IREX
International Research & Exchanges Board

Media Sustainability Index (MSI) - Europe and Eurasia

MSI Europe & Eurasia 2008

E-mail this pageE-mail this page

 

Belarus

Introduction

Overall Country Score: 0.73

Belarus remained largely unchanged this year, with the country score a 0.73 versus a 0.71 the previous year. The government sustained its tight control over the media and media supporting institutions. However, unlike in 2006, when journalists were physically assaulted and several newspapers were suspended in the run up and during the very controversial presidential election, the general attitude was more of suppression rather than harassment.

The government put off, at least temporarily, its plans to restrict the use of satellite television and the Internet. The latter media remained the least regulated of all; however the authorities have expressly set their sights on correcting this, with elections due in 2008. Most media, especially broadcast, are state-owned and there are only a dozen independent newspapers offering alternative viewpoints. Similarly, the government has kept an unwavering grip on the press distribution channels and most of telecom infrastructure.

Belarus’ unreformed and centralized economy slowed down somewhat but growth remained strong (8.1 percent growth). However, many expect a continuing decline after the deterioration of energy relations with Russia, Belarus’ key ally and main gas supplier. Under a transitional agreement reached in January 2007, the Russian gas monopoly Gazprom forced Belarus to pay double the costs in 2006. Also under that deal, prices will gradually rise to reach parity with those paid by EU states by 2011. Separately, under another arrangement, the Belarus budget was losing most of its windfall oil earnings, since 80 percent of the revenues in increased oil export duties were to be transferred back to Russian oil companies.

Subsidized Russian energy has long secured popular support for President Alyaksandr Lukashenka—in office since 1994—via nearly full employment and state-mandated wage hikes. With this pillar of his rule coming under threat, he declared in early 2007 he wanted closer relations with the West. The government, however, has done very little, if anything at all, to improve its poor record of political governance and human rights by giving at least some freedom to marginalized parties, NGOs, trade unions and the media. The move was generally seen as playing for time in anticipation of a leadership change in Russia in the March 2008 presidential elections. Meanwhile, several regime critics remained jailed, most notably Alyaksandar Kazulin, a challenger to President Lukashenka during the 2006 presidential election.

The society, however, has been more concerned with rising prices (84.2 percent of those polled aged 18 and above) and unemployment (38.3 percent) than with human rights abuses (25.6 percent) and Belarus being an exile country (14.5 percent), according to an independent opinion poll. In a positive breakthrough, 49.6 percent said they trusted independent media (up from 12 percent a year earlier) and state media—47.7 percent (down from 58.2 percent in 2006).

The MSI panel, meanwhile, voiced little optimism for the year to come. At several instances participants reserved lower scores—usually zeroes—for the future, saying there is clear evidence the situation will deteriorate.

Note: MSI panelists in Belarus agreed to participate only if they were not named publicly. Amendments to the Criminal Code were introduced in December 2005 to add a new article, “Discrediting the Republic of Belarus,” that provides for criminal liability for submitting to international organizations “false information” on the situation in the country. Human-rights groups, both domestic and international, believe the article’s vague wording make it possible for the government to penalize anyone reporting negative information with detention of up to six months or imprisonment of up to two years.

Objective 1: Freedom of Speech 

Score: 0.48

In 2007, scores for free speech remained virtually unchanged from the previous year, reflecting a stagnant situation that kept Belarus a country actively opposing free speech. The Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, and there are laws that regulate the media and protect freedom of speech, yet those are only partially enforced and other aspects of these laws also limit freedom of speech, panelists said. “Formally, there are some rights that protect freedom of speech, there is minimal enforcement, since independent media still exist. Yet you can’t say this right is truly enforced both for the broader public and the media as well,” one panelist noted.

Politicized courts offered little to no protection to independent media and journalists. “Theoretically, a practical result might be achieved, yet not always,” a media lawyer added. They recalled a case when the Supreme Court ruled in favor of an independent journalist, fined over working without an accreditation for a foreign radio station.

The already restrictive legal framework has not changed much in 2007. However, there have been some minor, albeit very negative, developments: under a new administrative code fines were increased for the “misuse” of media. An energy shock in early 2007—when Russia doubled gas tariffs for Belarus and increased an export duty on oil products Belarus economy heavily relies on—was widely covered by independent media to the dislike of the government which was criticized as slow to present a more positive picture. As a result, an instruction by Prime Minister Siarhiej Sidorski on 22 February ordered tighter control of what state officials and managers of state-run companies could say to independent media reporting on the economy and the government – namely, those officials providing “incorrect” information might be fired.

Earlier the same month the cabinet tightened control over the work of Internet cafes, in particular, ordering them to keep the log files of all websites visited by their clients for at least 12 months and, if necessary, provide those to the law enforcement.

The draft law on information passed the first reading in the Belarusian parliament in December 2007. Widely criticized both domestically and internationally as a tool to further curb civic liberties, it is, according to state telecom officials, meant to regulate access to public information, methods of protecting state information systems, and personal data and would have no control over media and copyright issues. Strangely enough, a representative of a local press freedom watchdog, the Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ), was invited to contribute to the bill. BAJ and other domestic and international experts came up with over 200 comments on the bill, yet only minor ones were adopted by the parliament. However, the bill is still to pass one more reading at the lower house of the parliament and then go through the upper house before being passed to the president. Prospects are gloomy, many agree, since the government has made clear its desire to regulate the Internet.

