Independent Media

Media monitoring /2005 Presidential election/

Second report on media coverage of the 22 May presidential election

Released on May 9, 2005

Globe International, an independent, non-partisan Mongolian NGO dedicated to freedom of expression and the media, has been systematically monitoring the media coverage of the 22 May presidential election. This project is conducted with the material and technical support of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), an international NGO headquartered in Washington, D.C. promoting democratic development worldwide.

Globe International seeks to evaluate the mass media’s performance in providing objective and balanced coverage of the candidates and their platforms so the citizens of Mongolia can make well-informed choices at the ballot box. The project’s findings are determined through a well-defined and rigorous methodology and are not intended to support any one candidate or political party, but the integrity of the media environment as a whole during the campaign season.

On April 4, Globe International commenced the monitoring of six TV channels (Mongolian National TV, Channell 25, UBS TV-5, TV-9, and Eagle TV), one radio (Mongolian National Radio) and four daily newspapers (Daily News, Century News, Today and The People’s Right) using qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis . Quantitative analysis measures the total amount of time and space devoted to elections-related coverage on monitored media outlets. The qualitative analysis evaluates whether the information about candidates is positive, negative, or neutral in its content.

To date, monitoring has taken place over two periods, 4-22 April (the first monitoring period) and 23 April – 6 May (the second monitoring period). Globe International continued to find a wide difference in the type of news presented by different outlets as well as major differences in the ways that major political entities are portrayed. It is apparent that these data are not the result of short-term anomalies, but appear to reflect genuine trends in Mongolian media. Following is the second of periodic reports that Globe will issue through the May election.

HIGHLIGHTS

- In general, majority of monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidate’s campaigns in the second monitoring period (23 April – 6 May). However, this balance appears to be achieved not thanks to improved reporting standards, but due to an unusual agreement amongst broadcasters (MNTV, MN Radio, UBS, TV9 and TV5) and the candidates.

- Outside of the prime time news items (invariably called Election 2005), which are allegedly prepared by candidates, the broadcasters in general have provided little information about candidates` activities and platforms in their prime time news programs.

- The monitored print media continued to show strong bias either in favour of or against a candidate.

- In a positive development, all four candidates have made a preliminary agreement to participate in a televised debate, which is to take place on MNTV, and has been tentatively scheduled for 18 May. Televised debates provide the best opportunity for citizens to better understand political messages and to develop a better understanding of the differences and choices among competing candidates.
? The Mongolian media has so far failed to serve as a forum for the exchange of opinions, public debate, confrontation, investigation and commentary that would offer the public fully informed, analyzed and assessed views of persons seeking elected office.

Television

In general, majority of monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates` campaigns in the second monitoring period. However, this balance appears to be achieved not thanks to improved reporting standards, but due to an unusual agreement amongst broadcasters (MNTV, MN Radio, UBS, TV9 and TV5) and all four candidates. Based on this agreement, all four contestants are allegedly buying equal amounts of prime time news airtime on the above-mentioned electronic media outlets. On a daily basis, the candidate`s campaign headquarters prepare promotional programs on their candidates which are consequently broadcast largely unedited by the above-mentioned electronic media outlets in their prime time news programs. This practice not only appears to be in conflict with the Law on Advertising (Articles 11.3 and 18.1), but also is totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics.

Mongolian National Television (MNTV)

