The Absence of Media in Taijikistan
The Absence of Media in Tajikistan
And its consequences for the young generation
By: Salim Aioubzod, Senior producer, RFE/RL
The absence of truly independent media and the widespread abuse of a relative freedom of speech in Tajikistan are breeding a generation in the atmosphere of deception and aspersion, ignorance and obliviousness, servitude and thraldom, narrow group and corporate interests. As a result, this generation has developed the sense of distrust in the mass media, and is turning a blind eye to the consequences of not being involved in decision-making. They are turning into passive onlookers, keeping away from participating in the political process oblivious to the fact that it is their own future they are ignoring.
The young generation of Tajikistan, particularly those who grew up in uneasy years of post independence and civil war do not find answers to their numerous socio-political questions either in the media or even in literature or film. On the contrary, they see a growing gap between what they see as the reality of their lives and the superficial official portrayal of life. At times they see clearly that the media are even trying their best to create an artificial reality. Despite a few achievements, Tajik journalism has not succeeded in reflecting the reality of life; media’s half-truths and half-lies irritate the curious young readers, while the systematic abuse of a relative press freedom misleads others.
Many politicians, and even some of younger journalists, blame the onset of the civil war in Tajikistan in 1992 on the readily available freedom enjoyed after Tajikistan’s independence in early 1990’s. However, the present mass media in Tajikistan could be accused of initiating social injustice and inequality, with the inescapable, possibly tragic, consequences for future generations.
So far the consequence of this restricted access to independent media has been public apathy and mass political indifference. This indicates in turn that the current official media does not have a considerable impact on the society either.
There are various theories about the effectiveness of mass media on society. Joseph Klapper’s theory, popular in the mid-20th century (”The Effects of Mass Communication”, Glencoe, Ill., 1960), argued that the press and, generally, mass media are ineffective institutions.
Effectiveness does not necessarily abide by the law of information exchange. It could be just one of the factors that could leave an impact on audiences if combined with other vital factors. Selective exposure, selective perception, and selective retention by individuals are among the factor that result in possible effectiveness of mass communications, believes Klapper.
However, William J. McGuire rejects Klapper’s theory (”Handbook of Social Psychology”, Mass., 1969). He agrees that acceptance and usage of information could be selective and individual, but the process depends on the intellectual capacity of the recipient and his expectations and needs of information.
The prominent German scholar Michael Kunczik (”Concepts of Journalism. North and South”, Bonn, 1988) has defined the following as mass media’s duties: confronting depression, entertaining, mind-triggering, giving knowledge about the geographical area, giving self-esteem and self-confidence to audiences, strengthening the ruling criteria and values, presenting topics for discussion, communicating etc. Another scholar Eleanor Maccoby (”Effects of the mass-media”, New York, 1964) highlights the conditions and circumstances in which information is received. According to Maccoby, those conditions and circumstances account for the most important factor of the information-receiving process.
All these scholars are convinced that mass media do have an effect on society, but they all relate the extent of the impact and its frequency to certain factors.
Thus, we have the following factors:
- Recipient’s intellectual capacity;
- his/her expectations from mass media;
- The general environment in which information is received.
Now let’s try to scrutinise mass media’s effect on the Tajik youth based on the above-mentioned template.
First of all, we’ll have to look at the overall situation with freedom of speech and people’s lives in Tajikistan in recent years. The summary of findings by international organisations gives us the following picture:
Tajikistan
Freedom House: Table of Global Press Freedom Rankings
2007
166th out of 195 countries
2006
165th out of 194 countries
Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer
2007
150th out of 180 countries
2006
142nd out of 163 countries
World Bank
Entrepreneurship Index
2007
153rd out of 178 countries
2006
153rd out of 175 countries
Foreign Policy Magazine and the Fund for Peace: Failed States Index
2007
39th out of 177 countries
2006
42nd out of 146 countries
We at Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) conduct a poll among our listeners in Tajikistan once or twice a year. We ask our listeners to evaluate Tajikistan’s freedom of speech. Certainly, these polls are not done in a strictly scientific way; however, in the absence of official statistics, they reflect an overall picture of the state of affairs in the country. According to those polls, the media in Tajikistan is becoming progressively less free. Here are some of the results across the country:
Human Rights and Liberties in 2007
Dushanbe:
Better: 14%
Unaltered: 30%
Worse: 56%
Khatlan:
Better: 11%
Unaltered: 35%
Worse: 65%
Rasht:
Better: 10%
Unaltered: 55%
Worse: 35%
Khojand:
Better: 10%
Unaltered: 34%
Worse: 51%
Kharogh:
Better: 0%
Unaltered: 43%
Worse: 45%
As attested by 56 % of respondents in Dushanbe, 65 % in Khatlan, 51% in Khojand and 45% in Kharogh, the situation with human rights and civil liberties in 2007 was worse than in the previous year. According to latest surveys, the situation has remained unchanged.
