FINAL MONITORING REPORT
2005 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
CONTENTS
ONE: PROJECT INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT NEEDS
1.2 PROJECT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, ACTIVITIES
TWO: POWER OF PRESIDENCY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
2.1 CONSTITUTIONAL POWER
2.2 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION LEGISLATION
THREE: POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
3.1 RESULTS OF THE 2004 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS
3.2 2005 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN
3.3 POLLING DAY
FOUR: MEDIA AND ELECTIONS
4.1 LEGAL FRAMEWORK
4.2 EXPERIENCES OF MONGOLIAN MEDIA ELECTION COVERAGE
FIVE: MEDIA MONITORING
5.1 MONITORING SCOPE
5.2 MONITORING METHODOLOGY
5.3 PUBLICITY OF MONITORING RESULTS
SIX: RESULTS AND FINDINGS OF MONITORING
6.1 HIGHLIGHTS
6.2 DATA ON PARTICULAR MEDIA OUTLETS
SEVEN: CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
FINAL MONITORING REPORT
2005 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
ONE: INTRODUCTION
Globe International, an independent, non-partisan Mongolian NGO dedicated to freedom of expression and of the media, conducted systematic monitoring of the media coverage of the May 22, 2005, presidential election. This project was conducted with material and technical support from the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), an international NGO headquartered in Washington DC, USA, promoting democratic development worldwide.
Globe International sought to evaluate mass media performance in providing objective and balanced coverage of the candidates and their platforms to enable the citizens of Mongolia to make well-informed choices at the ballot box. The project’s findings have been determined through a well-defined and rigorous methodology and are not intended to support any candidate or political party, but rather the integrity of the media environment as a whole during the campaign season.
Globe International (GI) implemented the project from March 1, 2005 to July 1, 2005. Before the start of monitoring, representatives of NDI and GI met the leaders of the political parties with parliamentary seats and of the major media outlets to be involved in the monitoring.
On April 4, 2005, GI started monitoring six TV channels (Mongolian National TV, Channel 25, UBS, TV-5, TV-9, and Eagle TV); one radio station (Mongolian National Radio); and four daily newspapers (Daily News, Century News, Today and The People’s Right), using qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. Quantitative analysis measured the total amount of time and space devoted to elections-related coverage on monitored media outlets. Qualitative analysis evaluated whether the information about candidates was positive, negative or neutral in its content.
The results revealed disturbing problems in coverage of candidates in news and current affairs programs on most of the monitored media outlets. This made it very difficult for Mongolians to get accurate and unbiased coverage of political parties, candidates and other issues. In general, biased media coverage of the election demonstrated that Mongolia lacks a strong and independent media able to provide objective and balanced information to enable the electorate to make a well-informed choice at the ballot box.
1.1 PROJECT NEEDS
The media provide a forum for the exchange of opinions, public debate, confrontation and criticism, and offer the general public a chance to gain a better understanding of opinions presented by individual candidates and political parties. The roles of the media are also to provide the public with an objective portrayal of public affairs; to be a vehicle for the dissemination of information about the most important developments in a society; to unveil shortcomings of the political system; and to provide an unbiased analysis of the context in which events occur. During an election, this helps voters to make well-informed decisions as to which political entity they will give the mandate to represent their interests. During an election, the role of the media is indispensable, especially in portraying the various participants in the election competition and in interpreting their previous activities, political programs, opinions, plans and visions for the future. By enabling political contestants to communicate their messages and in presenting information about political parties, candidates and matters of political importance, the media play an essential role in the integrity of the electoral process, as the primary source of information about politics.
The principle of freedom of speech requires that journalists, editors, producers and media proprietors take responsibility for the content and form of their messages as well as the consequences they entail. The media should be assured by the government of the right to gather and report objective information without intimidation and with no arbitrary or discriminatory obstruction or censorship of their coverage of the campaign. State authorities should refrain from interfering in the activities of journalists and other media personnel with a view to influencing elections. Media management and owners should accept the principles of journalistic ethics and independence and they should not exert pressure on their employees to act at variance with these principles. While all the media should offer responsible coverage, it is particularly incumbent upon state-owned media to observe even more rigorous standards, since they are publicly funded. The citizens pay fees and the public media have therefore a legal and moral obligation to serve the interest of the general public, not partisan or private interests.
Media monitoring constitutes an important part of the overall analysis of the pre-election environment conducted by a domestic election-monitoring organization. Media monitoring is an effective tool to measure both how the state and political contestants treat the media and how the media treat contestants. Valid and credible media monitoring projects provide the general public with benchmarks to judge the fairness of the whole election process. Media monitoring also represents an important tool to highlight cases of undue interference in the editorial freedom of the media or attempts to undermine their independence.