Thus, the deputy information minister, Alyaksandr Slabadchuk, announced on 20 August 2007 that a working group was being set up to research the legal regulation of the Internet. He claimed that the new regulations would not restrict freedoms, but went on to cite how the Internet is controlled in China. The announcement came two weeks after President Alyaksandr Lukashenka threatened to put an end to "anarchy" online.

Some panelists felt that the society does not value free speech, at least compared to the early and mid 1990s when the public protested against the closure of TV and radio programs and attacks on the independent press. Nowadays, they are distracted by more serious concerns, such as survival. In an independent opinion poll in December 2007, 84.2 percent of adults said rising prices had been their biggest problem. Besides, Belarusians are not an information society since information is not needed to make a choice, one panelist said. Another participant of the discussion, a media lawyer, added that “…the society is just tired after 13 years [of the authoritarian rule of the incumbent president Alyaksandr Lukashenka]. Moreover, protesters may and do face sanctions.”

Even opponents of the president sometimes attack independent media for being critical of the opposition. Luckily, a panelist noted, there is more solidarity in the independent media community itself, and violations of media freedoms are made public to the extent the independent press reaches their audience.

The Internet, meanwhile, remained the least regulated compared to other sectors, despite likely legislation in 2008. On LiveJournal (LJ), a popular blogging system, over 20,000 blogs place Belarus is the Top 15. And bloggers are quite active, a panelist added, noting those were mostly the younger and more educated. Hence, he believed there were chances tat Belarus would move closer to an information society in the near future. Voice-over Internet protocol, however, is restricted other than for personal/private use.

Broadcast licensing remained highly politicized, panelists agreed, with licenses granted by the information ministry. Three FM radio stations received licenses in 2007, the ministry of information reported. One was actually an extension of a license for an FM radio in Vitebsk; two more stations are already on air in Minsk and decided to go regional. Elsewhere, SKIF TV, a privately-owned regional TV network in the north-east of the country was given a license for a FM music station, a panelist added.

Participants also mentioned that ONT, a state-controlled national TV channel, launched Radio ONT in the capital, Minsk, in November 2007. “Yet I can’t recall the word ‘contest’ if you speak of how Radio ONT got the frequency. It wasn’t mentioned at all,” a panelist said.

On the other hand, BelaPAN, an independent news agency, lost its radio broadcast license in September 2007 since it was unable to go on air with its radio station FM-Novosti (FM-News) within a year after license was granted. One more contest for a radio frequency had to be announced by the information ministry, but it would not do so.

President Lukashenka told BelaPAN director, Ales Lipai, at a press conference that “…registration of a radio station would not be made easier… we are cautious as to creating private, unfriendly stations and letting investors in… should Paval Yakubovich [editor of Belarus’ biggest daily, Sovietskaya Byelorussia, the mouthpiece of Lukashenka administration] decide to launch a radio as part of his newsroom, there would be no problem. As for those we are not sure of, we have to ponder on that and set certain conditions.”

Market entry for media outlets was described as unfair and having many more restrictions than other industries, with licensing coming from information and telecommunications ministries. In addition, newsrooms need to register with local authorities where their premises are located. The procedure is non-transparent and local officials use dubious or no grounds at all to deny registrations to independent media. Unlike other businesses, media outlets can be suspended without a court ruling, after receiving two warnings from the information ministry. Taxation and other conditions are no different for the media than for other industries. “You need to get more permits than for other businesses - it could be comparable to the arms trade,” a panelist said.

Similarly to other years, crimes against journalists remained rare. However, participants mentioned that obstructing the work of a journalist was a criminal issue in Belarus and concentrated more on that aspect. Those working for foreign media without accreditations come under serious pressure from the government and sometimes quit their jobs, a panelist said. Panelists mentioned several cases when photojournalists were detained or even assaulted by the police. On 10 September 2007, Reuters photo correspondent Vasili Fiadosenka and his France Presse colleague Viktar Drachou were briefly detained by the police outside the city court in Baranavichy while shooting a picket in support of young opposition activist who was on trial for being a member of an unregistered organization.

On 12 December, two more photo correspondents were assaulted by the riot police dispersing a rally in downtown Minsk. “Journalists generally feel a bit more secure than demonstrators,” a panelist said, “…and if detained, they are released soon, yet only after they couldn’t do their job of covering the event.”

“You do not just feel insecure, on the contrary, you are perfectly aware that if something happens, this system will neither work for you, nor neutrally, it will work against you, that’s how it’s oriented,” said one of panel participants, an online editor. Crimes against journalists do receive certain coverage in the media, yet few surviving impendent media might provide only limited publicity.

There are no public media in the western sense, panelists said. Media laws favors neither state-funded nor independent media, yet in a broader sense state media are given preferences via orders and regulations of local authorities and state institutions, especially as far as access to information is concerned. Every year the budget law provides extra funding to state-owned media in addition to their subsidized salaries, rent, printing and distribution.

State media are far from being editorially independent, since their editors—whose contracts are usually renewed every year—are directly appointed by the ministry of information. “Editors of major state-owned media are appointed by politicians, or to be exact, by Belarus’ only politician [President Lukashenka],” a panelist commented.

