After Preventing international monitoring of the elections and limiting and restricting local monitoring
Will 2010 witness the same fall through in election media as 2006?
Summary of results and recommendations related to media performance during 2006 elections in Bahrain.
Chart shows that the electoral mobilization and government news accounted for (71%) of broadcast programs compared to the other topics on the television in the 2006 elections
10th October 2010
The Bahrain Center for Human Rights expresses its concern over the restrictions and practices imposed by the Bahraini authorities in regard to observing the current elections taking place in Bahrain which started on the 3rd of October and continues until the 30th of October, which is the date of the reruns.
After Preventing international monitoring of the elections and limiting and restricting local monitoring
Will 2010 witness the same fall through in election media as 2006?
Summary of results and recommendations related to media performance during 2006 elections in Bahrain.
Chart shows that the electoral mobilization and government news accounted for (71%) of broadcast programs compared to the other topics on the television in the 2006 elections
10th October 2010
The Bahrain Center for Human Rights expresses its concern over the restrictions and practices imposed by the Bahraini authorities in regard to observing the current elections taking place in Bahrain which started on the 3rd of October and continues until the 30th of October, which is the date of the reruns.
The Bahraini authorities continue the prevention of international and regional organizations from monitoring the elections. In the last month they proceeded to disband the board of directors of the Bahrain Human Rights Society, which is one of two organizations the government usually allows to monitor the election. On the other hand, the Bahrain Human Rights Watch Society has been given complete liberty to monitor the elections, this society is founded and funded secretly by the government as was revealed in the documents published by a former advisor to the government[1].
Regarding monitoring of the media during the elections, which is a project organized by the Arab Working Group for Media Monitoring AWG-MM in collaboration with the International Center for Media Support (based in Denmark), the authorities have so far put great pressure on those in charge of the project. There has been pressure on the societies that intended to host the project in their headquarters. Moreover, there has been an opposing media campaign through the pro-government press and the government controlled Journalists Society. The executive director was pressured into withdrawing from the project and making statements that commend the government and declare that the implementation of the project has come to an end, without referring to the group in charge of the project.
The Arab Working Group for Media Monitoring had carried out a project of monitoring the role of the media in the 2006 elections, which received wide attention from the local press. The final findings of the project where stated in a detailed report issued by the group in July 2007 which included the results of the quantitative and qualitative monitoring conducted by a trained group of observers under the supervision of the Arab Group. The 140 pages of the final report included in the beginning a summary of the results and recommendations to the government, media, political societies and civil society institutions[2].
The reports findings about the role of the media in the 2006 elections has revealed many failures concerning freedom of information in relation to the elections, also regarding integrity, impartiality and professionalism, this criticism included both the radio and television stations and the performance of the daily newspapers. The report also stated that despite the margin of relative freedoms in Bahrain in comparison with other countries in the region, it has been found that in the end rather than supporting democracy, the media was actually an obstacle to democracy, and that there is a lot to be done to remedy the situation. (Find a summary of the report’s findings and recommendations below.)
The Bahrain Center calls on the Bahraini authorities to lift the ban and restrictions on independent monitoring of the elections, considering that such restrictions are a key indicator of declining freedom and the lack of transparency. And to work instead on taking advantage of the findings of the monitoring programs and their recommendations to promote democracy and human rights.
Will 2010 witness the same fall through in election media as 2006?
Summary of results and recommendations related to media performance during 2006 elections in Bahrain.
Summary of results:
Candidates and political societies running for elections were forbidden from broadcasting their election campaigns and ads through the radio and television, using neutrality as the reason. Instead, during this period, these channels were used systematically to broadcast condensed ads to promote the ruling family, with news and programs. This resulted in the direct or indirect influence on voters to promote pro-ruling family candidates. These channels were also used to broadcast programs which clearly targeted certain political groups without providing an opportunity for them to respond. This may be seen as a systematic act of directing political opinions, as well as not allowing space for discussions or diverse opinions.
In the quantity results shown by the report, 93% of broadcast in the radio was used for electoral mobilization and governmental news in comparison to other topics which are electoral education and electoral opponents. As for the television, 71% of broadcast was used for electoral mobilization and governmental news in comparison to other topics[3]. According to the quality monitoring provided by the report, it shows that most of the electoral mobilization was directed for political propaganda for the king and royal family, which serves directly, or indirectly to affect the elections by promoting the candidates who are close to the royal family, and to weaken the candidates from the opposition parties.
