Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia

Print Media Monitoring Pre-Election Report 1 September - 15 October, 2020

This report was produced with the support of the European Union (EU) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The authors are solely responsible for its content, which may not necessarily reflect the positions of the European Union or the United Nations Development Programme.

Internews - Georgia 1 Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media The monitoring of newspapers during the period 1 September - 15 October revealed the following:

 The coverage of opposition political parties increased compared to the previous reporting period.

 Newspapers provided little coverage of parties’ electoral programmes, but readers were given the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the opinions or statements of politicians and to find out more about their individual activities.

 Most newspapers displayed negative attitudes towards almost all political parties.

 Some newspapers continued to publish tendentious materials based upon a single source.

 The dissemination of unverified information continues to be a problem: some publications did not hesitate to present serious allegations against certain politicians without evidence. In most cases, statements in which respondents made allegations were reported without being checked.

 Some newspapers continue to use insulting and denigrating terminology.

 Compared to the previous reporting period, almost no abusive or discriminatory pictures were published.

 In contrast to the previous reporting period, there were almost no cases of publications strengthening gender stereotypes.

Gender-sensitive coverage

The monitoring of electoral topics in print media also focused upon gender-sensitive coverage, and particular attention was paid to coverage and terminology that reinforced widespread gender stereotypes.

The newspapers that were monitored allocated little space to the coverage of female politicians and candidates.

Unlike the previous reporting period, there were almost no cases of publications that contributed to reinforcing gender stereotypes.

There were only two instances of journalists using a ‘female’ politician to insult a man. In addition, there was also a case of abusive remarks made by a journalist against the President that aimed to damage her image as a female politician.

Internews - Georgia 2 ResearchStudy on Media and Research Coverage onof 2 Election020 Parliamentary Media Coverage Elections Print Media Print Media for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Newspaper coverage of subjects according to gender (%) 1 September - 15 October 2020

10 27 Female

Male

Unidentified

UnlikeConclusion the previous reporting period, there were almost no cases of publications that contributed to reinforcAs theing election gender stereotypes. campaign enters its most intense phase, the coverage of opposition political parties has increased. The newspapers reported little about their election programmes, but gave readers the There were only two instances of journalists using a ‘female’ politician to insult a man. In addition, opportunity to familiarize themselves with the opinions or statements of politicians and to find out there was also a case of abusive remarks made by a journalist against the President that aimed to more about their individual activities. In addition to party list presentations and the nominations of damagecandidates her image for as athe female post politician of Prime. Minister, there were interviews of political scientists and analysts during which they reviewed the electoral process, assessed the electoral environment and party strategies, and made forecasts. Conclusion Most of the newspapers held negative attitudes towards almost all political forces, but among some As theof election them a campaign neutral attitudeenters its wasmost observed intense phase towards, the coveragethe ‘Alliance of opposition of Patriots’, political ‘Georgian parties Idea’ and the has increased.‘Georgian The March’. newspapers reported little about their election programmes, but gave readers the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the opinions or statements of politicians and to find out We still encountered instances of gross violations of journalistic standards and ethical norms in some more about their individual activities. In addition to party list presentations and the nominations of newspapers—e.g. offensive and discriminatory terminology was often used in the texts of journalists candidates for the post of Prime Minister, there were interviews of political scientists and analysts in addition to the statements of respondents. However, compared to the previous reporting period, duringthere which were they almost reviewed no imagesthe elect containingoral process, abusive assessed or the discriminatory electoral environment content. and party strategies, and made forecasts. The dissemination of tendentious and unverified information remains one of the main problems for Most newspapers.of the newspapers In many held negativecases, allegations attitudes towards against almost some all politicians political forces were, but delivered among some to readers without of themhaving a neutral been attitude checked, was andobserved the criticism towards the and ‘Alliance difficult of Patriotsquestions’, ‘Georgian expressed Ide aby’ and some the journalists were ‘Georgianmore March biased’. and subjective rather than based upon fact.

Most of the newspapers continued to offer their readers materials that were based upon a single source, thereby preventing Internewsthem from - Georgia acquainting themselves with different 3 opinions on particular issue.

Internews - Georgia 3 Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

We still encountered instances of gross violations of journalistic standards and ethical norms in some newspapers—e.g. offensive and discriminatory terminology was often used in the texts of journalists in addition to the statements of respondents. However, compared to the previous reporting period, there were almost no images containing abusive or discriminatory content.

The dissemination of tendentious and unverified information remains one of the main problems for newspapers. In many cases, allegations against some politicians were delivered to readers without having been checked, and the criticism and difficult questions expressed by some journalists were more biased and subjective rather than based upon fact.

