MEMO 98, in cooperation with Adil Soz, has been conducting an independent and non-partisan project to systematically monitor the Kazakh media coverage with a special focus on the 19 September parliamentary elections in Kazakhstan. After the election, MEMO 98 has issued regular reports, including the media monitoring findings which were disseminated to the local media. The project's findings are not offered to support any one of the political platforms. By following an internationally accepted methodology, it has sought to assess whether the media has been providing objective and balanced coverage of political and social events in Kazakhstan.

The media monitoring exercise was conducted from January 3, 2005 to February 3, 2005, using qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. The quantitative analysis measured the total amount of time and space devoted to the different political groups on the four TV channels and in the four newspapers. The qualitative analysis evaluated whether the information about the political parties and candidates was positive, negative or neutral in content.

The media monitoring team found a wide difference in the type of news presented by different outlets as well as in the way the parties and their representatives were portrayed by the broadcast and print media.

Main findings

- The media monitoring results showed that the press was less active in covering political parties during the monitored period.
- Most of the monitored media outlets were one-sided and showed a clear bias in favor of the ruling authorities both in the quantity and the tone of presented information.
- Khabar TV continued its bias reporting by providing President Nazarbayev with 38.4% and the Government with 32% of the political news coverage, with an overwhelmingly positive slant. Conversely, the state broadcaster ignored opposition activities.
- Kazakhstan 1, another state-owned channel, adopted a similar approach by allocating most of its newscast to the authorities. It allotted most of its broadcast time to the Government (32.5%) and the President (32%). The tone of the coverage was mainly positive.
- Channel 31 was more balanced in covering political events by presenting a wider range of opinions and allowing politicians on both sides of the political spectrum to receive media exposure. Although the authorities were devoted more than half of all the political coverage, it was rather balanced. Also, opposition parties like Patriots, Ak Zhol and Rukhaniyat were covered alongside the pro-presidential party Otan.
- Both state-funded newspapers (Kazakhstanskaya Pravda and Egemen Kazakhstan) demonstrated a clear bias in favor of the authorities by allotting them with more than 80% of its space. Moreover, the information was predominantly positive. Furthermore, while referring to political parties, only the pro-presidential party Otan was given the same coverage.
- Express K, a private paper, painted a similar picture in its political stories, with a strong preference for the ruling powers and with rare and negative coverage of the opposition.
- Zhash Alash, another private newspaper, covered the authorities as well as the pro-presidential party Otan in a negative way. On the other hand, it showed clear favoritism for Ak Zhol.

Legal framework

The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the media law are the basic guidelines in the information sphere, as regards the professional activities of media outlets and journalists in Kazakhstan.. Article 20 of the Constitution of Kazakhstan prohibits censorship and states, "everyone shall have the right to freely receive and disseminate information by any means not prohibited by the law."

Political parties in Kazakhstan do not enjoy any special status, and no specific law protects their existence. The only legal defense of their rights is similar to the common procedure for the protection of one's honor, dignity and business reputation, provided by the existing legislation.

As regards media coverage of political parties and their representatives, the Election Code only regulates media behavior in the course of the election campaign. Apart from this specific period, the decision on the bias and completeness of the news in media outlets fully depends on the editorial policy of the individual newspaper or television station.

Although there are many ethical codes and internationally recognized standards in the world to guide journalists and media outlets through the process of covering political life, they are not always respected in the daily practice of Kazakh media outlets.

1.) Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention characterizes the right to information as a fundamental human right. People are entitled to demand: "that information provided by journalists, be authentic and fair, when sharing opinions, without interference by authorities and the private sector."

2.) The International Federation of Journalists' Declaration of the Principles on the Conduct of Journalists identifies the standard professional conduct of journalists, when holding, receiving, imparting and commenting on information. The first duty of journalists is "respect for the truth and for the right of the public to truth."

MEDIA MONITORING RESULTS

Nowadays information and communication play key roles in shaping the personal views of citizens and the democratic development of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The extent to which citizens are involved in the socio-political life of the country indicates the level of democracy in the country. Such involvement is only possible when citizens receive full and objective information from the media. Thus the responsibility of the media and journalists has become more significant than in the past. As a result, it strengthens journalists' obligations. For example, the news in the electronic and print media should be based on facts. Additionally, the information should be clearly divided into news and opinions/commentary sections.

Nevertheless, objective media coverage apart from the election period must be assessed in the context of the existing political system in the country. The political system in the Republic of Kazakhstan combines party-lists with single-mandate constituencies, which favors an independent candidate over a candidate in a party list. As a result of this system, where only 10 seats out of 77 in the Mails (Parliament) are distributed among the party lists, there is wide-spread apathy among parties to start or continue fighting for election or re-election.