Under Belarusian legislation, libel is a criminal law issue. However, more common are “honor and dignity” cases falling under civil law, where the prosecution does not have to prove malice, or even falsity. It is enough that the article in question caused “emotional distress” to the one being described. “There are a bunch of such articles in the Criminal Code and under the Civil Code the burden of proof is much heavier that in other European countries,” said one of the panelists, a media lawyer.

Two cases were mentioned during the discussion. On October 1, 2007, a district court in Minsk ruled in favor of Aleh Praliaskouski, chief of the ideology at the Lukashenka administration, in a defamation lawsuit against the independent weekly Narodnaya Volya. The newspaper and its journalist Maryna Koktysh, who wrote the story, were ordered to pay 25 million Belarusian rubles ($11,600) and 2 million Belarusian rubles ($930) respectively over a report on the arrest of Praliaskouski’s deputy on bribery changes. The ideology boss told the court the story caused him to experience anxiety, which led to health problems for which he had to take medicine. “The court has ordered us to retract three sentences [Praliaskouski disliked], including the phrase ‘but Praliaskouski currently walks free,’” said Koktysh in an interview. An appeal with a higher court later that year was unsuccessful.

Separately, another district court in Minsk upheld on December 20, 2007 a lawsuit from senior government official Mikalai Charhinec against the independent weekly Novy Chas and journalist Alyaksandr Tamkovich. The newspaper was ordered to pay 50 million rubles ($23,300) and Tamkovich 1 million rubles ($470) respectively. Charhinec, chairman of the standing committee on international affairs and national security in the Council of the Republic, the upper house of Belarusian parliament, filed a suit over his critical profile the newspaper published on September 24, 2007. The profile, titled “General-Senator Mikalai Charhinec,” criticized his literary credentials (Charhinec is a writer of detective stories and chair of Belarus' official writers union), his record of Soviet police service (including alleged participation in an unsuccessful investigation of serial killings in early 1980-s), and exaggerating his military service in Afghanistan in the mid-1980s during the Soviet invasion of the country.

Charhinec claimed the story damaged his “honor, dignity, and business reputation as a writer, politician, and general-senator,” a report said. In an unprecedented claim—in the country where the average salary is $352, officially—he demanded 500 million rubles ($233,600) from the newspaper and 100 million rubles ($46,700) from journalist Alyaksandr Tamkovich and seizure of the property and financial assets of both the paper and the journalist to secure the coverage of damages.

“In both Praliaskouski’s and Charhinec’s cases the defense raised the issue of to what degree a public figure may be criticized. The courts reacted just the opposite,” a panelist added.

Public information is not easily available, the panelists agreed. Although the law guarantees equal access to information, state-owned media have better access, or rather access for independent journalists is restricted first of all via accreditations issued by state bodies and local governments. Those working for online media or foreign media without an accreditation with foreign affairs ministry do not have journalist status and hence face even more problems. In the regions, said one of the panelists, independent journalists are often denied accreditations on grounds that a) a state-owned media have already been accredited; b) all the information can be obtained from the state media where it will officially published. Sometimes regulations are issued banning state officials from communicating with journalists rather than via press services.

One of the panelists mentioned that in 2007 the press center of the National Assembly, the lower house of Belarusian parliament, failed to provide even the accredited journalists with copies of the 2008 Budget. “The draft was introduced just a day before it was supposed to be voted through the parliament. Luckily, MPs got it. The only thing journalists were given was a verbal statement of what’s in the Budget. Nothing of the kind has ever happened since 1991 [when Belarus gained independence]. Perhaps they thought that was unnecessary.”

It is not surprising then that investigative reporting is almost extinct in Belarus, apart, to some degree, to what is being done by e-paper Ezhednevnik. An expensive and time consuming as they are, with restricted access to information investigations become something most independent media cannot afford.

Under the law, any state body shall respond to a request for information from the media within 10 days. However, this norm is not enforced. Some journalists are fighting the restricted access to information, mostly with the help of BAJ. “Naturally, people are getting used to living in a shrinking environment. Yet so far these walls being pushed from outside meet some resistance from the inside,” a participant commented. Looking onward, panelists were unanimous that further restrictions may follow given the provisions of the law on information adopted in the first reading in December 2007.

There are no formal restrictions on access to international news and news sources. With modern technologies like satellite TV and radio and first of all the Internet becoming more available and affordable, the main issue here is willingness to take extra efforts to access them. However, revenues of independent media outlets by and large remained the same, so they still have to put a curb on the use of the Internet, a panelist said. Other participants quoted the language barrier as another big reason why most media in Belarus are using Russian websites as the main source of international news, which, in view of their dubious objectivity, gives a somewhat distorted or at least one-sided picture of the world.

Subscriptions to international news services is restrictively expensive for most Belarusian media, and thus—unless subsidized by foreign donors—absolutely unaffordable. Some foreign news companies, like Reuters, are offering Russian-language news subscriptions. These are useful, a panelist said, since they provide a more balanced view and some information for comparison. Yet media absolutely would not spend money on that.

Entry into journalism is relatively unrestricted, panelists said. However, to be considered a journalist, one should be employed by a registered media outlet. Under a law, there are no freelancers or independent journalists; they are not given any rights other journalists enjoy. With the increasing number of events which require accreditation, independent media outlets are often denied.