Most of the newspapers continued to offer their readers materials that were based upon a single source, thereby preventing them from acquainting themselves with different opinions on particular issue. Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

AnnexAnnex:: Coverage Coverage of subjects of according subjects to tone according (8 diagrams) to. tone (8 diagrams)

Tone of Coverage (%) Rezonansi 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative

Georgian Dream 14 73 13

Government 12 84 4

United National Movement 3 72 25

Prime Minister 10 87 3 Mikheil Saakashvili 60 38

European Georgia 92 7

Lelo for Georgia 79 11

Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage(%) Akhali Taoba 1 September - 15 October 2020

Positive Neutral Negative Internews - Georgia 4 Georgian Dream 4 45 51 United National Movement 83 15 European Georgia 83 16 Government 10 74 16 Mikheil Saakashvili 9 59 32 Lelo for Georgia 86 11 Labour Party 99

Internews - Georgia 4 Tone of Coverage (%) Asaval-Dasavali 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative Mikheil Saakashvili 8 91 United National Movement 8 91 Georgian Dream 20 32 48 Lelo for Georgia 3 95 European Georgia 9 90 Georgian March 4 95 Government 29 42 29

Internews - Georgia 5 Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage(%) Akhali Taoba 1 September - 15 October 2020

Positive Neutral Negative Georgian Dream 4 45 51 United National Movement 83 15 European Georgia 83 16 Government 10 74 16 Mikheil Saakashvili 9 59 32 Lelo for Georgia 86 11 Labour Party 99

Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%) Asaval-Dasavali 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative Mikheil Saakashvili 8 91 United National Movement 8 91 Georgian Dream 20 32 48 Lelo for Georgia 3 95 European Georgia 9 90 Georgian March 4 95 Government 29 42 29

Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%)

Kviris Palitra 1 September Internews - Georgia- 15 October 2020 5

Positive Neutral Negative Georgian Dream 4 43 53 United National Movement 60 38 Lelo for Georgia 17 77 6 Mikheil Saakashvili 77 67 Government 20 50 30 Strategy Aghmashenebeli 56 39 Progress and Freedom 98

Internews - Georgia Tone of Coverage (%) 5 Qronika+ 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative

Georgian Dream 13 86

United National Movement 6 67 25

Strategy Aghmashenebeli 15 81

Labour Party 10 89 Mikheil Saakashvili 17 57 26

European Georgia 1942 39

Alliance of Patriots 89 10

Internews - Georgia 6 Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%) Kviris Palitra 1 September - 15 October 2020

Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%) Qronika+ 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative

Georgian Dream 13 86

United National Movement 6 67 25

Strategy Aghmashenebeli 15 81

Labour Party 10 89 Mikheil Saakashvili 17 57 26

European Georgia 1942 39

Alliance of Patriots 89 10

Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%)

S a Internewskartv e- lGeorgiao da M s o p l i o 6 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative

Alliance of Patriots 5 95

Georgian Dream 27 73

Dimitri Lortkipanidze 97

Government 31 68

Mikheil Saakashvili 95

United National Movement 16 84

Georgian Idea 95

Internews - Georgia 6 Tone of Coverage (%) Alia 1 September - 15 October 2020

Positive Neutral Negative Georgian Dream 20 78

Alliance of Patriots 9 90

United National Movement 42 55

Government 18 82 Mikheil Saakashvili 93

European Georgia 88

People's Party 100

Internews - Georgia 7 Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%) Sakartvelo da Msoplio 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative

Alliance of Patriots 5 95

Georgian Dream 27 73

Dimitri Lortkipanidze 97

Government 31 68

Mikheil Saakashvili 95

United National Movement 16 84

Georgian Idea 95

Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

Tone of Coverage (%) Alia 1 September - 15 October 2020

Positive Neutral Negative Georgian Dream 20 78

Alliance of Patriots 9 90

United National Movement 42 55

Government 18 82 Mikheil Saakashvili 93

European Georgia 88

People's Party 100

Research on Media Coverage of 2020 Parliamentary Elections Print Media

Tone Internews of - GeorgiaCoverage (%) 7 Guria News 1 September - 15 October 2020 Positive Neutral Negative Local Government 5 66 29

Government 6 88 7

Georgian Dream 2 82 16

European Georgia 50 45 5 Solidarity Alliance 50 47

Progress and Freedom 98

United National Movement 91 9

Internews - Georgia 7

Internews - Georgia 8 Study and Research on Election Media Coverage for the 2020 Parliamentary Elections in Georgia Print Media

Internews - Georgia 8