August 30 through September 16, 2004
Released on September 21, 2004

MEMO 98, a Slovak based media watchdog, in cooperation with Adil Soz, has conducted an independent and non-partisan project to systematically monitor the media coverage prior the first round of the parliamentary elections scheduled for September 19, 2004. The project's findings are offered not to support any one of the candidates. By following an internationally accepted methodology, the project has sought to assess whether the media provided objective and balanced coverage of the elections' related events for the Kazakh citizens to make qualified choice at ballot box.

Mass media's important role of providing citizens with information they need to make well-informed choices in their lives is most evidently demonstrated during elections. Nowadays, people often decide their vote on what they learn from the media. What the media reports is therefore crucial part of the electoral landscape. Accuracy and fairness of the media coverage of candidates, political parties and other election's related issues is an important part of the level playing field required for genuinely free and democratic elections. Whilst all media should offer responsible and fair coverage, it is especially incumbent upon state media, which is financed by all of a country's citizens, to provide unbiased coverage. The citizens pay fees and the public media have legal and moral obligation to serve the interests of the general public, not partisan or private interests. Using public media for promotion of a certain political candidate or party is an illegitimate manipulation with public property. Therefore, the real failure of media freedom is when any state acquires a monopoly of the media forcing them to provide favorable coverage just to the ruling powers and critical portray of those in opposition to the government. In a democratic society, it is unacceptable to approach the news, often the main source of information, with a specific bias agenda and become a mouthpiece of any state administration or political party. One sided information or intentional omission of important facts casts doubt upon reporting. Unbalanced information is not only inaccurate but also biased towards its recipients because it offers a distorted view of events.

The media monitoring has been carried out since August 30, 2004, using qualitative and quantitative method of analysis. Quantitative analysis measured the total amount of time and space devoted to the respective political forces in the four TV channels and four newspapers. Qualitative analysis evaluated whether the information about political parties and candidates was positive, negative or neutral in its 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 running parties and candidates were portrayed by the broadcast and print media.

HIGHLIGHTS

· 26% of the time given to the elections' relevant stories on Kazakstan 1 news was devoted to president Nazarbaev and 17% to his governmental party OTAN. In addition, the tone of their presentation was highly positive, whilst the coverage of other contestants was very limited.
· Another State-owned television Khabar presented clear bias in favor of Asar and its leaders, both in given time and tone (Asar granted for 116 positive references). The channel paid almost no attention to the non-governmental parties by allocating 4.1% and 1.1% for Bloc of DVK - KPK and Ak Zhol party, respectively.
· The private Channel 31 offered its viewers more balanced information about the campaign and the political actors and thus to some extent did serve as an alternative source. While Channel 31 brought different picture than State-owned channels, another private channel KTK in their news programme showed strong bias in favor of Asar and presented discrediting materials about opposition likewise.
· While the print media provided a wider range of opinions, they appeared to be partisan up to such extent that it was impossible for a voter to rely on one source of information and had to consult more newspapers in order to get non-distorted information.
· A significant number of "media effects" (both of promotional and discrediting character) were presented by media outlets in the course of the pre-election campaign. The most cases of an unprofessional journalism showed State-owned Khabar and private channel KTK.

LEGAL/REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR THE MEDIA

The Constitution of Kazakhstan in its Article 20 guarantees that "censorship shall be prohibited" and that "everyone shall have the right to freely receive and disseminate information by any means not prohibited by the law."
Before the election, Central Election Commission introduced its Resolution to implement Election Law provisions of conducting pre-election campaign. Its clause 2.4 states that "mass media are obliged to exercise unbiased interpretation of the election campaign of candidates, political parties; to abstain from publications of propaganda materials and other information, obviously discrediting honor, dignity and business reputation of the candidate or the political party; to grant a possibility to the indicated persons a free of charge publication of denial in protection of honor, dignity and business reputation in the nearest issue, volume ." Further, the same clause says that "mass media are obliged to follow the principles of equality and parity in the interpretation of the election campaign of the candidate or political party in interpretation of activity, as for candidates as well as for political parties, not creating advantages to anyone of them."