In regards to the international media, the authorities undertook an intelligent approach to serve their interests, by selecting and hosting approximately 200 journalists from the international media. The journalists were taken care of financially, and were provided with facilities, which affected their ability to be neutral in the elections. On another level, websites that criticized the government were banned so that the journalists would not have access to them.
Despite the fact that daily newspapers in Bahrain are privately owned and proclaim political independence; they are subjected to governmental pressure and influence when they are established as newspapers are only given permission to circulate based upon a political decision made after detailed studies. Also, press law states that a newspaper may only be established if they can provide a large capital, which is only possible through prominent businessmen or investors who more often than not have political loyalty or financial interests with the government. This law has been used to take editors and journalists to court. The government also uses its influence through who they select to distribute governmental ads, and through a system of preference in deciding who they provide important governmental news to about the executive bodies. In that, the government possesses conclusive influence which they used during the elections to promote their news and achievements through newspaper headlines. This caused a situation of self-censorship in an attempt to avoid anything that is considered a red line by government. Hence, we now have private independent newspapers from a business and legal perspective, but they are in fact subject to unofficial and unannounced governmental pressure and influence.
Chart shows the non-neutrality of the press coverage in the 2006 elections
The quantity results for the newspapers[4] stated that the government used the newspapers in a systematic manner to broadcast news and pictures to influence voters during elections days by broadcasting governmental achievements or positions of officials and promises in regards to citizens’ living and housing situations. It important to note that there were certain newspapers that were more willing to promote the governmental news, and these were firstly Akhbar Alkhaleej, secondly Alwatan, thirdly Almeethaq and fourthly Alayam.
In regards to the political neutrality of the newspapers in regards to the political societies and candidates, the quantity and quality monitoring showed that there was clear bias in all daily newspapers towards certain political societies and against others. The quality results are compatible to the quantity results in regards to the bias of the newspapers either to the candidates close to the authorities, especially those belonging to the AlMenbar Society and the Islamic Asala as was found in Akhbar Alkhaleej and Alwatan, or to those belonging to the opposition parties like Waad as found in Alwaqt and Alayam[5]. The results also showed that there was a coherent correlation in the spaces provided for the paid election campaign ads and news coverage. In certain newspapers, the election campaign ads were limited to certain societies[6].
In general, there was a lack in impartiality, professionalism and experience and there were violations of laws related to election coverage. Despite the fact that the law states that any election publicity must be halted 24 hours prior to voting, the direct and indirect campaigning for certain candidates (according to the newspapers preference) continued the day before the elections, and on the day of the elections. To add to that, certain candidates continued writing in the newspapers about the elections. The Bahrain Journalists’ Society expressed their concern about the fact that certain journalists were receiving payments to conduct interviews, broadcast news as well as publishing paid editorial pieces without marking it as advertisement with the objective of promoting certain candidates for the parliamentary elections.
At the same time that the candidates and their political societies were denied access to private radio and television, they were also denied access to government run channels. To add to that, they did not possess any daily publications for their parties, nor did they have any widespread media outlet, be it printed or electronic. Thus, the political societies and candidates depended mostly on street advertisements that usually only had a personal picture, and which heavily rely on the society’s or the candidate’s financial status. They also depended on setting up tents and having election festivals, which the radio and television refused to cover and which were affected by the unprofessionalism and biasness of the daily newspapers.
The report concluded that the role of the media during the 2006 elections was not neutral, which negatively affected the voters and the democratic process. There was a lack in independence for the television and radio which did not allow election publicity for the candidates, and the country lacked newspapers that could be trusted to be neutral, impartial and professional. When candidates running for the elections do not have effective means to reach the voters, which affects the voters right in getting information which then affects how their choices are made and their participation. In the end, this affects the whole legitimacy of the democratic process.
Recommendations
Based on the details and results from the abovementioned report, and starting with the international standards and the exemplary practices from other countries, we here present a set of recommendations which if implemented, aim to establish media which is more neutral and impartial. This will then cause it to gain the public’s trust especially that of the political parties taking part in the electoral process, and will contribute to enhance democracy as well as freedom of opinion and freedom of speech.