In addition, a natural sign for developing countries like the Republic of Kazakhstan is that particular individuals establish parties right before the election in order to promote their interests. The main goal is to achieve seats in the Parliament for the leader and his close affiliates. Such parties seek more power for their leaders rather than striving to represent a wide and diverse segment of society. After the leader is elected, further party activities are no longer necessary. In most cases the party loses importance and folds. The Asar party represents an example of this phenomenon. During the electoral period and shortly afterward, Asar frequently ran TV commercials in which it explained its platform in detail. Since then however, less attention has been given to the party.

Electronic Media

Khabar, the state-owned channel, demonstrated a clear bias by almost exclusively covering the ruling authorities and the pro-presidential parties in its main evening newscasts. It devoted 38.4% and 32% to the President and Government respectively. Moreover, the tone of the channel's presentation was predominantly positive. Otherwise, it only covered two pro-presidential parties Otan and Asar with 5.4% and 1.6% respectively. The coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral and without any negative information. Conversely, it completely ignored the activities of the opposition parties.

Kazakhstan 1, another state-funded channel, demonstrated the same approach by allocating a significant portion of its main newscast to the authorities. The Government and the President enjoyed 32.5% and 32% of the channel's prime time news respectively, and were portrayed in a positive light. Conversely, the channel devoted only one fifth of its total airtime to the political parties. Among them, the Patriots party with 8% and the pro-presidential party Otan with 6.9% received the most coverage. However, while the opposition centrist party Patriots was mostly presented in a neutral manner, the information about Otan was positive. The coverage of the other parties (Rukhaniyat, Ak Zhol, DPK and KPK) was insignificant.

KTK, the private channel, devoted 55% of its politics-related prime-time news to information about the Government. The coverage contained both positive and negative references. Meanwhile, although the share devoted to the President was less extensive - 21%, the connotation of the information was almost exclusively positive. As for the political parties, the channel covered only two pro-presidential affiliations - Asar and Otan (10% and 2% respectively). Unlike the portrayal of Asar, which was predominantly positive or neutral, the coverage of Otan was more balanced. The remainder of the political spectrum was left out of the prime-time news.

Channel 31, another private broadcaster, was more balanced; it presented a wider forum of opinions referring to the activities of the monitored political subjects. Although it allocated 32% and 27.8% of its total airtime to the Government and the President, respectively, the coverage was quite balanced. The remaining political information was devoted to four political parties. Among them pro-presidential Otan was given the largest share - 12.8%. The others included the opposition Patriots with 3.5%, Ak Zhol with 2.7% and Rukhaniyat with 1.2%. The presentation of these parties was both negative and positive, without any special preferential treatment.

Print media

Kazakhstanskaya Pravda, a state-funded newspaper with the largest circulation, and which is very popular, gave strong preferential treatment to the authorities. A total of 44% of its space was given to the President, and the coverage was either positive or neutral. A total of 43% of its space was devoted to Government activities, all without a single negative reference. As for the political parties, the paper devoted most of the remaining space to pro-presidential Otan with 8% and Asar with 2%. Moreover, the information was not balanced. Ak Zhol, the opposition party received 1% of the coverage.

Similar to Kazakhstanskaya Pravda, state-funded Egemen Kazakhstan showed one-sided coverage of the main political entities and displayed a clear bias in its presentation of the ruling forces. It devoted 57% of its politics-related coverage to the President and 40% to the Government. As far as the tone of the information is concerned, both were mostly presented in a positive manner. References to the parties were extremely rare; only Otan, Ak Zhol and DVK were covered. However, unlike pro-presidential Otan, which was covered in a predominantly positive tone, the remaining two were only referred to in a negative way.

In addition, the information about the political situation in Kazakhstan provided in the private newspaper Express K was almost identical to that presented in the state-funded papers. More than 57% of the political coverage was devoted to the President was overwhelmingly positive in its tone. The government received 40% of the political coverage, but it was more balanced. Among the political parties only Otan, Ak Zhol and DVK were presented. However, the information about the latter two opposition parties was rare and predominantly negative in content.

A different editorial policy was evident in the opposition Zhash Alash paper, where almost all political coverage was negative. The paper is widely known for its promotion of opposition views, and supports the Ak Zhol party. The newspaper demonstrated its affiliation by devoting 26% of its coverage to that party. This coverage was predominantly positive, whereas the coverage of other parties was mainly negative. The President and Government received 12% and 19% of its coverage, respectively, and it was primarily negative. Although pro-presidential Otan received the most coverage among political parties (33%), the picture was predominantly negative. Asar, another pro-presidential party, received 10%, most of it being critical. The other parties were covered either very rarely or not at all.