MONITORING RESULTS

Electronic media

The role of mass media in providing access for political contestants to communicate their messages and in presenting news about political parties, political leaders and matters of political importance is vital to the integrity of the electoral process as the most voters nowadays gain essential information about politics through mass media. The State-owned media, which is reliant on public funds, must abstain from campaigning for or against a candidate.

In the course of the first three weeks of the monitoring exercise, State-owned Kazakstan 1 has openly promoted pro-governmental party OTAN and the incumbent president Nazarbaev that often presented himself as the party member, whilst oppositional views were showed to only a limited extent. The level of bias towards OTAN and the incumbent was displayed in the amount of time (17% and 26% for the President and for OTAN respectively) as well as in the tone of coverage, which was predominantly positive or neutral (OTAN granted for 33 positive and 1 negative reference). On the contrary, the oppositional parties were given lesser time (Ak Zhol 8% and Bloc DVK - KPK 3%, respectively) and the coverage was mainly neutral.

Another national broadcaster, 51% State-owned Khabar introduced similar editorial policy by showing clear bias in favor of another pro-governmental party Asar and incumbent in its prime-time news (even though with the upcoming E-day channel reduced the portion of biased information). Khabar appeared to be channel with a high portion of time given to state authorities - President and Government granted for 26.7% and 36.4%, respectively. As for the parties, Asar headed by D. Nazarbaeva that is consider to be Kazakh media typhoon, was dedicated 16.5%, moreover, the party representatives were portrayed mainly in very positive or even promotional context (116 positive references in comparison with 12 negative references). Two oppositional parties were largely ignored by Khabar news, receiving together 5.2% of mainly negative content.

As for the private channels, KTK channel adopted a similar approach like the State-owned channels. It also produced many very positive stories about pro-governmental Asar and informed about opposition only rarely and mostly in a negative slot. An attention paid to party Asar was displayed in the fact that 35% given to the party in its news programme was the largest portion for a single party among monitored electronic media outlets. In addition, a strong preferential treatment of Asar can be found also in a coverage that was highly positive in its content.

Channel 31, another private channel offered its viewers on its prime time news a different picture than other three monitored televisions. It provided for more balanced picture with a greater diversity of views, introducing smaller parties as well. Ak Zhol was given the biggest space by receiving 15% of election related news. As regards the tone of information, parties were granted comparable portion of positive and negative coverage.

As a positive step must be noted that State broadcasters aired TV debates including all parties in order to enable the voters to betters understand their political platforms, even though their actual impact is incomparably lesser to that of the prime-time news.

Print media

The print media provided a plurality of views, but their coverage was often bias in favor or against a candidate up to such extent that it was impossible for a voter to rely on one source of information. Thus, voters could form an objective view of the campaign only if they read several publications.

State-owned press

The State-owned Egemen Kazakhstan showed its clear endorsement of Otan and Aist, both of which were given 15% of its elections` related coverage portraying the party mainly in positive or neutral manner. Aside from this the newspaper completely ignored existence of opposition party Ak zhol and the block of Communists and DVK.

Similarly, the State-run Kazakhstanskaja Pravda allocated overwhelming majority of its elections' coverage just to cover activities of the pro-governmental party Otan that was given 16%. There were some of materials, which may be deemed propagandistic undoubtedly.

Non-state press

One of the most popular dailies Express-K chose two main points to focus on: advertising of the supported party Aist and anti-propaganda of its challenger Ak Zhol. All the negative references about Ak zhol and positive and neutral about Aist prove such tactics to be true.

Aside from strong biases in favor of pro-governmental parties, demonstrated by the first three newspapers, Zhas Alash newspaper visibly supported the one in opposition -Ak zhol (41 positive references).

Summarizing all above, it may be definitely said that all the media outlets were somehow divided in their attitudes toward all running parties. Most of them chose one or two parties to support, consequently making everything not only to propagandize them but to anti-propagandize their challengers as well. Despite the differences in choices, there is an obvious tendency that the media sought more to get the chosen party won, than to provide readers with unbiased and impartial information necessary for free decision to be made.