“We will try to initiate different projects to improve the quality of the press. We do not want to be a censorship authority for journalists. On the contrary, we aim to help them realize that the observance of the deontological norms is what makes a journalist be respected by the public”. IPN News Agency tried to find out the priorities during the next mandate of the Press Council in an interview with Viorica Zaharia, new chairwoman of the self-regulatory institution.

– You took over the Press Council when the institution was given a new mandate. What are the prospects for the next two years? Want do you intend to obtain as Council head?

– The mission and goals of the Press Council do not change. They remain the same. The Press Council continues to work as a mediator between the consumers and media outlets and to supervise the way in which the journalists obey the Deontological Code. The Press Council of the Republic of Moldova, which has worked for six years already, is one of the most active bodies, with a rather complex activity compared with other self-regulatory press institutions of the neighboring states and even the CIS. I’m sure that this is due to the former members and ex-chairwoman Ludmila Andronic, who led and represented the Council abroad during all these years. This means that I came to a body that established some foundations and became a solid and respected self-regulatory body. This image will have to be maintained and this work will have to be continued.

Thus, besides examining complaints, we will also take steps when we see press reports that run counter to the deontological norms and will discuss them in the meetings of the Press Council, which are held once in about two months. I was chosen to this post after I accumulated a year’s experience in managing the online debates platform mediaforum.md. This platform is a project of the Press Council and, during a year and a half, we identified themes for debates that are topical for the media professionals of Moldova. We will also try to initiate different projects to improve the quality of the press. We do not want to be a censorship authority for journalists. On the contrary, we aim to help them realize that the observance of the deontological norms is what makes a journalist be respected by the public.

– The objective of the Press Council is to make the Moldovan press more responsible before the public. The previous mandate showed that some of the media institutions violate the Deontological Code even if they know that they are monitored. Are penalties for media outlets that do not obey the deontological norms necessary?

– The Press Council is an institution that establishes if the deontological norms were violated or not. The Council’s decisions do not have legal effects. However, judging by the cases examined during the last few years and by the fact that an increasing number of public institutions, persons holding responsible posts or simple media consumers seek help from the Council, we can speak about the confidence these have in this body and about the fact that they value the approved decisions. Those whose rights were infringed by journalists want the fact that the press made a mistake to be recognized, not necessarily in court.

I would not plead for increasing the fines or making penalties harsher. I do not support such policies. I think the ascertaining of the deviation from the deontological norm and publication of the relevant decision are enough.

– To what extent does the Press Council manage to increase people’s confidence in the mass media?

– Opinion polls show the confidence in the media decreases and this is the effect of the expanding information manipulation and propaganda in the TV channels and radio stations retransmitted in our country and in the national ones as well. It is normal for the people to start to realize that not all the media outlets informal and not all of these are of a high quality. It is very important to explain to the people that there are media outlets that do their job honestly and to show them that there are some criteria by which an honest and independent press organization that provides information that does not mislead can be distinguished from those that aim to manipulate.

Currently, confidence in the press is selective. There is media that enjoy greater credibility, which the people follow to verify if what they read, heard or watched elsewhere is true. This is a kind of ‘gold class’ press that is known to provide only true information. The people who work there care about their dignity, reputation and profession in general. These institutions and these journalists must be supported because they are the ‘golden stock’ of the guild. Regretfully, these are often attacked or criticized for wringing ‘by order’. There is also press with a large audience. I refer to particular TV channels. In many cases, even if the information is consumed, this does not mean that the people really trust what they see or read.

– We know that some of the media outlets are not really free. What changes are needed to ensure the people have safe and reliable sources of information?

– The conditions in which the media work in the Republic of Moldova are not the best. I consider the role of the Press Council and independent journalism is to promote the necessity of solidarity and union around professional standards. We must propagate the idea that the journalists must be upright as the state functionaries and the representatives of other guilds must be. The conception of journalism was affected as some think it is not important to remain impartial and to do your job correctly. During the next few years, the Press Council must reach the young people who only enter the profession with the message that the observance of the professional ethics and deontology is important for the dignity and integrity of the journalists and non-observance means spoiling of reputation.

I will transmit the same message at the lectures at the Faculty of Journalism of the State University that I will start to teach next January. The information is not like any other product that affects you, especially in the short term, if it is spoiled. The false and manipulating information influences the masses and the effects can really be disastrous. The risks implied by propaganda and what honesty means are recognized not only in our country.

– Important changes to the legislation that regulates the work of the mass media were made during the last few years. Why does media ownership concentration remain a problem in this sector?

– There are also other objective factors here. The Broadcasting Code was modified so that an owner can now possess only two licenses for running media outlets, not five, as earlier. The change was made in May 2016 and will be yet implemented. Therefore, the licenses that were issued for a period of seven years are yet valid. I share the concerns of some experts who note that the legation in this field was amended easily and the question ‘why’ thus appears. Particular goals could be pursued here as well. We will yet see.

Anastasia Rusu, IPN