DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Opinion Survey Residents of Georgia June-July 2020 Detailed Methodology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Opinion Survey Residents of Georgia June-July 2020 Detailed Methodology Public Opinion Survey Residents of Georgia June-July 2020 Detailed Methodology • The fieldwork was carried out by the Institute of Polling & Marketing. The survey was coordinated by Dr. Rasa Alisauskiene of the public and market research company Baltic Surveys/The Gallup Organization on behalf of the Center for Insights in Survey Research. • Data was collected across Georgia between June 4 and July 2, 2020 through face-to-face interviews at respondents’ homes. • The sample consisted of 1,500 permanent residents of Georgia older than the age of 18 and eligible to vote. It is representative of the general population by age, gender, region and size of the settlement. • A multistage probability sampling method was used with the random route and next birthday respondent selection procedures. • Stage one: All districts of Georgia are grouped into 10 regions. All regions of Georgia were surveyed (Tbilisi city – as separate region). • Stage two: Selection of the settlements – cities and villages. • Settlements were selected at random. The number of selected settlements in each region was proportional to the share of population living in a particular type of settlement in each region. • Stage three: primary sampling units were described. • The margin of error does not exceed plus or minus 2.5 percent and the response rate was 66 percent. • Charts and graphs may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding. • The survey was funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. 2 Georgian Government COVID-19 Pandemic Response To what extent are you satisfied with the government’s response to COVID-19? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat unsatisfied Very unsatisfied Don't know/No answer Jun-20 41% 38% 13% 7% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 4 Please evaluate these institutions by effectiveness in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic in Georgia Very effective Somewhat effective Somewhat ineffective Very ineffective Don’t know/No answer National Center for 64% 30% 5% 1% 1% Disease Control (NCDC) Ministry of Health 55% 36% 6% 2%1% Office of the Prime 46% 35% 13% 2% 3% Minister The Patriarchate of 39% 36% 14% 4% 7% Georgia Parliament of Georgia 23% 34% 27% 9% 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 5 To what extent are you satisfied with the government’s efforts to address the economic consequences of COVID-19? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat unsatisfied Very unsatisfied Don't know/No answer Jun-20 19% 37% 24% 18% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 6 To what extent are you satisfied with the government’s social programs to mitigate the consequences of COVID-19? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat unsatisfied Very unsatisfied Don't know/No answer Jun-20 21% 37% 22% 17% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 7 To what extent were you informed about the ways and measures to keep yourself safe during the COVID-19 pandemic? Fully informed Somewhat informed Somewhat uninformed Totally uninformed Don't know/No answer Jun-20 72% 24% 2%2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 8 To what extent do you approve of the Georgian Orthodox Church’s decision to hold religious rituals during the COVID-19 pandemic? Fully approve Somewhat approve Somewhat disapprove Fully disapprove Don't know/No answer Jun-20 37% 32% 14% 8% 9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 9 Which foreign countries have been most helpful to our country’s dealing with COVID-19? (First spontaneous response displayed) USA 47% China 6% European Union 4% Germany 1% Turkey 1% Other 3% None 15% Don't know/No answer 23% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% * Countries named by less than one percent are merged into “other.” 10 To what extent has COVID-19 been a concern for you? Very serious Somewhat serious Not at all serious Don't know/No answer Jun-20 17% 44% 38% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 11 Economic Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the economic situation in Georgia has … Improved a lot Improved somewhat Stayed the same Worsened somewhat Worsened a lot Don't know/No answer Jun-20 1% 2% 15% 42% 40% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 13 How would you describe the current economic situation of your household? Very good Somewhat good Somewhat bad Very bad Don’t know/No answer Jun-20 2% 32% 43% 22% 1% Oct-19 2% 37% 43% 17% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 14 Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, how has the economic situation of your household changed? Improved a lot Improved somewhat Stayed the same Worsened somewhat Worsened a lot Don't know/No answer Jun-20 3% 29% 42% 25% <1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 15 National Outlook In general, would you say that our country is heading in the right direction or in the wrong direction? Right direction Wrong direction Don't know/ No answer 80% 70% 67% 68% 70% 65% 65% 65% 66% 63% 63% 59% 60% 58% 57% 60% 56% 55% 57% 54% 56% 55% 53% 51% 48% 48% 47% 48% 50% 50% 43% 43% 42% 38% 40% 38% 41% 41% 41% 41% 39% 31% 31% 29% 33% 30% 25% 36% 27% 24% 32% 25% 24% 22% 22% 23% 27% 21% 26% 20% 25% 16% 22% 22% 19% 19% 20% 10% 16% 16% 16% 15% 14% 13% 13% 12% 13% 14% 12% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 11% 10% 10% 10% 10% 9% 0% 6% 17 In general, would you say