Independent Media

Media monitoring /2005 Presidential election/

Third report on media coverage of the 22 May presidential election

Released on May 19, 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 sought to evaluate the mass media’s performance in providing objective and balanced coverage of the candidates and their platforms to enable the citizens of Mongolia to make well-informed choices at the ballot box. The project’s findings were determined through a well-defined and rigorous methodology and were 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 measured the total amount of time and space devoted to elections-related coverage on monitored media outlets. The qualitative analysis evaluated whether the information about candidates is positive, negative, or neutral in its content.

This is the third and final report released prior to the 22 May presidential election covering six weeks of media monitoring (from April 4 till May 15). The monitoring results revealed disturbing problems in news and current affairs programs coverage of candidates in majority of the monitored media outlets. This situation has made it very difficult for Mongolians to get accurate and unbiased coverage of political parties, candidates and other issues. In general, the media`s biased coverage of the election demonstrated that Mongolia lacks a strong and independent media able to provide objective and balanced information to the electorate to make a well-informed choice at the ballot box.

HIGHLIGHTS

- MNTV allocated 40% of its political and election prime time coverage to N. Enkhbayar, of an overwhelmingly positive or neutral tone. The second most covered candidate, B.Erdenebat, received 25% of similar airtime, which was also mostly positive or neutral. The other two candidates - M.Enkhsaikhan and B. Jargalsaikhan – received 20% and 15% of the coverage respectively. In displaying a clear bias in favour of N. Enkhbayar, MNTV failed to meet its obligation to provide balanced treatment to all candidates during the election process.

- Out of five monitored private TV channels, two (UBS and TV-9) provided N. Enkhbayar with the biggest portion of their political, and election prime time coverage. M.Enkhsaikhan was the most often presented candidate on Channel 25 and B. Erdenebat on TV 5. Eagle TV provided its viewers with the most balanced information about the candidates out of all monitored TV stations.

- Mongolian National Radio devoted comparable amount of its political and election prime time coverage to three candidates - N. Enkhbayar 20%, B. Jargalsaikhan 21%, and M.Enkhsaikhan 25%. The fourth candidate, B.Erdenebat, received 34% of such coverage, which was overwhelmingly positive or neutral in tone.

- The print media provided a plurality of views, but often showed strong bias either in favour of or against a candidate. Consequently, voters could form an objective view of the campaign only if they read several publications.

- In a positive development, a televised debate amongst all four candidates took place on MNTV. However, the format of debate did not allow for a real interaction between the candidates.

- While majority of monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates in the last three weeks of the campaign, this balance was not achieved thanks to improved reporting, but due to the fact that majority of TV channels were selling their prime time news time to candidates (on an equal basis). This practice was totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics

- Another disturbing finding of Globe International throughout this project has been the consistent practice on majority of monitored media outlets of neglecting to air opposing views in the body of particular stories.

Television

Mongolian National Television (MNTV)

In six weeks of the official campaign in the media, the candidate of the Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party (MPRP) N.Enkhbayar received 40% of primetime coverage on MNTV`s news and analytical programs, as much as 18 minutes and 37 seconds (out of 41 minutes and 19 seconds) in his capacity as Speaker of Parliament rather than engaged in election campaign activities. This coverage was beyond that which was reasonably proportionate to N. Enkhbayar`s role as Speaker of Parliament. The tone of the coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. The second most covered candidate, B.Erdenebat, received 25% of similar airtime, which was also positive or neutral. The other two candidates - B. Jargalsaikhan and M.Enkhsaikhan received 15% and 20% of the coverage respectively.

Generally, 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. N.Enkhbayar was devoted the biggest portions of direct airtime to present his views and convey his messages to the electorate. In displaying a clear bias in favour of N. Enkhbayar, MNTV failed to meet its obligation to provide balanced treatment to all candidates during the election process.

Ulaanbaatar Broadcasting Systems (UBS)

UBS also showed its support to the incumbent speaker of parliament by allocating him 41% of its primetime coverage, which was overwhelmingly positive in tone. By comparison, the next most covered candidate, B.Jargalsaikhan, received 23% of the channel`s political and election prime time coverage. While the tone of his coverage was mainly positive or neutral, B.Jargalsaikhan also received some criticism on the channel`s prime time news. Candidates M.Enkhsaikhan and B.Erdenebat were devoted 20% and 16% of such coverage respectively, all of this coverage mainly positive or neutral in tone.