During the second media-monitoring period, N. Enkhbayar`s share of airtime (of all prime time devoted to the activity and opinions of candidates) decreased significantly from 55% to 24% . However, almost all of this coverage continued to portray N. Enkhbayar in a positive or neutral light. Indeed, he received more positive coverage than any other of his opponents. In adiditon, N. Enkhbayar was again devoted the biggest portions of direct airtime to present his views and convey his messages to the electorate. On the other hand, in comparison with the first monitoring period, MNTV devoted much less coverage to N. Enkhbayar in his capacity as Speaker of Parliament. Indeed, a broad interpretation of the newsworthiness of the coverage to the Speaker of Parliament, versus his role as a candidate, in State and some private media outlets during the first monitoring period, blurred the distinction between a State official carrying out official duties and a candidate engaged in campaigning. During the second mnitoring period, the amount of coverage of M. Enkhsaikhan also decreased from 22% to 20% and its tone was also mainly positive and neutral. The most covered candidate in the second monitoring period was B.Erdenebat who received 32% of the prime time coverage which was exclusively positive or neutral in tone. During the same period, the share of B. Jargalsaikhan`s share of airtime increased from 7% to 24%. This coverage was also mainly positive or neutral. In general, there was very little negative information about the candidates on the MNTV`s news and current affairs programs – most of the candidate`s coverage was either positive or neutral.

In general, outside of the prime time news items (called Election 2005), which are allegedly prepared by candidates, the MNTV provided little information about candidates` activities and platforms in their prime time news and current affairs programs. Further, the State television is failing to serve as a forum for discussion, where opinions might be shared and exchanged freely.

Ulaanbaatar Broadcasting Systems (UBS)

Unlike during the first monitoring period, UBS was much more balanced in its coverage of the candidates` campaigns. In the second monitoring period, N. Enkhbayar`s share of airtime (of all prime time devoted to the activity and opinions of candidates) decreased significantly from 79% to 30%. While this coverage was mainly positive or neutral in tone, there was also some criticism (unlike in the fist monitoring period). UBS continued to show N. Enkhbayar in his capacity as Speaker of Parliament by allocating him 3 minutes and 12 seconds of direct airtime on its news and current affairs programs. In the same period, the next most covered candidate, B.Jargalsaikhan, received 28% of the channel`s political and election prime time coverage, which was mainly positive in tone. Candidates M.Enkhsaikhan and B.Erdenebat were devoted 22% and 20% of such coverage respectively, all of this coverage exclusively positive or neutral in tone.

UBS presented some stories in a one-sided unfair manner. Following are some examples:

- On May 1, in its 20:30 o’clock prime time news program, UBS reported that candidate N.Enkhbayar, in his capacity as Prime Minister (in 2000 – 2004) did a lot to support the local producers. In contrast, when candidate M.Enkhsaikhan was the Prime Minister, he abolished the import tax and thus negatively affected the domestic industry. Apart from showing clear bias in favour of N. Enkhbayar and against M.Enkhsaikhan by the news presenter, the accused side (M.Enkhsaikhan) was not offered a chance to react.

- On May 3, in its 20:30 o’clock prime time news, UBS showed interviews conducted with people on the street who were asked about their opinion on solving the issue of Mongolian debt to Russia. The television aired only those responses which were very positive towards N.Enkhbayar and his role in handling of this issue. No alternative opinion was shown.

Eagle TV

Eagle TV prime time news programs continued to offer its viewers the most balanced picture of the campaign. The media monitoring results indicate that all four candidates received roughly equal proportions of the channel`s political and election prime time coverage - Enkhsaikhan (DP) - 26%, B.Jargalsaikhan (MRP) - 30%, B.Erdenebat (MP) - 19% and N.Enkhbayar - 25% of the channel`s prime time election and political coverage.

As for the tone of the coverage, the candidates received more positive and neutral than negative coverage with N.Enkhbayar receiving the biggest amount of negative coverage.