that our country is heading in the right direction or in the wrong direction? (Disaggregated by age and settlement type) Right direction Wrong direction Don't know/No answer 18-29 y.o. 41% 52% 7% 30-49 y.o. 40% 51% 9% AGE 50 years and older 36% 55% 9% Rural 40% 52% 9% Urban 38% 50% 12% SETTLEMENT Tbilisi 36% 57% 7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 18 What is the most important problem facing our country today? (Respondents permitted to supply one spontaneous answer) Economy—unemployment 46% Economy—cost of living, high prices 17% Poverty 10% Economy—other/general 6% Covid-19 pandemic 4% Occupied territories 3% Internal conflicts 2% Education 2% Healthcare 2% Corruption 1% Social services/benefits 1% Agriculture 1% Current government 1% Other 3% Don't know/No answer 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% * Problems named by less than 1% merged into "other" 19 What is the most important problem facing your town/village? (Respondents permitted to supply one spontaneous answer) Unemployment 31% Roads 10% Economy 9% Drinking water 9% Ecology 5% Poverty 3% High prices 2% Social problems 2% Agriculture 2% Lack of tourists 2% Irrigation 1% Traffic jams 1% Low salaries 1% Sewer systems 1% Gas supply 1% Other 11% None 1% Don't know/No answer 8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% * Problems named by less than 1% merged into "other" 20 What is the most important problem facing your household? (Respondents permitted to supply one spontaneous answer) Unemployment 29% Economy 17% Low salaries 7% High prices 5% Poverty 4% Health issues 3% Bank debt 2% Social problems 2% Ecology 2% Low pensions 2% Illness of a family member 1% Emigration 1% Poor living conditions 1% Expensive medication 1% Other 6% None 5% Don't know/No answer 12% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% * Problems named by less than 1% merged into "other" 21 Government and Institutions What is the main accomplishment of the current government, if any? (One spontaneous answer) Fight against Coronavirus 25% Healthcare reform 7% Freedom of speech 3% Infrastructure 2% Democracy 2% Stability 2% Education reform 1% Roads 1% Increase of pensions 1% Visa-free travel 1% Improving the economy 1% Protection of human rights 1% Other 6% None 15% Don't know/No answer 32% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% * Accomplishments named by less than 1% merged into "other" 23 What is the biggest failure of the current government, if any? (One spontaneous answer) False promises 9% Economic decline 7% Unemployment 6% June 20, 2019 events* 6% Occupied territories 4% Rising poverty 4% Cohabitation 3% Rising prices on product 2% Not punishing members of UNM 2% Loss of confidence 2% Currency devaluation 2% General disappointment 2% Injustice 2% Growth of corruption 2% Lack of professionalism 1% Other 7% None 3% Don't know/No answer 36% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% * - On June 20, 2019, government forces violently suppressed opposition street protests over a situation in which a Russian MP was permitted to address a gathering of international parliamentarians from the Speaker’s Chair in Parliament. ** Failures named by less than 1% merged into "other." 24 In your opinion, what is the most successful reform adopted by the current parliament within the last year, if any? (One spontaneous answer) Healthcare reform 13% Education reform 4% Fight against COVID-19 3% Increase of pensions 2% Visa-free travel 2% Parliamentary reform 1% Agricultural assistance 1% Other 6% None 9% Don't know/No answer 60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% * Successful reforms named by less than 1% merged into "other." 25 Now I am going to read out the names of some Georgian institutions and organizations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • News Digest on Georgia
    NEWS DIGEST ON GEORGIA November 28 – December 1 Compiled by: Aleksandre Davitashvili Date: December 2, 2019 Occupied Regions Tskhinvali Region (so called South Ossetia) 1. Another Georgian Sent to Pretrial Custody in Occupied Tskhinvali Georgian citizen Genadi Bestaev, 51, was illegally detained by the „security committee‟ (KGB) of Russia- backed Tskhinvali Region across the line of occupation, near Khelchua village, for “illegally crossing the state border” and “illegal drug smuggling” today. According to the local agency “Res,” Tskhinvali court sentenced Bestaev, native of village Zardiantkari of Gori Municipality, to two-month pretrial custody. According to the same report, in the past, Bastaev was detained by Russia-backed Tskhinvali authorities for “similar offences” multiple times (Civil.ge, November 29, 2019). Foreign Affairs 2. Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia with an ID card Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia with an ID card, Georgian PM has already signed an official document. „Citizens of Switzerland can enter Georgia on the basis of a travel document, as well as an identity document showing a person‟s name, surname, date of birth and photo,‟ the official document reads. The resolution dated by November 28, 2019, is already in force (1TV, December 1, 2019). Internal Affairs 3. Members of European Parliament on Developments in Georgia On November 27, the European Parliament held a debate on developments in the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries at its plenary session in Strasbourg. Kati Piri (Netherlands, Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats): “Large protests are currently held in Tbilisi since the government failed to deliver on its commitment to change the electoral code in 2020 to full proportional system.
