Mass Media in Post-Independence Tajikistan

Mass Media in Post-Independence Tajikistan
Umed Babakhanov
Asia-Plus Media Group
Director-general

The Tajik mass media, as well as other institutions of civil society in Tajikistan, are still undergoing the process of evolution. The process is hard and inconsistent as well as the modern history of the independent Tajikistan. Practically straight after declaring independence the country was engulfed by a confrontation between various political and regional forces. Later in 1992 the conflict grew into a civil war. The period of political instability lasted until the beginning of the 2000s. Only after that the country started restoring the economy battered by war and attracting the first foreign investments. However, Tajikistan has faced serious social and economic problems again; problems caused by both global factors and internal subjective reasons.

Situation in any country has a direct impact on the quality of its mass media –the degree of their freedom, the pace of their development, and their economic stability. Tajikistan was not exempt from the rule.

Civil war of 1992-1997 considerably staggered development of national mass media, in general, and private TV and radio stations, in particular. Tajik authorities then decided that TV and radio, as the most strategic and influential mass media, should be strictly supervised by the state for information security reasons. Subsequently, government took the procedure of their licensing under its rigid control. In the mid-1990s parliament passed the law on TV and radio broadcasting, according to which the State TV and Radio Committee was given the task of licensing private stations. That means the State TV and Radio Committee acquired the right to decide whether to give or not to give out licences to its competitors – private TV and radio stations. As a result of this illogical decision numerous private TV and radio companies could not obtain licenses, and some others (including Radio Asia-Plus) had to wait behind the Committee’s doors for years.

The situation is still the same. A new publication in Tajikistan could be registered in 2-3 days, but getting a new TV or radio station registered is next to impossible. Therefore, nowadays the independent TV in Tajikistan is presented merely by ten small and extremely weak regional channels, and in the capital we did not have a private TV station whatsoever till last year. Thus, according to experts, authorities are rendering themselves clumsy assistance; due to the lack of competition from private TV channels the state TV also develops extremely slowly. All three existing national TV channels are well behind Kazakh, Kyrgyz and even Uzbek TV stations that enjoy better quality and professionalism.

I used the word “even” regarding Uzbekistan, because journalists in that country are working in much more convoluted circumstances than in Tajikistan. Nevertheless, their private TV and radio stations have reached a higher stage of development. They simply do not discuss political topics in their programs.

Degree of freedom of the press is among primary factors that define democratic character of a society and the state. Some factors have negatively influenced Tajikistan’s freedom of the press during the years of independence. First of all, it was civil war, when the society, and along with it the majority of journalists, were divided into two warring camps. Unbiased interpretation of socially significant problems had been considerably complicated. During this period many journalists got killed or underwent physical violence that affected their work.

Then the war ended, but problems with freedom of speech remained. Today, according to the Constitution, censorship in Tajikistan is prohibited. However, self-censorship has replaced it. Journalists and editors think twice before publishing any material. And journalists keep struggling with their own desire and fear to publish a sharp critical piece. Usually they are not willing to cross a certain virtual ‘red line’ behind which problems are waiting for both the editor and the newspaper. There have not been many relevant cases during these years, but they did exist anyway. For instance, after publishing a story in 1990s the capital’s paper “Vecerniy Dushanbe” was bewildered by plentiful of problems. Prior to the parliamentary elections in 2004 “Ruzi Nav”, “Odamu olam”, and “Nerui Sukhan” were forced to cease publication under different pretexts. The measure was tough enough to make other editors draw their own “necessary conclusions” and decrease criticism and public discourse on matters of public interest.

At the start of Milleneum international organizations raised Tajikistan’s position in in resecting freedom of speech. They reported that the situation had improved after the civil war. In effect following Tajik authorities’ rapprochement with the West in the aftermath of September 11 Tajik mass media experienced some degree of liberalisation. In particular, private radio stations and new political publications were registered. The government was proud of its higher rating in the reports, but this period did not last long.

Undemocratic parliamentary and presidential elections in the years that followed were coupled with the closure of several newspapers.  These and other factors negatively affected the image of the country again. During last two to three years Tajikistan’s position has dramatically dropped in all international ratings on freedom of speech. In fact media legislation of the past three years could be said to have caused a sharp deterioration in media freedom. For example, the Criminal Code of Tajikistan was unexpectedly amended last year in order to allow authorities to prosecute journalists for slander, insult and false information published on the Internet. Nobody in the world knows how to control online publications or how to define the authenticity of their authorship. However, members of the Parliament in Tajikistan seem to think it was possible and needed. They justify tougher legislative by saying they have to put as their top priority the  protection of people’s rights and the country’s information security.

There were greater expectations of qualitative political, economic and social changes in Tajik society after the last presidential elections. However, these expectations, in my opinion, were not fulfilled. New people did not join the government and the role of parliament, the judiciary and political parties was diminished. Subsequently, nowadays instead of a new impulse in realization of reforms and a greater role for institutions of civil society, including mass media, we are witnessing new problems that are not solved, but preserved.

Sadly, Tajikistan’s authorities as well as other Central Asian authorities still see the press not as their equal partners in the country’s development process, but as an opposition force which tries to destabilise political situation and which therefore deserves to be kept under a strict control. Insignificant steps towards the development of democracy and freedom of speech have been taken not because the government understands its importance in the process of normal development of the country, but exclusively under the pressure of the West and for the sake of new grants and credits from the international community.

On the other hand, Tajik mass media has not developed into a complete institution of civil society yet. Professional level of the majority of our colleagues remains very low, and we do not always comprehend the role of the press and its social responsibility.

At the end I want to say few words about mass media, not as an institution of civil society, but as a business. All of us know that it is impossible to speak about independence of mass media, if they remain economically weak and/or depend on government, big private companies or parties. From this point of view, unfortunately, our present media business does not attract investments. Media income, particularly in provinces, is so low that usually it does not defray their own expenses, not to mention their perspective development. The main reason of this misery is the general situation in national economy. Private sector in Tajikistan is underdeveloped and consequently the advertising market is not well advanced either that in turn, keeps the media income at its lowest level.

The weakness of the advertising market and the low level of national income have complicated the survival of the press in Tajikistan. The potential buyers of newspapers need to decide upon the Hamlet question “To buy or not to buy?” And what to buy – a fresh newspaper or bread for the family?

The government of Tajikistan cannot afford financial support of national mass media, but at least temporarily it could create ‘a sparing tax mode’ for them.  Such attempts had been undertaken, but officials’ efforts turned them into fiction. According to the Ministry of Culture, currently six news agencies, more than 10 independent TV and radio stations, and about 200 newspapers and magazines are officially registered in Tajikistan. However, in practice only few of them are profitable and economically sustainable. Nobody knows yet how many of them will survive and develop in future.