TV- 5

Similarly as during the first monitoring period, TV-5 once again failed to provide a more balanced coverage of the four contestants. However, while in the first monitoring period, the channel showed its clear support to N.Enkhbayar, during the second monitoring period, TV5 openly favoured B.Erdenebat. In the last two weeks of the campaign, B.Erdenebat was devoted as much as 61% of political and campaign coverage on the channels news and current affairs programs, which was exclusively positive or neutral in tone. In adiditon, B.Erdenebat was allotted the biggest portion of direct airtime (18 minutes and 37 seconds) to present his views and convey his messages to the electorate. The next most covered candidate was N.Enkhbayar who received only 17% of the coverage (a significant decrease in comparison with the first monitoring period when N.Enkhbayar received as much as 47% of the coverage), almost all of it positive or neutral in slant. The other two candidates - M.Enkhsaikhan and B.Jargalsaikhan - were devoted 12% and 10% of the coverage respectively. The tone of their coverage was mainly positive or neutral in tone.

- Candidate B.Erdenebat has already appeared three times on the TV’s regular program called “Fostering Mongolia” since the election campaign commenced. On April 25, he was introduced as a private businessman. The very next day, April 26, B.Erdenebat appeared on the same program once again, this time talking about his election platform. Most recently, on May 4, he was shown again in his capacity as presidential candidate in a program which focused on the development of the city of Darkhan. Since no other candidate has so far appeared on this program, B. Erdenebat has gained an advantage prior to 22 May.

- On May 6, TV-5 showed a meeting of the Speaker of Parliament N.Enkhbayar with journalists celebrating the World Press Freedom Day. During the meeting, the president of the Mongolian Journalists Confederation Ms. D.Sarangerel (who also happens to be the director of TV-5) presented N.Enkhbayar with traditional blue ribbon and silver cup with milk wishing him success in the Presidential elections.

TV-9

Similarly as during the first monitoring period, TV-9 continued to show its support to N.Enkhbayar who was allocated 36% of the prime time news and current affairs coverage dedicated to the activity and opinions of candidates. However, in comparison with the first monitoring period, the N. Enkhbayar`s share of airtime decreased significantly (from 69% to 36%). The tone of the coverage remained overwhelmingly positive or neutral. In the same period, his main opponent M.Enkhsaikhan received only 17% of such airtime, which was mainly neutral or positive in tone. The other two candidates, B.Jargalsaikhan and B.Erdenebat received 29% and 18% of the coverage respectively, which was mainly neutral and positive in tone.

- On 25 April and 1 May, TV9 aired prime time news items dealing with the issue of the money that “Buyan” company (whose former director is the presidential candidate B.Jargalsaikhan) owns to the Japanese Marubeni Corporation. While being critical of “Buyan” and B.Jargalsaikhan, neither B.Jargalsaikhan nor any representative of the “Buyan” company was given a chance to present their points of view.

- On April 28, TV9 in its prime time news program accused candidate M.Enkhsaikhan of negatively affecting the medium and small businesses by abolishing import tax in 1996 as a Prime Minister. The news item went on by saying that the former Prime Minister N.Enkhbayar reversed this decision. The accused candidate was not given a chance to present his point of view to this accusation

Channel 25 TV

During the first monitoring period, Channel 25 was the only broadcaster to offer wide-ranging and favourable coverage to M.Enkhsaikhan and a critical approach towards N.Enkhbayar. In the last two weeks of the campaign, M. Enkhsaikhan`s share of airtime (of all prime time devoted to the activity and opinions of candidates) decreased significantly from 87% to 25%. While there was a significant increase in the share of airtime devoted to N.Enkhbayar (from 9% to 40%), the tone of the coverage remained mainly negative. The other two candidates, B.Jargalsaikhan and B.Erdenebat received 5% and 30% of the coverage respectively. The coverage of Erdenebat was exclusively positive or neutral in tone, whereas the coverage of B.Jargalsaikhan was exclusively negative or neutral.

Radio

Mongolian National Radio (MNR)

In comparison with the first monitoring period, N. Enkhbayar`s share of airtime (of all prime time devoted to the activity and opinions of candidates) decreased significantly from 28% to 6%. While the tone of the coverage was mainly neutral or positive, N. Enkhbayar also received some criticism. MNR gave almost equal proportions of its election and political prime time news coverage to two candidates - M.Enkhsaikhan - 31% and B.Jargalsaikhan – 28% (significant increase in comparison with the first monitoring period – from 11% to 28%). The most covered candidate in the second monitoring period was B.Erdenebat who received 41% of the broadcaster’s news coverage of political and candidates` coverage, which was exclusively positive or neutral in tone. The biggest proportion of positive coverage was devoted to candidate M.Enkhsaikhan.