    [Show full text]
  • EXPERT POLLS Issue #8
    October 2018 Georgian Institute of Politics EXPERT POLLS Issue #8 Zurabishvili is in the lead but is unlikely to win the first round, according to experts The candidate endorsed by the Georgian Dream (GD), Salome Zurabishvili, remains the strongest contender in the October 28 presidential election, but she will not win in the first round, according to the latest poll of engaged observers and experts. The expert survey, conducted by the Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) in early October, is based on the opinions of 40 international and Georgian political observers and experts, whose input was collected through various channels. In sum, these estimates can be viewed as a “corridor of expectations” for the outcome of the upcoming presidential elections. Poll results: “Corridor of Expectations” Salome Zurabishvili / Georgian Dream 31-45 % Grigol Vashadze / United National Movement 20-31 % David Bakradze / European Georgia 12-20 % David Usupashvili / Development Movement 3-9 % Zurab Japaridze / Girchi 2-7 % 1 | WWW.GIP.GE Figure 1: Corridor of expectations (in percent) Who is going to win the presidential election? According to surveyed experts (figure 1), Salome Zurabishvili, who is endorsed by the governing Georgian Dream party, is poised to receive the most votes in the upcoming presidential elections. It is likely, however, that she will not receive enough votes to win the elections in the first round. According to the survey, Zurabishvili’s vote share in the first round of the elections will be between 31-45%. She will be followed by the United National Movement (UNM) candidate, Grigol Vashadze, who is expected to receive between 20-31% of votes.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report on the Political Situation in Georgia and Related Foreign Malign Influence
    REPORT QUARTERLY REPORT ON THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN GEORGIA AND RELATED FOREIGN MALIGN INFLUENCE 2021 EUROPEAN VALUES CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY European Values Center for Security Policy is a non-governmental, non-partisan institute defending freedom and sovereignty. We protect liberal democracy, the rule of law, and the transatlantic alliance of the Czech Republic. We help defend Europe especially from the malign influences of Russia, China, and Islamic extremists. We envision a free, safe, and prosperous Czechia within a vibrant Central Europe that is an integral part of the transatlantic community and is based on a firm alliance with the USA. Authors: David Stulík - Head of Eastern European Program, European Values Center for Security Policy Miranda Betchvaia - Intern of Eastern European Program, European Values Center for Security Policy Notice: The following report (ISSUE 3) aims to provide a brief overview of the political crisis in Georgia and its development during the period of January-March 2021. The crisis has been evolving since the parliamentary elections held on 31 October 2020. The report briefly summarizes the background context, touches upon the current political deadlock, and includes the key developments since the previous quarterly report. Responses from the third sector and Georgia’s Western partners will also be discussed. Besides, the report considers anti-Western messages and disinformation, which have contributed to Georgia’s political crisis. This report has been produced under the two-years project implemented by the Prague-based European Values Center for Security Policy in Georgia. The project is supported by the Transition Promotion Program of The Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Emerging Donors Challenge Program of the USAID.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION in GEORGIA 27Th October 2013
    PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IN GEORGIA 27th October 2013 European Elections monitor The candidate in office, Giorgi Margvelashvili, favourite in the Presidential Election in Georgia Corinne Deloy Translated by Helen Levy On 27th October next, 3,537,249 Georgians will be electing their president of the republic. The election is important even though the constitutional reform of 2010 deprived the Head of State of some of his powers to be benefit of the Prime Minister and Parliament (Sakartvelos Parlamenti). The President of the Republic will no longer be able to dismiss the government and convene a new Analysis cabinet without parliament’s approval. The latter will also be responsible for appointing the regional governors, which previously lay within the powers of the President of the Republic. The constitutional reform which modified the powers enjoyed by the head of State was approved by the Georgian parliament on 21st March last 135 votes in support, i.e. all of the MPs present. The outgoing President, Mikheil Saakashvili (United National Movement, ENM), in office since the election on 4th January 2004 cannot run for office again since the Constitution does not allow more than two consecutive mandates. Georgian Dream-Democratic Georgia in coalition with Mikheil Saakashvili. 10 have been appointed by politi- Our Georgia-Free Democrats led by former representa- cal parties, 13 by initiative groups. 54 people registe- tive of Georgia at the UN, Irakli Alasania, the Republi- red to stand in all. can Party led by Davit Usupashvili, the National Forum The candidates are as follows: led by Kakha Shartava, the Conservative Party led by Zviad Dzidziguri and Industry will save Georgia led by – Giorgi Margvelashvili (Georgian Dream-Democratic Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili has been in office Georgia), former Minister of Education and Science and since the general elections on 1st October 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • The Year in Elections, 2013: the World's Flawed and Failed Contests
