Bratislava (2 April 2009) – MEMO 98 has for a long time focused on presentation of political subjects and their representatives in the media both in Slovakia and abroad. This is the fourth report which analyses presentation of presidential candidates running in the 2009 presidential election. Monitoring of the media was conducted in the framework of the project “Information portal www.infovolby.sk“supported by Open Society Foundation Slovakia.

MEMO 98`s monitoring focused on coverage of the two most successful candidates who made it to the runoff in the prime time news of nationwide TV stations – STV, TV Markiza, TV Joj and TA3 in the run-up to the second round. The monitoring included quantitative and qualitative analysis of the coverage, assessing and producing findings regarding the time or space allocated to each candidate and also evaluating the tone of the coverage. Quantitative analysis measures the total amount of time and space devoted to election contestants on news and information programs. Qualitative analysis evaluates the tone in which the relevant political subjects have been portrayed – positive, neutral or negative.

• Presidential election as a topic dominated the media coverage, with TA3 allocating it the most and TV Joj the least of their airtime.
• Two candidates who made it the runoff were devoted more airtime (almost 49 minutes) than all seven candidates together in the run-up to the first round of election.
• Two candidates together were given the biggest amount of airtime by TA3 (22 minutes) and the smallest on TV Joj (6 minutes). While Iveta Radicova was devoted more airtime in all monitored TV stations together then her rival Ivan Gasparovic, the difference was not significant in three out of four monitored TV stations. Similarly as prior to the first round, TV Markiza distributed the airtime among candidates in the most balanced way.
• Televised debates provided direct exchange of views between the two candidates who made it to the runoff, thus enabling viewers to evaluate their stronger and weaker points.

The tight difference between the two candidates who made it to the runoff caused that the campaign prior to the second round was more confrontational, mainly thanks to the incumbent president and his political followers. They did not hesitate to use the so called Hungarian card (by stirring up the Slovak nationalism) in an apparent attempt to mobilize their voters. It is also important to mention that leaflets and paid political advertisements which were used primarily to discredit Ms. Radicova could easily be characterized as the so called black PR – which is often used in the former Soviet Union countries. On the other hand, Ms. Radicova repeatedly publicly declared that her campaign would not be conducted in the form of verbal attacks against her opponent, but would be focused on her platform. The media presentation of both candidates in the run-up to the runoff indicates that monitored TV channels tried to present them in a balanced way.

In a positive development, both public and private electronic nationwide broadcasters organized televised debates between the two runoff candidates, thus enabling viewers to get familiar with candidates’ views. Televised debates between candidates provide direct exchange of views as well as ability to respond to each other’s remarks, thus enabling viewers to assess candidates’ stronger and weaker points. It is also positive that both candidates accepted invitations to several such debates which enabled voters to compare them.

Similarly as prior to the first round of election, private TV channels again offered interesting and attractive debates. While this time STV (along with the Slovak Radio and TASR) also organized a debate between the two candidates focusing on several issues (including the role of media, interruptions, the development of Slovakia since the 1989 Velvet Revolution), it still did not reach the quality of the debates organized by private TV stations. This was mainly due to the fact that both candidates mainly answered questions by moderators – instead of having an opportunity for a direct discussion.

The media paid more attention to candidates in the runoff since both of them received more airtime (almost 49 minutes) than all seven candidates received together in the run-up to the first round of election. Presidential election as a topic dominated in the prime time news of TA3, STV and TV Markiza as the most featured topic, while it was only the second most covered topic on TV Joj.

Presidential election as topic was covered most on TA3 where it received almost 40 minutes. The news channel devoted 22 minutes for the presentation of both candidates which was also more than any other monitored TV station. At the same time, it was almost half of the total time that all four TV stations devoted to election together.

Publicly-funded STV devoted 25 minutes to presidential election as topic and 11 minutes and 30 seconds to both candidates. In the run-up to the first round of election, STV was very passive in bringing information about candidates and largely ignored the election per se. In a positive development, during the campaign prior to the runoff, STV brought much more information on election and the candidates.

Similarly as STV, privately-owned TV Markiza covered presidential election as topic intensively and devoted it 24 minutes of its prime time news. As for the candidates, they acquired a combined total of 9 minutes – distributed equally. As such, similarly as during the first part of the campaign, TV Markiza provided its viewers the most balanced picture of the campaign.

Conversely, of the four monitored outlets, TV Joj devoted the smallest amount of information about election (12 minutes) and the two candidates (6 minutes). In addition, TV Joj presented the least balanced coverage of the two candidates, with Ms. Radicova getting twice as much airtime as Mr. Gasparovic.

As for the presentation of the two candidates in all four monitored TV stations, Ms. Radicova acquired more airtime than her rival – however, the difference was not significant. As mentioned above, TV Markiza devoted equal proportion of its prime time news coverage to both candidates (Ms. Radicova 50 per cent and Mr. Gasparovic 50 per cent). As for STV, it devoted 54 per cent of its prime time news coverage to Ms. Radicova and 46 per cent for Mr. Gasparovic; TA 3 devoted 56 per cent for Ms. Radicova and 44 per cent for Mr. Gasparovic; and TV Joj gave 67 per cent to Ms. Radicova and 33 per cent to Mr. Gasparovic.

While the monitored private TV channels were more critical than positive in their coverage of both candidates, publicly-funded STV featured more positive than negative stories.

Ms. Radicova received more airtime to speak directly in the prime time news of all four monitored TV stations than her rival Mr. Gasparovic. This could have been caused by the fact that in the run-up to the second round, Mr. Gasparovic was often represented by members of the Slovak National Party (mainly its chairman Slota and also vice chairman Belousova) or even the Prime Minister Fico.

While in comparison with the first round of election, Mr. Gasparovic received less airtime in his capacity as the incumbent president and more as candidate, we noticed his higher attendance at ceremonial events organized by the Government (such as his participation at re-directing of the river Nitra into its new riverbed or during an initiative to re-introduce the car-scrapping bonus) which could have been linked with an effort to profit from the popularity of the ruling SMER party.

---

This report was prepared in the framework of the project “Information portal www.infovolby.sk“supported by the Open Society Foundation Slovakia.

---

Attachments:
Results - All media
Results - STV
Results - TV Markíza
Results - TV Joj
Results - TA3