The bill to amend the Broadcasting Code didn’t solve the problem of propaganda. By this law, called the “anti-propaganda” law, they try to distract attention from the serious problems faced by the Republic of Moldova. Related issues were discussed in the talk show “Expertise hour” on Jurnal TV channel, IPN reports.
Journalist Alexandru Cozer said the amendment of the Broadcasting Code solved nothing as it neither the fights propaganda, nor bans Russian influence in the mass media in Moldova. “Simply, Vladimir Plahotniuc at a certain moment needed to tell a cock and bull story to the foreign partners and to some people here, in the country, because the legislation that was in force in the Republic of Moldova could be easily applied to ban propaganda,” he stated.
Media expert Angela Arama called the “anti-propaganda law” a big pharisaic act as it was used to cause hubbub not because it is a really revolutionary one, but because the Democratic leader needed to build a positive image before the Europeans, while the leader of the Socialists needed to build the image of defender of the Russophiles in Moldova. If the Broadcasting Code had been respected, they wouldn’t have spoken now about Russian propaganda. “The basis of the struggle against Russian propaganda was laid in that Code in 2006. In 2010, 70-80% of the programs of the Moldovan broadcasters were to be in Romanian, as the Code provided, but this wasn’t done. There were no political will and no wish to fight propaganda,” stated Angela Arama.
Socialist MP Vasile Bolea said the legislation should have contained a concrete notion of “propaganda”. “If the authorities had really wanted to bring things in order, they should have defined this notion,” said the politician. According to him, all the actions taken by the government to fight Russian propaganda, including the amendment of the Broadcasting Code, are not voluntarily as they are directed from Washington.
Civic activist Valeriu Pasa said this law is a revolutionary one, but this is not the merit of Vlad Plahotniuc, who assumed the role of author of this law. The point is that a product should have access to the market if it meets or not the deontological norms of journalistic correctness.
