Media Mirror 2011 Media Manipulation and Propaganda
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NGO INFO-CENTRE NEW MEDIA CENTRE MEDIA DEVELOPMENT CENTRE MEDIA MIRROR 2011 MEDIA MANIPULATION AND PROPAGANDA Skopje, December 2011 The project was supported by Foundation Open Society - Macedonia MEDIA MIRROR 2011 MEDIA MANIPULATION AND PROPAGANDA Report on most commonly used methods of manipulation and propaganda techniques by the journalists and the media in Macedonia in several important events that attracted major media interest in 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................3 1. THE CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................3 2. OVERVIEW OF MOST IMPORTANT MEDIA CASES IN 2011 .................................7 2.1. The “Martin Neškovski” Case ................................................................................7 2.2. The Incident at the Debate in Brussels ................................................................10 2.3 Lustration Process ..................................................................................................14 3. OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF MOST COMMONLY USED METHODS OF MANIPULATION BY THE MEDIA ...................................................................................16 3.1. Authorship and Sources ........................................................................................17 3.2. Defocusing and Generalisation .............................................................................19 3.3. Framing ...................................................................................................................19 3.4. Mixing of information with commentaries ..........................................................21 3.5. False Association ....................................................................................................22 3.6. Name Calling (Labelling) ......................................................................................23 3.7. Paralogism ..............................................................................................................24 3.9. Expert authority .....................................................................................................24 4. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................25 2 INTRODUCTION The NGO Infocentre, in cooperation with the Media Development Centre and the New Media Centre, financialy supported by Foundation Open Soceity Macedonia (FOSM), prepared a report on several important events that attracted major interest by the media in 2011: The situation in the media and media freedoms in Macedonia; the death of Martin Neškovski, the incident that took place at the debate on the freedom of media in Macedonia, organized by the European Parliament in Brussels; and the process of lustration, i.e. the lustration of Vladimir Milčin, influential civic activist, as the lustration case that received the greatest attention by the public. In addition to the media coverage of those events, this report provides a general overview of the most commonly used methods of manipulation and propaganda techniques by the journalists and the media in Macedonia in the cases subject to this analysis. This report is divided in four parts: the first part – the Context - presents the overview of the situation in media and the freedom of speech in Macedonia; the second part presents, in detail, the cases of Martin Neškovski, the incident in Brussels and the lustration of Vladimir Milčin; the third part offers an overview of most commonly used manipulation techniques; and the last, the fourth part contains the conclusions. It should be noted that this analysis took into account the journalistic reports and media articles dedicated to the said cases, published and aired in the first seven days since the start of each of the cases, respectively. 1. THE CONTEXT The already noted process of deterioration of the situation in the media in Macedonia continued in 2011. The evident mobilisation of the media along political lines, the pressure exerted on the editors and the journalists, and the continued violations of standards of public information resulted in a series of reactions by a number of factors, both on national level and abroad. The main points of focus for the criticism and the calls to overcome the existing situation were the shut-down of the media located in Pero Nakov street in Skopje, the media coverage of the Parliamentary Elections 2011, the lay-offs of journalists and their union representatives, the announcement that new Media Law is to be adopted without proper public debate, the changes in the Broadcasting Law that allowed for expansion of the membership of the Broadcasting Council, the channelling of the advertising funds from the State Budget, and a series of processes that resulted from the developments listed above. Among the reactions that followed the said negative processes, we need to point out the following: The Association of Journalists of Macedonia (AJM), the Macedonian Institute for the Media (MIM) and the Independent Union of Journalists and Media Professionals of Macedonia 3 (UJMPM) all came forward with their reactions to the adopted changes of the Broadcasting Law: “MIM, AJM and UJMPM strongly protest1 to the proposed changes in the Broadcasting Law that propose a change of the composition and the number of members of the Broadcasting Council. The three organizations believe that any change of the media regulations should be reviewed and adopted with utmost care, in a transparent and open process which would take into account the views of the media professionals, experts and professional associations, collected in proper expert and public debate. The changes in important legislation, such as the Broadcasting Law, in a urgent procedure that excluded the media, the expert community and other stake- holders, will further complicated the situation of the media in the country, and the solutions that were adopted without considering the views and opinions of the media community shall be perceived as solutions imposed from outside2”. In that context, the international organisation “Reporters without Borders” warned about the trend for dramatic deterioration of the situation of the media in Macedonia: “The Reporters without Borders reacted to the closure of A1 Television, the three daily newspapers and the changes in the composition of the Broadcasting Council, as well as the lay-offs of journalists-members of the journalist’s trade union... The organisation concludes that the Government in Skopje “seized the chance to silence some of the few media that criticize it”. Furthermore, the Reporters without Borders see the decision to fire the state TV’s board of governors as an “attempted coup at the state TV”. The organization noted the individual cases of termination of employment of members of journalists' trade union, such as the cases of the union president Tamara Čausidis, who was fired by Alsat-M TV, and Tamara Grnčarovska, fired by the "Utrinski vesnik” daily.” The OSCE3 Representative on Freedom of the Media sent a series of messages and letters to the responsible parties in Macedonia: “OSCE warns4 that the closure of the three pro-opposition newspapers, on alleged tax evasion charges, practically eliminated the newspapers' criticism of the Government. The OSCE suspects that media which has been critical of the government has been specifically targeted by the authorities, and urged them to ensure media pluralism and transparent investigations5”. “OSCE expressed its concerns6 over the attacks on press freedom in Macedonia. The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Dunja Mijatović, comments in her letter, that in spite of numerous appeals, the situation in Macedonia further 1http://www.mim.org.mk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=339%3A2011-07-13-13-13-51&catid=39%3A2008-12-01-12-31- 11&lang=mk. 2 http://www.mim.org.mk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=341%3A2011-07-18-12-36-46&catid=39%3A2008-12-01-12-31- 11&lang=mk 3 Organization for Security and co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Representative on Freedom of the Media, http://www.osce.org/fom. 4 http://www.osce.org/fom/81610, July 4, 2011. 5 Balkan Insight, “OSCE: Macedonia Opposition Press Practically Eliminated". 6 http://www.osce.org/fom/81610, August 11, 2011 4 deteriorates. She noted the recent termination of employment contract for trade union president Tamara Čausidis, and the withdrawal of broadcasting licence of A1 Television".7 The Broadcasting Council sanctioned a number of violations by the media in the media coverage of the Early Parliamentary Elections 2011, most of all for early start of campaigning in the media, violations of campaign silence regulations and unbalanced reporting8. In the beginning of July 2011, the Ethics Council of the AJM submitted its collective resignation, in reaction to the deteriorating situation in the media: “The Ethics Council concludes that it lacks other tools to ensure that its recommendations would achieve the desired effect. The collective resignation of the members of the Ethics Council is an act of protest over the situation of Macedonian journalism, which is held hostage by the interests of media owners and other powers that be, mostly the political parties, instead of serving the public and the truth. The principles of the Ethical Code are violated unscrupulously, and the journalists