Firstly: Recommendations to the government (the legislative and executive authorities):
1. To form an independent committee to monitor the governmental media during the elections, and to make sure that the national laws as well as the international standards relevant to electoral media coverage are being abided. This committee should put forth a detailed methodology for their work, and chose individuals to implement it according to a transparent, neutral and impartial strategy.
2. For the public (governmental) media outlets, especially the television and radio, to play a positive neutral role, not a negative one, by covering the elections as needed by the electoral process and according to the rights of the candidates and voters. That should be done by allotting time for broadcasting the electoral programs of the candidates, as well as providing journalists who are neutral, impartial and professional to cover the elections and to prepare the programs which go to serve all opinions and political views.
3. To remove all obstacles which hinder political parties and candidates in the elections from owning private media outlets such as television channels, radio, daily newspapers and electronic outlets.
4. To stop using public media outlets especially the television and radio to promote political propaganda to any party including the governing family. To cover news about governmental officials in a moderate manner as representatives of the general public and according to their positions in a constitutional and democratic country.
5. To stop producing programs of political propaganda using the public’s, students’ and the state’s institutions’ budget. To stop using these programs as a tool for political influence during the election period.
6. To put criteria and mechanisms which limit the governments’ ability to abuse the use of laws, advertisements, and media circulation to influence the impartiality of the independent media outlets, especially newspapers. To have the government parties print their own private publications, and to not impose their political views on the independent newspapers.
7. To stop using the policy of selecting international journalists, bringing them to cover the elections, and provide them with facilities in a way which can be seen as trying to influence them. To discontinue the monitoring of these mentioned journalists’ movements and stay. Instead, they should be provided with facilities in a transparent manner by an independent election media committee.
8. To ease the process of monitoring the media during elections, and to use their reports and recommendations, as well as using the reports issued by organizations specialized in media freedoms in general.
9. To amend the laws and practices which bind the freedom of the press as well as freedom of expression in accordance to international standards and declarations which the Kingdom of Bahrain signed; especially those related to the elections.
Secondly: recommendations to the private media and newspapers:
1. For every media outlet to put clear criteria to put into effect the principle of political independence, especially during the election period so that there are no political, ideological or sectarian motivations which greatly influence the impartiality and professionalism of their media work.
2. For there to be an ethics referendum for the journalists which includes clear criteria about impartiality and being neutral in covering the elections. Also, for there to be evaluation carried out by the newspapers, and other relevant institutions, which can then hold journalists and writers accountable for their work.
3. To hold workshops for journalists and others working in the media about professionalism, neutrality and impartiality, as well as the international standards concerning the role of the media during elections. To conduct these workshops especially during periods which precede the elections. Specialized organizations and other country’s experiences can be used as reference.
4. For there to be cooperation with international organizations which specialize in freedom of the press, as well as institutes which specialize in monitoring the media. This is in regards to the publication of reports, implementing recommendations, training, consulting or dialogue.
Thirdly: recommendations to political societies and institutes of civil society:
1. To put a strategy to stimulate the country to guarantee the rights and freedoms concerning the press and media. As well as to put laws and policies to amend the government’s policies in regards to the electoral media coverage and its development.
2. To put strategies to develop partisans media outlets and methods of reaching the voters.
3. To adopt an ethics referendum for the political societies. A referendum which will include the standards of honest competition especially in regards to using media outlets.
4. To cooperate and consult with institutes which specialize in freedom of the press, and to make use of the reports they publish, as well as to work on circulating them.
5. To develop programs to monitor the elections and to follow up on them, as well as programs to monitor the role of the media during the elections.
6. To start an initiative to establish an independent institution specialized in opinion polls, especially in regards to the elections.
—
[1]The Report: What it says
[2]The final report of the results of media monitoring program in the 2006 elections of the Kingdom of Bahrain (Arabic)
[3] See details in Chapter II of the report, the results of quantitative monitoring of radio and television.
[4] See details in Chapter III of the report, the tendencies of newspapers between the government and the opposition.
[5] See details in Chapter III of the report, the results of monitoring the results of the quantitative and qualitative monitoring.
[6] See details in Chapter III of the report, and especially Figure (6) which compare the size and sources of electoral advertisements published in newspapers.