Until recently, the government has hardly controlled admission to journalism schools. However, there are plans to amend admission rules for specialties “of particular import for the state,” including those for would-be journalists. This means applicants should be providing recommendations from local governments, reports said in November 2007. There is a common belief this provision would be used to debar the politically unreliable from the journalism schools. However, the panelist mentioned one exception: Franak Viacorka, son of the top opposition leader Vincuk Viacorka and head of the commission for culture of the nationalistic party Belarusian Popular Front, is currently a third-year student of the journalism school at the Belarusian State University (BSU) in Minsk. At the same time panelists doubted anyone with similar profile would ever join the journalism school.

Objective 2: Professional Journalism

Score: 0.89

Scores for professional journalism edged up somewhat, to 0.89 against 0.81 a year earlier, due to higher ratings given to objectivity, ethics, coverage of key events and balance between entertainment and information content.

Similarly to previous discussions, participants found it difficult to assess Belarusian media in general, since what most state-owned and some non-state media are offering is anything but journalism, according to the panelists. Some of the panelists remarked they would only speak about independent media, not state or opposition propaganda. No wonder opinions differed to some extent onto whether Belarus journalism was getting more professional. Surprisingly, the scores given by the opponents were not much at odds with each other.

Independent reporters try to verify and fact-check the information, to the extent it is possible considering the restricted access to information. They do consult a wide variety of sources, sometimes so wide, that these sources are absolutely unreliable, said one of the participants, an online editor. Researching the background is not so much a matter of professionalism, rather than the lack of time, since most newsrooms are understaffed. “Instead of three or four journalists we have only half of a journalist working, who, nonetheless, has to come up with three or four stories, instead of a one, albeit a big one,” said one panelist.

Experts are another sore point. “There are just a handful of them, and same names are everywhere.” Furthermore, another panelist added, as a rule an expert should first be briefed by a journalist on what has happened and on how things might develop further on. Independent think tanks are almost extinct, and even economics has not been properly analyzed: forecasts rarely come true and analyses are sometimes outspokenly unprofessional even for non-economists. State officials and experts are unwilling to give comments to independent media, or offer propaganda at best. Exceptions here are the finance minister and the chair of the central bank. In an alarming development, according to a panelist, some experts complained journalists wrote comments themselves trying to guess what expert might say rather than actually talking to them.

Many journalists are not using the Internet to double-check information, find the original source, or follow the trends, a panelist said: “Every two or three years they come for a seminar in Internet-assisted reporting and you see that skills they have gained at a previous session are just gone because they have not been using them.”

Press conferences are becoming more popular as sources of information, with journalists just reporting what officials have said and rarely questioning or fact-checking their statements. Previously, that used to be just one of the opinions, a panelist said. Interviews are also a sore point with more journalists acting like a “microphone stand”—a radio journalism slang nickname for an unprofessional reporter—and being led by an interviewee rather than interviewing them.

Both BAJ, the group that brings together independent journalists, and the Belarusian Union of Journalists, the “official” journalists association, have their ethical codes of conduct. The former are more likely to adhere to those standards, panelists noted. However, “in light of the confrontation initiated and fueled by the authorities, when barricades have been set up, many are becoming less choosy. There is a fight going on,” a panelist said. “Even the regional media are becoming more and more polarized, and it’s getting increasingly harder to stay calm,” added one of the participants, an independent editor.

Most journalists do not accept gifts for favorable coverage, possibly because they are not offered, a panelist commented. His colleague recalled a presentation by Russia’s VTB Bank, when journalists received souvenirs (a bottle of expensive wine and a pen), that cost more than most of them earn during a month. Nobody refused. Separately, in another example, Belarus’ biggest portal, TUT.by, was given laptops as presents.

There is selling of stories or positive coverage in the form of hidden advertisements and endorsements. Sometimes, this is done to sidestep the requirement that limits advertising to 30 percent of a newspaper’s content or to optimize taxes. Even news agencies are [unofficially] selling press mentions. Interfax-Zapad, a Russian-owned pro-government news agency, was said by some to charge politicians $300 a month and than contact them for comments. Both journalists and editors are selling the stories, a panelist added.

“…There is a common belief that self-censorship is widespread, amongst independent media as well. Yet when you ask a colleague, the answer is: ‘No, we do not practice that, while the others...’ Realistically speaking, there is a problem. Any media outlet faces it, if they want to make money. In short, the more business is in the project, the more cautious you are. Everyone is balancing their own way, yet this is one of the most serious professional problems. And sometimes we do not understand how far that has gone,” said one of the participants, an independent editor.

Among the most dangerous topics most media shun away from are the Lukashenka family and business interests of his closest allies. Even the new media practice self-censorship to some extent, often to give more protection to their heroes and sources. However, most key event and issues are covered, especially by independent media, panelists agreed. State-owned TV channels and newspapers are often either ignoring negative news or reporting and commenting on them three or four days after the event, most likely because they were awaiting instructions from the [Lukashenka] administration. Politics is being covered more or less fully, economy and culture are less so, especially in the regions.