- The MNR`s evening news block containing information on candidates appeared to present the source of information in a strange manner. Sometimes, MNR referred to the source as “information from a candidate`s press department”, other times as from “our special reporter/or special reporter informs”, and often there was no indication where did the information come from (22:00 o’clock news, May 3, 4, 5, 6 ).

- MNR`s prime time news programs containing information about the candidates are sometimes not more than propaganda type of news. For instance, on May 5 in its 22:00 o’clock prime time news, MNR aired a report on candidate N.Enkhbayar, during which it was mentioned that the head of state to be elected in the upcoming polls will become from the same place where Chingis Khan was born 800 years ago (indicating that N.Enkhbayar`s mother becomes from the same region as Chingis Khan).

Newspapers

The monitored print media continued to show strong bias either in favour of or against a candidate. As such, voters could form an objective view of the campaign only if they read several publications.

“People’s Right”

People`s Right provided M.Enkhsaikhan with 36% of its total space devoted to the coverage of candidates. As for the tone of this coverage, M.Enkhsaikhan received roughly equal proportions of positive and negative coverage. His main rival, N.Enkhbayar, received 27% of such coverage with slightly more negative than positive coverage. The other two candidates - B.Erdenebat and B.Jargalsaikhan received respectively 7% and 30% of the coverage which was mainly neutral or negative in tone.

“Today”

Today allocated as much as 53% of its candidates` coverage to B.Erdenebat, which was mainly neutral or positive in tone. The second most often covered candidate was N.Enkhbayar (36%) and third Enkhsaikhan (14%). Apart from B.Erdenebat who received more positive than negative coverage, his three opponents received more negative than positive coverage.

“Daily News”

Daily News devoted almost half of its candidates`coverage to N.Enkhbayar (51%). However, the tone of this coverage was mainly neutral or negative. His main opponent M.Enkhsaikhan received 21% of such coverage, which was mainly neutral or positive in tone. The only other candidate with some significant coverage was B.Erdenebat who received 23% of the paper`s coverage of the candidates. The fourth candidate - B.Jargalsaikhan – received only 9% of the coverage, which was mainly neutral or negative in tone.

“Century News”

Century News continued to show its clear support to N.Enkhbayar (MPRP) by devoting him as much as 75% of its candidates` coverage, which was almost exclusively neutral or positive in tone. Conversely, M.Enkhsaikhan (DP) received only 15% of such coverage, which was predominantly neutral or negative in tone. The remaining two candidates - B.Jargalsaikhan (MRP) and B.Erdenebat (MP) - received 2% and 8% respectively.

Conclusion

We continued to find a wide difference in the type of news presented by different outlets as well as major differences in the ways that major political entities are portrayed. While the majority of monitored electronic media provided a more balanced coverage of the candidate`s campaigns in the second monitoring period (23 April – 6 May), this balance appears to be achieved not thanks to improved reporting standards, but due to an unusual agreement amongst some broadcasters and the candidates. The early indications that not all media outlets follow the standards of balance and fairness were largely confirmed in the second monitoring period and it is apparent that these data are not the result of short-term anomalies, but appear to reflect genuine trends in Mongolian media. As a practice, a number of the Mongolian media frequently neglected to offer Mongolians opposing views on particular stories. In general, the Mongolian media has so far failed to serve as a forum for the exchange of opinions, public debate, confrontation, investigation and commentary that would offer the public fully informed, analyzed and assessed views of persons seeking elected office. We will continue to gather data throughout the pre-election period to determine if this is a consistent trend.