1.2 PROJECT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, ACTIVITIES
The project was a part of Globe International’s long-term goal of promoting fair and democratic elections; the particular project aimed to evaluate the Mongolian mass media performance in providing objective and balanced coverage of the candidates and their platforms to enable the citizens of Mongolia to make well-informed choices at the ballot box.
Before the start of monitoring, NDI representatives Scott Keirin and Rastislav Kuzel, project leader H. Naranjargal, coordinator J. Tuul and GI consultant S. Bayaraa met the leaders of the political parties represented in parliament and of the major media outlets to be involved in the monitoring, to tell them about project goals, activities and monitoring methodology, to encourage successful implementation of the project.
The project carried out the following activites:
• Training
NDI trainer and MEMO (Slovak NGO) Director Rastislav Kuzel from March 12 to 18, 2005 conducted intensive theoretical and practical training for the monitoring team in methodology, quantitative and qualitative measures and media effects. He came to Mongolia again during the project implementation to consult on the analysis of monitoring data and on writing the monitoring reports.
• Press conferences
The project held 5 press conferences. An introductory press conference was held on March 18, 2005, attended by the 2 NDI experts, telling those present about the goals and monitoring methodology. A press conference was held after each of the 4 periods of monitoring, giving information on results and findings. Journalists, media leaders, and representatives of civil society groups and international organisations attended the press conferences, which were covered by all media outlets except TV9.
• Round table
A round table was held on July 7, 2005, intended to evaluate project implementation. Participants discussed the general conclusions of the monitoring and contributed to the recommendations to parliament, government and international donor organisations.
TWO: POWERS OF PRESIDENCY AND LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
Mongolia has had a successful transition to democracy since the peaceful revolution of 1990. In that time, Mongolia has had several democratic elections: 3 presidential, 4 parliamentary and 4 local elections, under the 1992 Constitution of Mongolia.
Punslamaa OCHIRBAT, the first Mongolian president, was nominated by the MPRP for his first term, and in 1993 won the election for a second term as a candidate of the Democratic Coalition.
Natsag BAGABANDI, the second president, won two successive elections, in 1997 and 2001, as the candidate of the MPRP.
There are 3 main legislations related to the presidency:
1. The Constitution of Mongolia
2. The Law on the Presidency
3. The Law on Presidential Elections
2.1 THE CONSTITUTION AND POWERS OF PRESIDENCY
2.2 THE LAW ON PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS
THREE: POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
3.1 RESULTS OF 2004 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS
The Mongolian Parliament, called the State Great Hural (SGH), is the supreme governing institution, with 76 members elected by citizens of 18 years and over.
In the 2004 parliamentary elections, the Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party (MPRP) and the Motherland Democracy Coalition (MDC) won 35 seats each, and the Republican Party (RP) won one seat. The MDC comprised 3 political parties: the Democratic Party (DP), the Mother Land Party (MLP) and the Civil Will-Republican Party (CWRP). At the declaration of results, two electoral sub-districts remained in dispute. In the two months following the election, a de facto Grand Coalition government was formed after weeks of stalemate. In late December 2004, the MDC disbanded. At present, 5 political parties have seats in the SGH. Just before the presidential election, the courts gave a decision on electoral district #56, awarding the seat to J. Gurgagchaa, the MPRP candidate, so giving his party one more seat in the SGH. The dispute over the result in electoral district #25 in Ovorkhangai aimag is still before the courts.
Number of seats in SGH
# Seats MPRP DP MLP CWRP RP Independent
75 36 25 7 2 1 3
1*
76 36 25 7 2 1 3
PS: * One seat still in dispute.
Before the official campaign for the presidential election, it was clear that the political parties with seats in the SGH would nominate separate candidates.
3.2: 2005 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN
During the process of selection of candidates by the political parties, the Mongolian media was speculating on potential candidates. Among them were Prime Minister Ts. Elbergdorj; Parliamentary Speaker N. Enkhbayar; Deputy Prime Minister Ch.Ulaan; MP S. Gonchigdorj, and MP M. Enkhsaikhan. According to the media, N. Enkhbayar and M. Enkhsaikhan were the most likely main contestants for the presidential election.
The Mongolian media paid close attention to the congresses of the political parties. The processes of registration of the candidates by the General Election Committe (GEC) and anouncement of candidate platforms were widely covered by the media.
Before the parties announced their candidates, the media gave a great deal of coverage to N. Enkhbayar, both as Parliamentary Speaker and as the potential MPRP candidate. A negative tone dominated in this coverage, particularly by the Healthy Society citizens movement and at other public meetings and demonstrations.