Independent journalists remained poorly paid. The gap between the state-owned and independent media outlets widened even more: “Even state propagandists stopped lambasting their independent counterparts for their salaries, since they are very well-paid themselves, and this money is not well-earned.” Salaries even at leading independent newspapers are three times lower than at state-owned ones for the similar work, a panelist said. Many independent media can’t afford salaries of over $150-200. Even the leading online media are offering $300 a month at best. News anchors at Channel 1, Belarus biggest TV channel, are paid $1,500-2,000 a month, plus they receive other benefits, like apartments, subsidized loans, etc. according to a panelist.

News and information programming are not transcended by entertainment content, panelists said. In fact, with the society being somewhat split and concentrated more on survival, politics and related topics are given more attention than would be in a more democratic and prosperous country. And panelists noted that the quality of both news and entertainment content is low.

Newsrooms differ a great deal as far as their technical capacities are concerned, yet some minimal level is more or less sustained. Panelists however sat this minimal level is “stone age” compared to world’s leading media. Many are using old PCs and lack professional digital cameras and recorders. Even with broadband Internet, there are connection width and traffic caps. Software is 100 percent pirated, added another participant.

Luckily, as technology advances, both equipment and the Internet are becoming more affordable. Increasingly independent newsrooms are being upgraded by journalists themselves, since some of them, especially younger ones, find it easier to buy voice recorders and laptops themselves, rather than wait until newsrooms pay for them. Similarly, some journalists - even those based in the regions - have faster Internet at home.

Panelists failed to generalize about where exactly the aid should be channeled since needs are not always similar. Moreover, the aid is not always used efficiently. For example, BELSAT, a donor-funded independent satellite TV channel with the annual budget of €4m ($5,8m) that started test broadcasting from Poland in December 2007, received old equipment. Its parent company, Telewizja Polska SA (TVP), equipped it with analog Betacam SP studio decks, that used to be the industry standard until the late 1990s. Surprisingly, its reporters working in Belarus are using DV (Digital Video) camcorders and at some point in December 2007 they had compatibility and editing problems.

However, in most cases the blame is to be laid with media outlets themselves, since they are reluctant to keep up with the latest standards, including technical ones. And when asked what kind of help they would need, they don’t know what to ask for or save money for, a panelist added. This equally applies to both independent and state-owned media.

Meanwhile, in 2007 the government spent $63 million on the state media, of which $47 million was spent on television and $7.5 million on the press.

 “There is a problem with quality reporting as such, to say nothing of quality niche reporting,” a panelist commented, saying affordability is the main constraint. In understaffed newsrooms one journalist has to keep their mind and report on three to four topics. Not to get it all absolutely wrong, they are just scratching the surface. Besides, the development of specialized quality reporting is hampered by low demand. That is not likely to change until the political situation changes. Currently media are fighting for survival and there are a handful of journalists—fueled mostly by their enthusiasm—who offer high quality niche reporting.

Panelists spoke highly of the news agency BelaPAN and business weekly Belorusy i Rynok, offering quality political and economic reporting and the sports weekly PressBall. Even state-owned news agency BelTA was said to be doing some good specialized journalism - if not their political reporting which is blatant propaganda, according to the panelists.

Objective 3: Plurality of News Sources

Score: 0.74

This objective increased slightly from the previous year. One of the reasons may be the news agency BelaPAN, an independent news agency, which has not only continued offering high quality reporting, yet come with new information services. Separately, more news sources became available, mostly on the Internet (blogs, online radios, etc.).

However, the media landscape has not changed considerably: some plurality of news sources still exists, but not all of them are easily available. State-owned TV channels remained the primary source of news. In a December 2007 independent opinion poll, 67.4 percent said they were watching Belarusian state TV channels every day or at least several times a week. In comparison, 26.8 percent said they were reading local newspapers (unspecified whether state-owned or independent), 21.2 percent—Sovietskaya Byelorussia (country’s biggest daily published by Lukashenka administration) and 16.7 percent—Komsomolskaya Pravda v Byelorussii (a popular tabloid, Russian-owned, with a Belarusian insert). “Easily available news sources are absolutely monopolized by the government and you can’t say they are giving a full and objective picture to the public,” a panelist commented.

Not surprisingly, those living in bigger cities and people with higher incomes have better access to alternative news sources, like cable TV, the Internet and satellite TV and radio. In rural areas people usually have access to state TV (commonly two channels), state radio (via a cable radio network reaching 3 million households) and one or two state-owned newspapers.

According to the same opinion poll, 30 percent of those aged 18 or older said they were watching cable TV every day and 12.8 percent—several times a week. For satellite TV figures are 9.8 percent and 5.6 percent respectively. Newspapers are affordable to many—only 8.9 percent said they were not reading them—yet these are being purchased for TV listings mostly. Since independent press is by and large banned from state distribution networks, fewer people are willing to make the extra effort to buy them from a street seller or subscribe to them. The latter alternative is even more complicated and time consuming, as a contract is to be made, then paid in a bank with the receipt to be sent to the publisher, etc. Moreover, some are afraid to subscribe to the independent press— labeled “opposition”—for fear of reprisals.

One of the panelists spoke of the digital gap between urban and rural areas. Although state-owned telecom monopoly Beltelecom is offering broadband even in smaller towns, fees remained high and there was hardly any demand.