Freedom House has downgraded Tajikistan by two points in its latest list of non-free countries published in its May 2008. Moreover, majority of Tajik journalists have acknowledged the slide-down. Most journalists claim that a series of topics and certain personalities have been placed beyond the red lines and thus inaccessible for journalists throughout last 10 to 15 years.
And as the youth access to the Internet is growing, their need for precise and unbiased information is evolving too. Nevertheless, the red lines are getting tighter.
Another important factor in the equation is the plummeting state of national education in Tajikistan. Regardless of people’s intellectual capacity or their readiness to accept or reject information, the system of education in Tajikistan is suffering from a deep and overwhelming crisis. The young generation is keen to know why their country’s economy is in dire straits and why the standard of living is deteriorating; they want to know why thousands of unemployed youth have to leave for Russia and why thousands of children should grow up without one or both of their parents, why schools do not have enough teachers; they demand to know where all these problems came from and what should be done to resolve them.
It’s true that migration is a widespread phenomenon in today’s world. But over a million people leaving a country with just 7 million of population could not be considered a normal happening.
Migration has emptied Tajikistan’s countryside and the majority of people are often unsure if they could survive another month. At the same time a small number of people enjoy mind-blowing incomes with no difficulty whatsoever. The young generation finds it hard to understand this vast imbalance in the standards of living.
Some of their fellow friends who possess luxurious foreign cars and lavish wardrobes don’t know where to splash out their cash, whereas others try to figure out where to get some cash from to buy a piece of bread. The youths’ sharp sense of search for justice put these questions in a revolutionary context. Remember, in this process their intellectual level does not play a vital role, because their views are shaped by whatever they see and hear on a daily basis, particularly in their family circles. And as they try to make sense of their lives, the country’s mass media does not assist them. On the contrary mass media hinder the process of understanding for the young since they do not explain or debate the daily issues that face all families.
Youngsters hear from foreign sources and from their friends who study abroad — with international assistance — that the president’s policies are the main cause of some of the problems. But in the media they see nothing but praise for the president and wonder where the imbalance lies. For example, they heard recently that the president’s son might have killed his uncle, Hassan Asadullahzada, who happens to be the head of the biggest Tajik bank. The news was intriguing and they want to know the details. However, in the Tajik press they either got absolute silence or absolute denial. The president of Tajikistan, his family members and his numerous cronies are regarded as the red lines that the Tajik media must never cross. In fact since 1992 there has been no direct criticism of the president in the Tajik press.
The press doesn’t publish anything about the government’s expenditure either what justifies the youths’ prejudice about the corruption and embezzlement of the officialdom.
Thus, youths’ trust in media has reached its lowest level. Youngsters are saying frankly that they believe in neither state press nor independent media. The absence of interesting and factual topics disappoints the young and dissuades them from debating their country’s complex problems.
The absence of criticism in press strengthens the prejudice that this government could not be replaced peacefully and with rational reasoning. This situation pushes the youth to radicalism and violence.
While the government’s style of functioning promotes regionalism, sectarianism, egoism and group profiteering, schools and society are not concerned about the level of education and access to information for the young. At the same time the media is petrified in its mould, and scared of telling the truth. It thus falls into the trap of tribalism, group or regional interests. The media, in effect becomes a trap for abuse of freedom of speech instead giving way to baseless gossip, slander and hate speech.
In a tightly controlled political atmosphere, with legal obstacles artificially created to keep the press at bay it is hardly surprising that for press entrepreneurs, independent economic survival is almost impossible. Thus Tajikistan’s mass media have failed to perform their main function as institutions that challenge the dominant corrupt processes and have thereby faltered in their role as the guardians of justice, progress, truth and democracy. The main victim of this failure will be the young generation that will walk towards the future blindfolded and unable to communicate.