A large part of the ten TV channels that are monitored by the Independent Journalism Center (IJC) offered relatively equal access to election contenders, who were protagonists of separate news items or were mentioned in news articles that were directly or indirectly electoral in character. Another part of the TV channels had preferential attitudes and presented the activities staged by particular contenders, ignoring the activities of other contestants, shows the report on the monitoring of the audiovisual press in the campaign prior to the general local elections during October 1-11, which was presented by the IJC.

In a news conference hosted by IPN, Independent Journalism Center executive director Nadine Gogu said that they selected ten public and private TV channels with national coverage, which broadcast in Romanian and in Russian, namely Moldova 1, TVR Moldova, Jurnal TV, Pro TV, TV 8, Cinema 1, ITV, Orizont TV, Vocea Basarabiei, and Exclusiv TV. A news bulletin from prime time was chosen and its content was fully monitored.

“Most of the times, the analyzed materials were based on one source of information. Respectively, the pluralism of opinion wasn’t ensured and the subjects weren’t treated in depth. Most of the materials were unbalanced as regards the ensuring of gender equality, with men being quoted most of the times. This is due to the fact that a large part of the candidates and registered contenders are men,” stated Nadine Gogu.

According to her, in some of the situations, a perfect 50/50 balance was ensured at some of the TV channels. “The truth is there were fewer materials at those channels and it was easier to ensure this balance. Most of the TV channels showed a correct and impartial attitude to the election contenders, without evidently favoring or disfavoring them,” said the IJC director.

It was determined that the public TV channel Moldova 1 broadly covered the election campaign through its 43 news items, obeying the professional and deontological standards. The channel offered access to most of the election runners, without favoring or disfavoring any of them. Most of the electoral news articles were based on one source. The controversial materials were balanced, but gender balance wasn’t ensured.  

In the case of TVR Moldova, in most of the cases the coverage was fair and impartial. But the representatives of the Chance and Revival parties were slightly disadvantaged by the used language and the information chosen for being presented in the news bulletin.

Jurnal TV broadcast electoral materials based mainly on one source and pluralism of opinion in the news items wasn’t ensured. But the controversial news items were balanced and no candidate was evidently favored or disfavored.

Pro TV also balanced the controversial materials most of the times and relatively ensured the pluralism of opinion and gender balance.

TV 8 broadcast most of the news items objectively and impartially, but allowed facts to be mingled with opinions in seven cases. The sources were varied, pluralism of opinion being relatively ensued, while gender balance wasn’t ensured. Cinema 1 offered access to most of the candidates, depending on the organized events. A part of the controversial materials didn’t ensure the right of reply and the tendency was to present election contender Ion Ceban more often.

ITV was biased when it covered the activities of the candidates of the Revival and Chance parties, who benefited from increased airtime and from a positive tone. Orizont TV was also biased in favor of the Chance Party’s candidates who were the protagonists of a larger number of news articles.

Most of the news articles at Vocea Basarabiei TV were correct and impartial. There were a number of indirectly electoral news items that had the potential to present the government and the PAS either negatively or positively. Exclusiv TV didn’t cover directly electoral subjects and didn’t offer access to election contenders through its news items.

Note: IPN News Agency offers the right of reply to persons who consider they were touched by the news items produced based on statements made by the organizers of the given news conference, including by facilitating the organization of another news conference in similar conditions.