According to another nationwide survey, 48 percent of Internet users still use dial-up. Fast broadband is still a luxury: one megabit ADSL without a traffic cap was offered for around $1,000 a month and by Beltelecom only, since it owns most of country’s telecom infrastructure and controls international Internet traffic. With other Internet service providers (ISPs) forced to purchase traffic from Beltelecom, they cannot compete on price. According to a survey, only 7.0 percent of those aged 18+ use the Internet daily with 8.7 percent more using it several times a week. Only 2.6 percent said they were reading news online on the daily basis, and 3.9 percent several times a week. Moreover, high fees are hampering online and civic journalism, for which a 24-7 Internet connection is a must, a panelist added.

To be distributed or broadcast in Belarus, foreign print and electronic media need an express permission from the ministry of information. Most western and also Polish and Ukrainian channels were banned from cable networks several years ago. However, they are available via satellites. The foreign press is hardly affordable. However, you could subscribe to them directly and the state postal service Belposhta will deliver that to you, a panelist said. Russian titles are widely available by subscription, yet are getting exorbitantly unaffordable. And very few will pay for such subscriptions, since these newspapers can’t be read on the Internet. Still, in November 2007 Belposhta delisted three Russian newspapers, Kommersant, Moskovskii Komsomolets and Novaya Gazeta, from its subscription catalogues for their critical reporting about Belarus.

Attempts to restrict the use of satellite TV by dismantling dishes outlined in the previous report have not gone any further than several cases, after Sovietskaya Byelorussia, the mouthpiece of Lukashenka administration, blamed the attempts on “overly enthusiastic” local governments. Meanwhile, a panelist noted that the percentage of pirated satellite subscriptions remained very high.

The Internet remained largely unrestricted compared to other media. Domestic news sources and sometimes blogs, or even entire blogging platforms like LiveJournal.com are “pinpointedly” blocked only during opposition rallies or similar events.

Belarus has no “public” media while state media all speak in a single voice reporting mostly on the government and first of all on President Lukashenka. “To some extent, they do reflect the political life, since it has really turned in to a one-man-show,” a panelist commented. Not surprisingly, they do not offer alternative viewpoints. “However, you can post a critical comment on the website of Sovietskaya Byelorussia and they will not delete it,” argued one of the participants.

Panelists complimented BelaPAN, an independent news agency, on their objective and quality reporting, which has contributed to the overall growth of the Objective 3. In 2007, in addition to its traditional text services BelaPAN offered photos, infographics, audio and video. “BelaPAN is everywhere. You can’t imagine the Belarusian media landscape without it. References are everywhere and those who are just not citing them as a source are too many to count,” a panelist commented.

Alternatively, media outlets, depending on their orientation, are also using BelTA (state-controlled agency), and two Russian-owned services, Interfax-Zapad and Prime-TASS. Five other companies registered as news agencies are offering mostly economic news and legislative updates. There is no discrimination on the side of the agencies, panelists said. On the contrary, independent media are very welcome to subscribe to BelTA which is actively pushing propaganda. Several years ago state-owned media and private radio stations were banned from using BelaPAN.

Unless subsidized, subscriptions are not always affordable for independent media. For its news subscriptions BelaPAN charges $150-300 a month, depending on the package and how much a media can actually pay. Interfax-Zapad’s subscription costs around $300, according to a panelist. Apart from BelaPAN, only BelTA has been offering photos (and unlike BelaPAN, for many years) and some infographics.

Domestic broadcast media tend to rely more on purchased programming. Non-state broadcasters, including regional ones, produce their own news, yet they are made “as toothless as possible,” a panelist said.

Broadcasters based outside Belarus—like European Radio for Belarus, BELSAT, Radio Liberty, Radio Racyja, Deutsche Welle—provided little relief. They target the same audience as domestic broadcast media—which is good since they have to compete and thus do supplement each other. “There is an impression, maybe wrong, that more people read news on their websites than actually listen to them,” a panelist said. In November 2007, TUT.by, Belarus’ biggest Internet portal, launched its online radio, Radio TUT, which is offering mostly music, yet also some news, including those provided by BelaPAN.

The law orders media outlets to disclose information about their founders, but not about founders of publishers or broadcasters. Hence, in some cases ownership may not be transparent, yet consumers can easily distinguish between state-owned and independent media. Government is the only media mogul and foreign presence is insignificant. Russian oligarchs own several newspapers: the popular daily Komsomolskaya Pravda v Byelorussii, analytical weekly BelGazeta. Popular weeklies Argumenty i Fakty and Trud publish their Belarusian local editions.

Russian Renova-Media owns Cosmos TV, a big cable TV operator and ISP, based in Minsk. The Swedish media conglomerate Modern Times Group (MTG) was said to be finalizing an agreement with Belarus ministry of telecommunications to build a production studio and a teleport on the condition that it will broadcast Belarusian state TV channels via its Sirius 2/3 satellite. MTG is the largest Free-to-air-TV and Pay-TV operator in Scandinavia and the Baltics and the largest shareholder in Russia's largest independent television network CTC Media, Inc. Its channels are distributed on the Viasat platform and in third party networks in 24 Nordic, Baltic and Eastern European countries and reach a 100 million people.

