insecurity, salary cuts and employment contracts
\nfor short periods of time, which ensure little social protection against
\nunemployment. At the same time, these contracts make it easier for employers to
\nsack journalists.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
This precarious economic situation is sometimes
\nclosely linked with the interests of the employer, which do not always coincide
\nwith the standards of the profession, as journalist Petrisor Obae, the
\ncoordinator of the paginademedia.ro website has told us:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The problems in the
\nRomanian media are two-fold. First of all, at a macro level, owners and
\nemployers in the media have realised that the media can be a powerful toy that
\ncan be used to advance their own personal interests. To this adds the economic
\npressure. Secondly, at the micro level, that of journalists themselves, there
\nare many who simply don’t know how to write and do research and who are not
\nfamiliar with the basic rules of their profession. Social problems also play a
\nrole and they are used by employers to their advantage. When journalists’ basic
\nneeds are not satisfied and they have to worry about putting food on the table,
\nthey will naturally be more likely to ignore the ethics of their profession, a
\nnotion which is already becoming obsolete.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
In fact, one of the issues identified by the report
\non media pluralism in Europe concerns the observance of professional standards,
\nin particular by the private media, which accounts for the biggest share in the
\nmedia sector. Here is Adina Marincea again:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Journalistic standards and codes are often
\nnon-existent, they are not observed or are drawn up by employers and managers,
\nnot by journalists or professional associations. All these factors interfere
\nwith the editorial content and there have been many accusations of illegal
\nfunding of the media by various economic and political players, and even of
\njournalistic censorship. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Speaking about interference and censorship, we
\ninevitably approach another field, namely political independence. Adina
\nMarincea has more:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
When speaking about political independence, there
\nare two indicators that usually draw alarm signals. Similar cases have been
\nreported in Slovakia, Slovenia and Lithuania.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The fact that part of the media, especially the private media, has
\nbecome excessively politicised in order to protect employers’ interests,
\nincluding their economic ones, is the conclusion of another study, the FreeEx
\nreport, drawn up by the ActiveWatch NGO. The report presents situations in
\nwhich employers pressure journalists into not publishing certain articles that
\ncould affect the image of some political figures or disclose their abuses.
\nThere are cases of journalists who, because they dared publish such materials,
\nwere ‘punished’ by having their collaboration contracts terminated. Also, there
\nare cases of local mayors who used the local media to blackmail their political
\nopponents. To Razvan Martin, political and economic dependence is also caused
\nby the bad financial situation that has not improved at all for some media
\ncompanies. Razvan Martin: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Being
\nvery vulnerable from an economic point of view, some media outlets are
\nvulnerable to pressure from certain politicians or various financiers. However,
\nI’m not convinced that a better economic situation of certain media outlets or
\nperiodicals would make them less vulnerable to certain influences. I’m afraid
\nthat their reason of being is to play such political games and not to inform
\nthe public or to obtain a legitimate economic profit. I’m referring to the most
\nvisible, mainstream media outlets, the TV news channels, focusing on the public
\nagenda. But I don’t want to generalise because there are still very many honest
\njournalists and quite honourable media institutions. There are media platforms
\nproducing quality journalism, online in particular.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Having a different economic and editorial situation,
\nthe two public broadcasting institutions, the Romanian Television and the
\nRomanian Radio Broadcasting Corporation have been confronted with problems too
\nin the past year, according to the FreeEx Report on the Media Freedom in
\nRomania. Razvan Martin:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The public radio is doing OK from an economic point
\nof view, but there were problems there too related to a campaign against an
\notherwise legitimate bill to amend the public broadcasting law. There is even a
\nsummons by the National Audiovisual Council warning that airtime was abusively
\nused to attack this bill. The Romanian Television is on the verge of collapse
\nhaving accumulated huge debts and politicians do not appear interesting in
\naddressing the situation.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Recently, Parliament has appointed by vote a new President and Director
\nGeneral at the Romanian Television. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
World Press Freedom Day on May 3 is an opportunity to assess the state of press freedom throughout the world.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":136,"featured_media":141902,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[42997],"tags":[30295],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-141901","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-society-today","tag-press-freedom"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n