The Non-constructive operation of the opposition media

A large number of the opposition mass media occupies a very special place among today’s printed and electronic news agencies of Armenia. The activity of opposing to all issues of the government administration often trespasses all limits and begins to contradict the national interests of state.

This situation has started to develop since 1990s but it has acquired even more acute character for the past 2 to 3 years. This situation is based on the expansion of the freedom of speech even though the opposition media usually condemns the government for limiting the freedom.

The partisan media, who support opposition parties in the ‘free’ states, never criticize the authorities in such a vulgar manner as it they do in Armenia. The problem is that such a delivery of information degrades the political vision of the society. For example, the protagonist of the opposition media ‘Chorrord Ishkhanutyun’ daily hardly ever contains any serious political analysis.

The majority of the news media of the mentioned type does not usually have its view point. The direction of the criticism is likely to be ‘chosen’ by the leaders of the opposition. If any one of them makes an announcement, next day the rest of the opposition media follows suit. For example, when Levon Ter-Petrosyan welcomed the president Sargsyan’s ‘political initiative’ for certain period, the opposition media softened the accusations against foreign policy of the government during the same period. It appears that the way the wind blows, the way the subservient media slews.

‘The slewing under the wind’ policy is expressed in other ways too.

It was sufficient for the ‘Jarangutun’ party not to join the‘Armenian National Congress’ during the municipal elections for the mayor position of Yerevan in 2009. The entire pro-‘Congressional’ media commenced a real pursuit of the ‘Jarangutun’ party and its leader. During the conclusive stage of the presidential elections in 2008, when the pro-Ter-Pterosyan opposition was conducting demonstrations at the Freedom Square, declared that the deputy minister of defense general Manvel Grigoryan joined the opposition. The entire opposition media started to cover the event lauding Manvel Grigoryan. Today when it is clear that Manvel Grigoryan is not with the opposition forces, the pro-Ter-Petrosyan opposition again continues its old style criticism. Following the session of ‘the Erkrapah Union’ held on the 18^th of March, Nicol Pashinyan discredited Manvel Grigoryan in his article ‘The Jeep Generalissimo’ published in the daily newspaper ‘Haykakan Jamanak’.

The same description fits the portrait of the former deputy of the National Assembly Hakob Hakobyan who was continuously being discredited by the opposition mass media at the time of his tenure. For example, the article titled ‘The Proposals ended up’ and published on the 6^th of March 2007 in the ‘Aravot’ daily ascribed nicknames to the politicians who were in favor of the authorities. Hakob Hakobyan was also derided along with the number of others. Hakob Hakobbyan  continued to the object of the derision when on the 13^th of April 2007 www.zhamanak.com published an article titled ‘Eat, drink and rejoice for a whole month’. When, however, Hakobyan switched sides and found himself with the supporters of Ter-Petrosyan following the presidential elections in 2008, the opposition media immediately forgot the nicknames. This media consequently proceeded to commend him.

The criticism of the opposition media of the developments of domestic politics in a variety of ways is perhaps tolerable. When the national interests and the reputation of the country are infringed upon at the expense of giving credits to the opposition, it delivers a serious blow. They speak about ‘the looming and unavoidable war between Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as between Armenia and Turkey’ (the Parties of ‘peace’ and ‘war’ in www.7or.am, ‘Between war and social unrest’ in ‘Chorrord Ishkhanutyun’, March 6, 2010). They speak about both the military and political advantages that our neighboring countries enjoy compared to us. They spread out the prefabricated news about the state of military readiness in Armenia (The sides prepare themselves in www.chi.am). This information was officially denied by the Ministry of Defense (‘The Uneasy March’ in www.7or.am).

This all creates an artificial tension and political instability in the country. In addition to the mentioned fact, the same political analyses contain offences to the persons who occupy the highest government positions such as the president, the prime-minister, the chairman of the National Assembly and others.

The same policy is run inside the camp of the opposition media. For example, www.7or.am supports the former minister of foreign affairs Vardan Oskanyan who was dismissed and within ‘7’ days joined the opposition ranks. The news media was found sharply criticizing the other wing of the opposition media headed by Levon Ter-Petrosyan (“’The Armenian’ Bourbons’. Why they did not come to power”, ‘Levon Ter_Petrosyan, Pogos pasha and exactingness’). On the contrary, the opposition mass media supporting Levon Ter-Petrosyan in turn exposed Oskanyan and ‘Civitas’ to the sharpest criticism (‘Transient national problems and gains or tragicomedy for free’ in  ‘Haykakan Jamanak’, October 8, 2009, ‘New Gods’, November 11, 2009.)

Compared to the rest, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsusyun with belonging to it TV channel  ‘Erkir Media’, the newspaper ‘Erkir’, and www.yerkir.am internet site is welcome among the ranks of the opposition media. They rather impartially describe the events related to country’s domestic and foreign policy. It is no surprise that both pro-‘Congressional’ and pro-’Oskanyan’ sharply criticize the party.

A sober and impartial coverage of the relations between Armenia and Turkey is noted in the operation of the ‘ALM’ TV channel. The work of this channel is directed by the head of the ‘People’s Party’ Tirgran Kapaetyan.

The situation is also distressing because many of the news media of the opposition do not have a clear vision of the foreign and domestic policy of the country. It is even more distressing that the present opposition media was supporting the authorities at the time when the opposition was in power. It was then pelting with mud its contemporary opposition. There is no doubt that should the present day opposition representatives come to power, the supporting them media will raise a wave of sharp criticism and use defamation to those politicians who will attempt to join opposition.

We are not against sharp criticism. One of the main objectives of the mass media is to watch the government and to reveal its mistakes. It is not accidental that the mass media are called the ‘watch dog’. We are, however, against when the freedom of speech is mistaken for intolerance and the sharpness of criticism is substituted for bad language. The bad language is a sign of insufficient facts. The sharpest and most helpful criticism is known to be the criticism based on facts. Criticism should not carried out with extreme emotional charge and nicknaming. Such issues are solved in the world via self-regulating mechanisms. Any respectable news media works out its own ethics of conduct and draws certain limitations on itself. Any self-respecting news media do not trespass those limitations either. This is exactly the point that is not observed in our country.

Besides, there is no independent and impartial organization that watches the operation of the representatives of the mass media. In fact, the delivery of the ‘political and verbal dirt’ on behalf of some of the media would receive its proper professional assessment.

Our mass media will deliver their proper professional quality and culture when they understand that they shall serve not only one or other power but the society. Even when they are financed by certain political power, they should point their arrows in the direction of the opponents in a proper way.