How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border? The coverage of the conflict on Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan border sorely lacked peacemaking journalism approaches, the experts say. Follow us on LinkedIn During the past two years, several major conflicts occurred on the territory of the border of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The last serious conflict was the clash near the Golovnoy water distribution point on April 28, 2021, when the citizens of two countries hurled stones at each other. The next day, the military of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan started exchanging gunfire. The sides announced ceasefire and troops withdrawal only on the evening of May 1. In the clashes, 189 Kyrgyzstan citizens were injured, 36 were killed, including a 4-year-old boy and a 12-year-old girl. In Tajikistan, according to the press service of the hukumat of Sughd region, 19 citizens were killed, and 87 were injured. During the conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik border, there were a lot of disinformation, fakes and unbalanced news reports in the media of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. According to the experts, this is also due to the fact that in the first days of the conflict, there was little official information. There was a lack of press releases, as well as speeches from representatives of government agencies of both states. Were there many fakes? According to the Factchek.kg journalist Asel Sooronbaeva, there were many fakes, especially on social media. There were also messages denigrating the Tajik side by the Kyrgyz social media users and vice versa. The media also published such messages. The old reports were presented as news, for example, the fakes about the requests for Emomali Rahmon’s resignation and the fact that Turkey is about to provide military assistance to Kyrgyzstan. This information was initially distributed by the Russian media, and local journalists republished it without verifying. How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border? The media distributed the information stating that the President of Turkey, in response to the message by the Kyrgyz TV host Assol Moldokmatova, requested Tajikistan to stop military aggression against Kyrgyzstan. The fact-checkers refuted this information. In Tajikistan, on May 2, the websites of the Tojikiston (pressa.tj) and Faraj (faraj.tj) newspapers published reports about an attack on Khistevarz village by the Kyrgyzstan citizens. However, Faraj deleted this report later, and Tojikiston newspaper stated that it turned out to be false. According to the co-author of Factcheck.tj resource Jamshed Maruf, during the week, his team published more than 10 fact-checking materials on the situation on the Tajik-Kyrgyz border in Russian and Tajik. According to him, the social media users mostly discussed the fakes about the President of Turkey and that “Tajikistan used Russian combat helicopters on the border with Kyrgyzstan”. In addition, on May 2, 2021, a video of the unloading of the Russian Operational-Tactical Iskander Missile System appeared on the Sadoi Kuhiston YouTube channel. Allegedly, this took place at that time in Khujand airport. However, a search by the screenshot revealed that the video was actually shot back in 2017. Maruf admits that they could not verify many reports due to the lack of reliable information on open sources. “Currently, we are working on ten more materials, and will soon publish them. During our work, we decided that from now on, we will quickly publish the Russian version of the checked materials, and even publish our materials in English, so that the global community has access to this information,” Maruf notes. How did the fakes appear? According to Asel Sooronbaeva, the sources of the fakes were everywhere. These were the tabloids, some Russian media, which deliberately or unintentionally disinformed the readers, as well as social media. The Kyrgyz media republished fake information. Some authors checked the data, but not every media did so. Jamshed Maruf adds that a significant false information flow invaded the social media. How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border? This happened both in the Tajik and Kyrgyz segments of social media, and then, it was shared in messengers. “Still, the disinformation flow in social media from both Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan is quite large. There are many more materials that we do not know about. This information has not been confirmed by the authorities, or published in the media yet,” he says. Tajik political scientist Parviz Mullojanov considers the fakes’ appearance inevitable in such situation. According to him, the fakes are part of the information warfare, which, in turn, is an integral part of geopolitical and military confrontation. “The social media and the online environment today are as much a battleground as the traditional theatre of military operations. Some of the fakes are intended for international readers, and some – for internal audience, in order to preserve the authorities’ reputation, to present the course of events in the most acceptable light,” Mullojanov noted. Did the Kyrgyz and Tajik media provide complete information? In Tajikistan, state media remained silent about conflict at the border. For example, over the past month, the government news agency Khovar published only one message about this conflict – about the meeting of the head of the State Committee for National Security Saimumin Yatimov and the chairman of the Sughd region Rajabboy Akhmadzoda with the residents of the villages of Vorukh, Chorkuh and Khoja Alo in Isfara. As the media expert Azamat Tynaev notes, the Kyrgyz journalists did their best under the given conditions. Unfortunately, in the early days, there was little official information. There was a lack of press releases, as well as speeches from representatives of government agencies. The Tajik journalists also expressed similar complaints about the work of the authorities’ press services. According to the editor-in-chief and founder of the Asia-Plus media group Umed Babakhanov, the Tajik media found themselves in a very difficult situation during the conflict. How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border? “While our Kyrgyz colleagues received information from all official structures, we did not receive any information from government bodies – neither from the security forces, nor from the social or political structures. Therefore, most of the Tajik media performed poorly and failed to fulfil their mission of informing society,” he says. Parviz Mullojanov assessed the Tajik media’s work positively. “The main burden fell on the digital media; the timely information was provided by Asia- Plus and Ozodi (RFE/RL’s Tajik Service),” he said. How can one explain the poor performance of the press-services? After the earlier transborder clashes and events associated with the large-scale popular unrest and violent change of power, the media experts have already given a recommendation to develop algorithms for an agreed upon, coordinated, and stable reporting, Tynaev notes. But so far, no one has listened to this advice. According to him, there are objective reasons for this. It is often that press services, even of very serious state bodies – those ensuring life support and security of the entire nation, perform poorly. They have insufficient human resources; they are understaffed and lack proper equipment. These factors come into play in the crucial moments. Thus, on May 3, the Committee of Emergency Situations of Tajikistan posted information about the pogroms in a Tajik village but used a photo from the Kyrgyz news agency kloop.kg for illustration. This photo was taken in Maksat village of Batken region of Kyrgyzstan. Later, the Committee apologized for the inaccuracy and replaced the photo. What was the role of media in a Kyrgyz-Tajik border conflict? The role of the media was revealed in efficiency of citing Border Service’s press-releases, statements of politicians and the use of videos and photos from social media, says Inga Sikorskaya, Program Director of the School of Peacemaking and Media Technologies in Central Asia. How Did the Media and Social Media Cover the Conflict on the Kyrgyz-Tajik Border? According to her, it was on the basis of the analysis of media reports on the most intense days of April 28-29-30 that some TV channels broadcast boring conversations of “talking heads”, who deliberated on what happened. There were almost no original materials. Were media reports ethical? Since there was a duplication of information from social media, and there was no original reporting from the scene, there was no point in discussing conflict journalism in this case, Sikorskaya says. According to her, the mention of the ethnicity of people (Kyrgyz, Tajiks) was present in many materials – and very often in headlines. In Kyrgyz and Russian languages, this always sets reader’s teeth on edge. It is opposite to, for example, headlines in English, where in public discourses references to an ethnic group are better correlated with references to belonging to a particular citizenship. “Some media reported that the deceased warrant officer in Batken was an “ethnic Uzbek” or that the Dungans (meaning the Dungan diaspora as a united group) are helping Batken residents. How necessary and important was it to emphasize this? It was much more important to put the facts in context. The coverage of the border conflict gave rise to the stereotype of a “small victorious war” across the information space – and it began to be replicated by many media outlets,” she notes. Did the reports contribute to the de-escalation of the conflict – or have an opposite effect? The reports on the topic of war and security, especially if the conflict occurs very close, always arouse interest, anxiety and different emotions in the audience.