    The Year in Elections, 2013: The World's Flawed and Failed Contests The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank, and Ferran Martinez i Coma. 2014. The Year in Elections 2013: The World's Flawed and Failed Contests. The Electoral Integrity Project. Published Version http://www.electoralintegrityproject.com/ Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11744445 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA THE YEAR IN ELECTIONS, 2013 THE WORLD’S FLAWED AND FAILED CONTESTS Pippa Norris, Richard W. Frank, and Ferran Martínez i Coma February 2014 THE YEAR IN ELECTIONS, 2013 WWW. ELECTORALINTEGRITYPROJECT.COM The Electoral Integrity Project Department of Government and International Relations Merewether Building, HO4 University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Phone: +61(2) 9351 6041 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.electoralintegrityproject.com Copyright © Pippa Norris, Ferran Martínez i Coma, and Richard W. Frank 2014. All rights reserved. Photo credits Cover photo: ‘Ballot for national election.’ by Daniel Littlewood, http://www.flickr.com/photos/daniellittlewood/413339945. Licence at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0. Page 6 and 18: ‘Ballot sections are separated for counting.’ by Brittany Danisch, http://www.flickr.com/photos/bdanisch/6084970163/ Licence at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0. Page 8: ‘Women in Pakistan wait to vote’ by DFID - UK Department for International Development, http://www.flickr.com/photos/dfid/8735821208/ Licence at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0.
    [Show full text]
  • Sexism and Stereotypes in Social Media Gender
    election monitoring report: Sexism and gender stereotypes in social media Sexism and gender stereotypes in social media 1 election monitoring report: Sexism and gender stereotypes in social media Author: KETI MSKHILADZE Monitors: MEDEA SULAMANIDZE, MARIAM TALAKHADZE Editor: TAMAR KINTSURASHVILI Design: BESIK DANELIA, IBDesign Cover photo: Shutterstock, Nubefy The report has been prepared by Media Development Foundation (MDF) with support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) component within the framework of the United Nations Joint Programme for Gender Equality financed by the Government of Sweden. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the international organisations listed above. INTRIDUCTION “Gender Barometer – Monitoring sexist speech during pre-election period” is implemented with sup- port of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The project is implemented by Media Development Foundation (MDF) in partnership with the Union Sapari. The aim of the project is to ex- pose sexist hate speech and gender stereotypes as well as gender-based campaigns against women politician and representatives of various public institutions. Within the framework of the project, Sapari has conducted focus groups involving media experts, politicians and gender specialists and formulated sexist hate speech indicators adjusted to interna- tional experience and Georgian political reality. Based on these indicators and using a Facebook tool, Crowdtangle, the MDF developed a social media monitoring methodology. Findings of the monitoring is provided in this report. A mid-term report1 which was published on 26 November, covers the results of a three-month mon- itoring – from 4 August through 4 November.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter of Concern of April 2015
    7 April 2015 Mr Giorgi Margvelashvili President of Georgia Abdushelishvili st. 1, Tbilisi, Georgia1 Mr Irakli Garibashvili Prime Minister of Georgia 7 Ingorokva St, Tbilisi 0114, Georgia2 Mr David Usupashvili Chairperson of the Parliament of Georgia 26, Abashidze Street, Kutaisi, 4600 Georgia Email: [email protected] Political leaders in Georgia must stop slandering human rights NGOs Mr President, Mr Prime Minister, Mr Chairperson, We, the undersigned members and partners of the Human Rights House Network and the South Caucasus Network of Human Rights Defenders, call upon political leaders in Georgia to stop slandering non-governmental organisations with unfounded accusations and suggestions that their work would harm the country. Since October 2013, public verbal attacks against human rights organisations by leading political figures in Georgia have increased. The situation is starting to resemble to an anti-civil society campaign. In October 2013, the Vice Prime Minister and Minister for Energy Resources of Georgia, Kakhi Kaladze, criticised the non-governmental organisations, which opposed the construction of a hydroelectric power plant and used derogatory terms to express his discontent over their protest.3 In May 2014, you, Mr Prime Minister, slammed NGOs participating in the campaign about privacy rights, “This Affects You,”4 and stated that they “undermine” the functioning of the State and “damage of the international reputation of the country.”5 Such terms do not value disagreement with NGOs and their participation in public debate, but rather delegitimised their work. Further more, the Prime Minister’s statement encouraged other politicians to make critical statements about CSOs and start activities against them.