Minority issues largely remained marginalized. “As a rule, interests of a narrow social group are not presented in mainstream media. At the same time, there are few media who represent narrow social interests,” a panelist said. Ethnic minorities have their own media outlets, mostly small circulation newspapers or bulletins. Most notable are Polish (including undercover ones, opposing the government), Ukrainian and Hebrew.

There is a big language minority, i.e. those speaking Belarusian, a panelist said. Amongst domestic broadcasters only two state-owned radio stations, Radio 1 and Radio 2, are offering news in Belarusian. Television-wise, LAD and STV have kept only several cultural programs in Belarusian; Channel 1 and ONT each have only a couple of journalists—mostly regional ones—doing reports in Belarusian.

Objective 4: Business Management

Score: 0.82

The business environment remained hostile with printing and distribution channels almost 100 percent owned by the government, a key barrier to the development of independent media and also a major threat to their very survival. Separately, the state has also been very repressive to small and media businesses, the mainstay for independent media, thus affecting their advertising revenues. The objective remained relatively unchanged from the previous year, scoring a 0.82.

Belarus was ranked 151 out 157 in the 2008 Index of Economic Freedom, administered by The Wall Street Journal and The Heritage Foundation: “[Belarus'] financial freedom, investment freedom, property rights, and freedom from corruption are 20–40 points below the world average. The government dominates the financial system and either owns or controls all but one of the 31 banks. Foreign investment in all sectors faces hurdles, from outright restrictions to bureaucratic incompetence. Weak rule of law allows for significant corruption and insecure property rights.”

Both state (given their subsidized status) and independent (economically repressed by the government) media are not operating as efficient businesses, panelists agreed, arguing media could be a profit-making venture under current conditions.

“The few remaining private printing houses are periodically raided by some unknown officials. I don’t know what they are looking for, yet the client will feel discomfort at a minimum,” a panelist said. Almost twenty independent newspapers were banned from the state postal service Belposhta and press distribution network Belsajuzdruk several years ago and have had to rely on their own street sellers or house-to-house delivery systems ever since. Two more regional newspapers, Vitebskii Kurjer in the north-eastern city of Viciebsk and Miascovy Chas, based in Pinsk in the southwest of the country, suspended publishing altogether, since they found it impossible to make ends meet. Several independent newspapers, most notably Narodnaya Volya and Tovarishch still publish outside Belarus, in Smolensk (western Russia). Meanwhile, the government is investing millions of dollars to update printing presses, under a program that all local state-owned newspapers could go full-color in 2008.

Revenues come from different sources with independent media using the widest variety (advertising, sales of print copies, sometimes donor funding) yet to a different extent. This however has not contributed to their sustainability, given the overall anti-business and anti-free press environment. State media relied mostly on government funding and subsidized fees, and to some extent, on subsidized advertising. Private broadcasters such as FM radios were making profits on advertising only while regional TV stations also relied heavily on personal messages, such as birthday greetings.

Although the market for Internet advertising almost doubled in 2007, up to $2.8-3.0 million according to some reports, little of that, if any, reached online media who had to rely on donor funding.

In 2007, according to the advertising group ZenithOptimedia, the Belarus advertising market totaled $87.1 million annually, with $53 million spent on television ads, $15.4 million on press, and $3.7 million on radio advertising. Television became the biggest gainer quantitatively, since big multinational companies, offering fast moving consumer goods and advertising agencies had traditionally stuck to national TV channels that reached wider audiences. The market remained dominated by big international agencies.

Under a new advertising law, advertising should not take more than 20 percent of total daily broadcast time and 30 percent on primetime (18.00 to 22.00).

Independent media do not receive government subsidies. However some outlets nominally not owned by the state yet controlled by it, sometimes choose to join state media holdings to avoid bankruptcy. In April 2007, the team of Vechernii Minsk, a daily based in the capital, sold a 68 percent stake of the newspaper to MTIS, one of Belarus’ biggest cable TV and Internet providers. MTIS in its turn is owned by the Minsk City government.

Some market research is being done, both in-house and by commissioned companies. However, their services are hardly affordable to all but a few bigger media outlets, mostly state-owned. According to a panelist, privately owned newspapers Intex-press, Vechernii Brest and Vechernii Grodno were using their own in-house research efforts, including questionnaires and phone polls, and accordingly tailoring their reporting and advertising behavior. State-owned media, like the daily Sovietskaya Byelorussia and TV channels ONT and Channel 1 were also said to be using external research and adjusting their products.

One of the panelists raised the issue of applicability, since media are very restricted in their marketing efforts: “If you tell Narodnaya Volya [the newspaper is banned from subscription] that their readers would rather subscribe to it, there is very little they can do.”

Several companies offer broadcast ratings: NOVAK is selling subscriptions to its diary panel and does quarterly face-to-face interviews on media consumption. The Institute for Sociology at the National Academy of Sciences uses PeopleMeters to produce television ratings. The  Independent Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Studies (IISEPS) is administering mostly political polls, yet sometimes offers TV, radio and newspaper ratings; SATIO and MASMI are periodically researching Internet audiences. Of all pollsters and research companies, only IISEPS is offering its reports for free. Sometimes figures on the use of Internet are made public.

Sometimes the ratings lack credibility, the panelists believed, or give little practical information to both media and advertisers. The same applies to circulation figures, since there is no independent audit authority. Under a law, every issue of the newspaper should carry the print run, yet actual sales figures remain suspect.