Eagle TV

Eagle TV prime time news programs offered 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) - 27%, B.Erdenebat (MP) – 23% and N.Enkhbayar - 24%.As for the tone of the coverage, the coverage of the candidates was generally balanced with all four candidates receiving a slightly more positive than negative coverage. N. Enkhbayar received the biggest amount of negative coverage.

TV- 5

TV-5 devoted the biggest proportion of its coverage to B.Erdenebat who received 36% of the channel`s prime time election and political coverage. The second most covered candidate was N.Enkhbayar (27%) who derived significant portion of his airtime in his capacity as Speaker of Parliament. This coverage was mainly positive or neutral. The other two candidates - M.Enkhsaikhan and B.Jargalsaikhan were devoted 26% and 11% of the coverage.

TV-9

Similarly as MNTV and UBS, TV-9 also showed its support to the incumbent Speaker of Parliament N.Enkhbayar who was allocated 46% of the prime time news and current affairs coverage dedicated to the activity and opinions of candidates. The tone of the coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. In the same period, his main opponent M.Enkhsaikhan received only 18% of such airtime, which was mainly neutral or positive in tone. The other two candidates, B.Jargalsaikhan and B.Erdenebat received 21% and 15% of the coverage respectively, which was also mainly neutral and positive in tone.

Channel 25 TV

Unlike the above-mentioned TV channels, Channel 25 was the only broadcaster to offer wide-ranging and favourable coverage to M.Enkhsaikhan and a critical approach towards N.Enkhbayar. M. Enkhsaikhan was devoted as much as 60% of the channel`s prime time election and political coverage. The tone of this coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. In sharp contrast, candidate N.Enkhbayar received only 13% of such coverage, which was mainly predominantly negative or neutral. The other two candidates, B.Jargalsaikhan and B.Erdenebat received 3% and 24% of the coverage respectively. The former received equal proportions of positive and negative coverage.

Radio

Mongolian National Radio (MNR)

State funded radio devoted the biggest portion of its news coverage of the candidates to candidate B.Erdenebat (34%). Other three candidates received roughly equal proportions of the MN Radio`s coverage - N.Enkhbayar – 20%, M.Enkhsaikhan - 25% and B.Jargalsaikhan 21%. The tone of the coverage was somewhat more positive about M.Enkhsaikhan and B.Erdenebat.

Newspapers

The print media provided a plurality of views, but invariably showed strong bias either in favour of or against a candidate. Consequently, 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 44% of its total space devoted to the coverage of candidates. The tone of this coverage was mainly positive or neutral. His main rival, N.Enkhbayar, received 34% of such coverage which was more positive than negative in tone. The other two candidates - B.Erdenebat and B.Jargalsaikhan received respectively 9% and 13% of the coverage which was mainly negative in tone.

“Today”

Today allocated as much as 40 % of its candidates` coverage to B.Erdenebat, which was mainly positive or neutral in tone. The second most often covered candidate was M.Enkhsaikhan (28%) and third N.Enkhbayar (24%). The latter was also the only candidate to receive the biggest amount of negative coverage. The fourth candidate - B.Jargalsaikhan - received 8% of the coverage.

“Daily News”

Daily News devoted 39% of its candidates`coverage to N.Enkhbayar. His main opponent M.Enkhsaikhan received 33% of such space. While the coverage of the Democratic Party candidate was exclusively positive or neutral, the MPRP candidate was under heavy criticism.
The other two candidates - B.Erdenebat and B.Jargalsaikhan received respectively 22% and 6% of the coverage.

“Century News”

Unlike the two above mentioned publication, Century News showed its clear support to N.Enkhbayar by devoting him as much as 81% of its candidates` coverage, which was almost exclusively positive or neutral in tone. Conversely, M.Enkhsaikhan received only 11% of such coverage, which was predominantly negative. The remaining two candidates - B.Jargalsaikhan and B.Erdenebat - received 2% and 6% respectively.

Conclusion

While majority of monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates in the last three weeks of the campaign, this balance was not achieved thanks to improved reporting, but due to the fact that majority of TV channels were selling their prime time news time to candidates (on an equal basis). This practice was totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics. Another disturbing finding of Globe International throughout this project has been the consistent practice on majority of monitored media outlets of neglecting to air opposing views in the body of particular stories. The monitoring results revealed disturbing problems in news and current affairs programs coverage of candidates in majority of the monitored media outlets. This situation has made it very difficult for Mongolians to get accurate and unbiased coverage of political parties, candidates and other issues. In general, the media`s biased coverage of the election demonstrated that Mongolia lacks a strong and independent media able to provide objective and balanced information to the electorate to make a well-informed choice at the ballot box.