    [Show full text]
  • Pre-Election Monitoring of October 8, 2016 Parliamentary Elections Second Interim Report July 17 - August 8
    International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy Pre-Election Monitoring of October 8, 2016 Parliamentary Elections Second Interim Report July 17 - August 8 Publishing this report is made possible by the generous support of the American people, through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The views expressed in this report belong solely to ISFED and may not necessarily reflect the views of the USAID, the United States Government and the NED. 1. Introduction The International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) has been monitoring October 8, 2016 elections of the Parliament of Georgia and Ajara Supreme Council since July 1, with support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The present report covers the period from July 18 to August 8, 2016. 2. Key Findings Compared to the previous reporting period, campaigning by political parties and candidates has become more intense. ISFED long-term observers (LTOs) monitored a total of 114 meetings of electoral subjects with voters throughout Georgia, from July 18 through August 7. As the election campaigning moved into a more active phase, the number of election violations grew considerably. Failure of relevant authorities to take adequate actions in response to these violations may pose a threat to free and fair electoral environment. During the reporting period ISFED found 4 instances of intimidation/harassment based on political affiliation, 2 cases of physical violence, 3 cases of possible vote buying, 4 cases of campaigning by unauthorized persons, 8 cases of misuse of administrative resources, 4 cases of interference with pre- election campaigning, 4 cases of use of hate speech, 7 cases of local self-governments making changes in budgets for social and infrastructure projects; 3 cases of misconduct by election commission members.
    [Show full text]
  • Monitoring the Implementation of the Code of Conduct by Political Parties in Georgia
    REPORT MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CODE OF CONDUCT BY POLITICAL PARTIES IN GEORGIA PREPARED BY GEORGIAN INSTITUTE OF POLITICS - GIP MAY 2021 ABOUT The Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) is a Tbilisi-based non-profit, non-partisan, research and analysis organization. GIP works to strengthen the organizational backbone of democratic institutions and promote good governance and development through policy research and advocacy in Georgia. It also encourages public participation in civil society- building and developing democratic processes. The organization aims to become a major center for scholarship and policy innovation for the country of Georgia and the wider Black sea region. To that end, GIP is working to distinguish itself through relevant, incisive research; extensive public outreach; and a bold spirit of innovation in policy discourse and political conversation. This Document has been produced with the financial assistance of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the GIP and can under no circumstance be regarded as reflecting the position of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. © Georgian Institute of Politics, 2021 13 Aleksandr Pushkin St, 0107 Tbilisi, Georgia Tel: +995 599 99 02 12 Email: [email protected] For more information, please visit www.gip.ge Photo by mostafa meraji on Unsplash TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 KEY FINDINGS 7 INTRODUCTION 8 METHODOLOGY 11 POLITICAL CONTEXT OF 2020 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS AND PRE-ELECTION ENVIRONMENT
    [Show full text]
  • Hate Speech and Gender Representation, 2016
    Authors: TAMAR KHORBALADZE TINA GOGOLADZE Peer review: JEAN MARIE COAT, FPU Expert Researchers: TAMAR GAGNIASHVILI, SOPHO GOGADZE, KHATIA LOMIDZE, ROMAN BAINDURASHVILI, TAMAR SOPROMADZE, TINA GOGOLADZE, IRAKLI TSKHADADZE, MARIAM TSUTSKIRIDZE, NATIA GOGELIA, NATIA GOGOLASHVILI, DALI KURDADZE Editor: TAMAR KINTSURASHVILI The report is prepared by Media Development Foundation (MDF) in the framework of the project “Transparent and Accountable Media for Enhancing Democratic Practices during Elections” supported by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Georgia. The contents of this report is the sole responsibility of the MDF and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Embassy. ©2016, MEDIA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION MDF GEORGIA.GE MEDIAMETER.GE/GE 1 INTRODUCTON Media Development Foundation (MDF) is conducting a pre-election media monitoring from April 1 to October 15, 2016. The monitoring is carried out with the financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands in Georgia within the frame of the project Transparent and Accountable Media for Enhancing Democratic Practices during Elections. The methodology for MDF’s monitoring was developed by Dominique Thierry, consultant of Free Press Unlimited (FPU) 1. The report was reviewed by FPU expert Jean-Marie Coat. Primetime news programs of the following TV channels were selected as monitoring subjects: the Georgian Public Broadcaster (Moambe at 20:00), Rustavi 2 (Kurieri at 21:00), Imedi (Kronika at 20:00), Maestro (Kontakti at 20:00), Kavkasia (Dges at 20:30), Tabula (Focus at 19:00), GDS (20/30 at 20:30). From 1 June the list was extended to include TV Obiektivi as this TV channel launched its news program (Akhali Ambebi at 19:30) on 16 May.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy P Aper Series
    saqarTvelos strategiisa da saerTaSoriso urTierTobebis kvlevis fondi sajaro politikis dokumentebi POLICY SERIES PAPER Mentors: Ekaterine Metreveli Vladimer Papava Aleksandre Kvakhadze Editor: Rusudan Margishvili Technical Editor: Artem Melik-Nubarov All rights reserved and belong to Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, including electronic and mechanical, without the prior written permission of the publisher Copyright © 2020 Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies ABOUT THE PROJECT The Policy Paper Series include policy documents developed within the framework of the project - National Minorities in Political Processes – Engagement for Better Future. The papers were elaborated by the young representatives of political parties, for whom it was the first attempt to work on an analytical document. The papers address the challenges and solutions for the ethnic minorities engagement in the political, economic or social life of Georgia. The project was implemented by the Rondel Foundation with the support and active participation of the OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (OSCE HCNM). The project aims to increase the political and social inclusion of ethnic minorities and to facilitate healthy policy debate on the issues of national minorities among the political parties, thus overall contributes to the good governance practices. Within the framework of the multi-component project, members of Tbilisi-based political party youth organizations, young people living in Samtskhe-Javakheti and Kvemo Kartli and active representatives of the local community attended various thematic seminars. The project also included thematic meetings of representatives of political parties and government agencies with the representatives of national minorities, the preparation of TV programs, and internships for young people representing ethnic minorities in political parties.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relevance of the Actual Values of the Political Actors of Georgia with the Ideologies Declared by Them
    The Relevance of the Actual Values of the Political Actors of Georgia with the Ideologies Declared by Them Dr. Maia Urushadze1, Dr. Tamar Kiknadze2 1Caucasus International University 2Head of the Doctoral Program in Political Science, Caucasus International University Abstract The permanent ideological impact of the propaganda narratives of powerful political entities on the international community is perceived as one of the most important challenges of the 21st century. The international agenda is full of controversial interpretations, produced by powerful international political actors. As a result, the international media agenda is getting like the battlespace for the struggle of interpretations, where the ruthless kind of "frame-games" between the strongest global agenda-setting political entities takes place. The information field is open for all countries, including the small states, where political parties are not strong enough to have their propaganda to resist the ideological pressure from outside. Due to this, the societies of these countries are still easily influenced by the narratives of global political actors creating a suitable psychological environment for internal conflicts in societies. We consider Georgia among these states. Therefore, our research aimed to study the relevance of the actual values of local (Georgian) political actors with the ideologies declared by them. In this regard, our primary objective was to understand the specifics of strategic communication of local political actors, then, to compare their narratives with the rhetoric of international actors, and finally, to determine the strength of local society's resistance to these narratives. We hope that in this way we can assess the long-term impact of global actors’ propaganda communication could have on a small country.
    [Show full text]