Objective 5: Supporting Institutions

Score: 0.75

Media-support institutions remained at a low ebb, finding it next to impossible to sustain an independent and professional press. Overall scores for this objective declined from slightly 0.81 a year earlier.

The panelists failed to name any trade associations supportive of media outlets’ interests. Television Broadcasting Network (TBN), an organization of local television broadcasters, closed down altogether in 2007. Independent regional publishers that used to have their own association until 2005 are now trying to reunite in the form of a more loose partnership.

There are two professional associations working in Belarus, and like other associations in the country, ideologically juxtaposed against each other. The Belarusian Union of Journalists (BUJ) is an “official” organization of journalists. Although it brings together around 2,000 media professionals working for state-controlled media, panelists failed to recall what it had been doing apart from giving out prizes. It is only in 2007 that they have launched a training program for journalists, something their independent counterpart, The Belarusian Association of Journalists (BAJ), has been doing for years. BAJ, in its turn, unites around 1,200 independent journalists and works to protect their rights via legal advice and defense, professional development, and public advocacy. Panelists paid tribute to what BAJ was doing to protect both journalists and the freedom of speech in the country. However, one of the panelists regretted it had been working somewhat traditionally, “like a usual association in a usual country.” Although very supportive for the media, it should be more pioneering and also active in keeping Belarusian journalists at the cutting edge of the most up-to-date innovations in the media sector, according to this panelist.

In a positive development, BAJ’s membership was growing — up from around 1,000 media professionals a year earlier. A group of young journalists—mainly working for the new media—joined BAJ in 2007. Since most of them lack professional training in journalism, the association is helping to improve the quality of their reporting. The influx of fresh blood is likely to make it more pioneering and efficient, a panelist said. Besides, BAJ publishes a professional journal, Abajour, which also contributes to the development of media.

NGOs are an endangered species in Belarus. Being harassed by the government, they have to concentrate more on their own survival than on helping the media. Some of them work in stealth mode and do provide some assistance to the media, like offering trainings or legal advice. There is more of such cooperation in the regions, since BAJ is not always reaching remote regions, a panelist said.

There are several domestic universities offering journalism degrees, most notably the journalism school at the Belarus State University (BSU) in Minsk, and other state schools in Homiel, Hrodna, and Viciebsk. There are two privately-owned institutions, both based in Minsk, that train journalists. Academically, domestic programs are “archaic,” a panelist commented and offer no practice-oriented training at all. Media managers at both independent and state outlets were said to be dissatisfied with the knowledge (“very basic”) and skills (“if any at all”) would-be journalists get. Besides, they are not teaching niche reporting, including economics and business, media management, and online journalism.

External alternatives include the European Humanities University, once a Belarusian university now in exile in Vilnius (Lithuania). There are also scholarship programs in Ukraine and Poland, funded by their governments and foreign donors. Elsewhere, the US government offers Masters scholarships in journalism and mass communications at US universities under the Muskie program. Other minor opportunities might be scholarships by the British Council (at the United Kingdom) and the Open Society Institute (Central European University in Budapest, Hungary). Similarly to previous years, panelists doubted graduates would find it easy to apply locally the knowledge and experience they have gained abroad.

Short-term training opportunities, offered mostly for free by both local and international organizations are available and quite popular since they are often the only opportunity to bridge the skills gap. By and large, the professional needs of all departments and all levels are addressed, or at least, pertinent courses are available. More trainings should be organized domestically, the panelists said, since most newsrooms find it problematic to send their key staff abroad. Trainers from Belarus and neighboring countries like Ukraine and Russia are a better choice compared to the western ones, one of the participants argued, since the former have better knowledge of the audience and better understand the broader context the media work in.

As noted above, printing facilities are monopolized by government, hence politicized and price-discriminative against the independent press. “The [remaining] 1.5 private printers are so scared not to make the government angry, that they themselves censor the newspapers they print,” a panelist commented. Under law, a director of the printing house is responsible for the contents of the printed materials his company produces. Sources of newsprint are not yet controlled by the government. However, it has built a newsprint factory in Lukashenka’s hometown of Shklou and was reportedly ordering state-owned newspapers to purchase newsprint from it starting from January 2008. At the same time it was planning to impose discriminatory customs tariffs on imported newsprint, a panelist said. However, the production did not start as planned in December 2007 due to technological problems.

Media distribution channels have remained under tight governmental control. Newspaper kiosks are owned by the state. There are some sales of mostly non-political press via newsstands in shops and supermarkets. Some independent regional papers operate their own, very small distribution incentives.

All broadcast transmitters are owned by the state as is most of the telecom infrastructure. There are private last-mile ISPs, yet the government controls international traffic and fees remain unaffordable for the vast majority of the population. As a result some of the Internet providers openly admitted they were earning more money by charging their users for access to their multimedia libraries—with almost 100 percent of pirated content—than by selling Internet access.

Web-hosting is more or less unrestricted; however, most online media prefer to be hosted outside of the country both for affordability and security reasons. “…There is an illusion of freedom. At least as far as web hosting and Internet access are concerned a newsroom can circumvent the state [restrictions],” according to a panelist.

Panel Participants

As noted above, the MSI panelists for Belarus agreed to participate only if they were not named publicly in order to avoid criminal prosecution.