Candidate nominations opened on March 22, 2005. Four political parties with seats in parliament nominated candidates; the only other party with parliamentary representation – CWRP – did not, and declined to express support for any of the candidates.
The Mongolian Traditional United Party, which has no seats in parliament, announced support for the MLP candidate.
Four candiates were registrated with the GEC and received approval to contest to the Presidentail elections. GEC organised 30 local electoral comissions, 329 subsidiry electoral commissions, and 1,631 divsion electoral commissions.
Candidates for the presidential election:
Party Name Position Election manifesto
Mongolian People's Revolutionary Party N. Enkhbayar Parliamentary Speaker
Democratic Party M. Enkhsaikhan Member of Parliament
Mother Land Party B. Erdenebat Member of Parliament
Republican Party B. Jargalsaikhan Member of Parliament
The Mongolian media reported that the main contenders were N. Enkhbyar and M. Enkhsaikhan.
Several opinion polls were conducted by Sant Maral, Prognoz, the International Republican Institute (IRI) and others before and during the election campaign. These made it clear that the public also considering the main contenders to be N. Enkhbyar and M. Enkhsaikhan.
The three institutions ran opinion polls involving the following nunber of the voters:
Sant Maral 1,747
Prognoz 6,336
IRI 1,800
Results of opinion polls (%)
Candidate/Party IRI Prognoz Sant Maral
UB Province
N. Enkhbayar, MPRP 58 53.1 53 55
M. Enkhsaikhan, DP 23 25.9 21 26
The Mongolian media reported widely on the results of public opinion polls and the Ardyn Erkh daily newspaper published the results of its own opinion polls run in cooperation with the Academy of Political Education.
3.3 POLLING DAY
Voting in the presidential election was held on May 22, 2005, when 927,679 (74.92%) of the 1,238,250 registered voters attended the polls, with 915,631 valid votes.
N. Enkhbayar, the MPRP candidate, received 53.46% of the votes; M. Enkhsaikhan (DP) received 19.73%, B. Jargalsaikhan (RP) won 13.94% and B. Erdenebat (MLP) received 11.51%.
Results of the presidential election
Party Candidate Ulaanbaatar city Provinces
MPRP N. Enkhbayar 55.14 52.2
DP M. Enkhsaikhan 17.57 20.85
RP B. Jargalsaikhan 16.48 12.63
MLP B. Erdenebat 9.67 12.46
Invalid votes 1.17 1.47
The voting and election results were widely covered by the media. TV9 and Eagle TV reported on the results of electoral districts and sub-districts and other TV channels and Mongolian National Radio carried results in their main news programs every hour.
Transparency International – Mongolia, in cooperation with the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, the Asia Foundation, the International Republican Institute and the Open Society Forum, ran an Election Night event to follow the voting results as they were tallied. Information from the GEC came in late. Eagle TV attended Election Night and reported on the different views of those present. All the major broadcast media and newspapers reported on the event. Project leader H. Naranjargal also gave the findings of the media monitoring.
FOUR: MEDIA AND ELECTIONS
4.1 LEGAL FRAMEWORK
Freedom of expression and right to publish.
The 1992 Constitution of Mongolia guarantees the following rights and freedoms of citizens:
Article 16.16
Freedom of speech, freedom to express opinions and freedom to publish.
Article 16.17
Right to seek and receive information that is not confidential or legally protected by the state and its institutions.
Article 10
Under this article, international treaties to which Mongolia has become party become effective as domestic legislation upon the entry into force of the laws for their ratification. Mongolia has ratified the International Human Rights Declaration (1961) and the International Convenant on Political and Civil Rights, so articles 19 of these documents should be recognized as domestic law.
Media freedom
The Mongolian parliament in 1998 passed the Law on Media Freedom, which forbids censorship and prohibits state ownership of the mass media. The parliamentary resolution for implementation of this law called for the conversion of all state-owned broadcasting to a public service, but the process was delayed for 7 years until January 2005, when parliament passed the Law on Public Radio and TV. Unfortunately, this only came into effect on July 1, 2005, so that Mongolian National Radio and TV (MRTV) remained a state broadcaster for the presidential election.
The Law on Presidential Elections and the media
Defamatory legislation
According to article 27.4 of the Law on Presidential Elections, it is prohibited to disclose private information and letters. The same article prohibits defamation of a candidate's honour.
Strict defamatory provisions are included in the Criminal and Civil Code. Journalists can be imprisoned for up to 2 years if information which is false or adversely affects a person's honor, dignity and reputation, is distributed through the mass media.
Other
Mongolia still lacks legislation on access to information and on protection of whistle-blowers. A journalist’s right to protect his/her information sources is not legally guaranteed.
4.2 EXPERIENCE OF MONGOLIAN MEDIA COVERAGE OF ELECTIONS
The results of the monitoring conducted by the Mongolian Free and Democratic Journalists’ Association (MFDJA), the Mongolian Press Institute and GI during previous elections showed that the Mongolia media have predominantly served the ruling party. Media monitoring has been conducted for parliamentary elections, but this was the first monitoring of coverage of a presidential election.
The first media monitoring was run by an international group of 5 journalists from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and a MFDJA Covering Elections project under the EU TACIS democracy program in 1996. The team reported disappointment that the Mongolian media had concentrated in the election campaign on making money and had paid insufficient regard to their responsibility to provide a forum for informed discussion, and thus assist better informed voting decisions.
The Mongolian Press Institute conducted ten days of media monitoring (June 20-30) in the 2000 parliamentary elections, involving 4 daily newspapers, one radio station and 4 TV channels. It is noted in their report that media information was biased, and they found many examples of partisan reporting or forcing of information in favor of a candidate. Extremely one-sided information dominated on the TV channels, particularly the state-owned channel, which exclusively served the ruling Democratic Coalition; Channel 25 and the Onoodor daily newspaper were neutral, they said.
Globe International, in cooperation with the Voter Education Center, ran media monitoring in 2004 for the parliamentary elections, looking at campaign financing, and covered the whole campaign period. The Mongolian Press Institute also conducted a week of media monitoring, June 11-17, 2004.
During the 2004 parliamentary elections, GI in cooperation with the Confederation of Mongolian Journalists (CMJ) implemented the Free and Fair project, and the CMJ and the Mongolian Newspaper Association for the first time adopted a Code of Conduct on Election Coverage and called on the media tp provide balanced and objective reporting. However, the ruling party used the media for its own political benefit and the private media used the election campaign as a way to generating income.
GI media monitoring showed that a total of 1 billion 764.4 million MNT was paid to the state-owned broadcaster, 96% by the ruling MPRP, 28% by the Mother Land-Democracy Coalition, the rest by other parties.
The Mongolian Press Institute reported that 65.4% of election coverage was on the MPRP, 28% on the MLD Coalition, the rest on the other parties. They found that 19% of MRTV election coverage was in fact disguised electoral advertising, with 21% on TV5, 10% on TV9, 9% on Channel 25 and 3% on UBS.
FIVE: MEDIA MONITORING
Globe International sought to evaluate the mass media provision of objective and balanced coverage of the candidates and their platforms so the citizens of Mongolia could make well-informed choices at the ballot box. The project findings were arrived at by a well-defined and rigorous methodology; they were not intended to support any candidate or political party, but rather looked at the integrity of the media environment as a whole during the campaign season.
The monitoring was in four stages: April 4-22; April 23–May 6; May 7-14; and May 15-21.
5.1 SCOPE OF MONITORING
The monitoring concentrated on 11 media outlets: 6 TV channels, one national radio station and 4 daily newspapers, studying quantitive and qualitative analysis and media effect.
Criteria for selection of media outlets
The 2004 media monitoring by the Mongolian Press Institute covered 220 broadcast and 115 print media outlets out of a total of 325 in Mongolia: 6 national daily and 25 weekly newspapers, 63 newspapers appearing at intervals of 10-14 days and 37 monthly journals.
This media monitoring project involved media outlets operating in Ulaanbaatar, capital of Mongolia, where two-thirds of voters reside.
The monitoring team selected media outlets on the following criteria:
1. Use of public resources.
2. Accessibility (national coverage, circulation, effectiveness).
Broadcast media
There were 73 radio and 42 TV broadcast media (including cable stations and FM radio). Five TV channels operate in Ulaanbaatar in addition to Mongolian National Radio and TV (MRTV).
1. MRTV is the state-owned national broadcaster; 90.4% of provincial residents and 95.7% of Ulaanbaatar residents use MNRTV as their main information source.
2. Privately-owned TV and radio channels hold licenses for the airwaves, which are public property; 83.1-94% of the public in Ulaanbaatar watch US-based TV.
3. The most-used cable TV provider is Sansar (38%); the newscasts of EBC (Eagle TV), which use Sansar, are the most popular.
Daily newspapers
Two of the 6 daily newspapers are affiliated with political parties, while 20.9% of provincial residents and 17.6% of Ulaanbaatar residents read newspapers. The main selection criteria were circulation and national distribution. The most-read newspapers are Odriin Sonin, Onoodor and Zuuny Medee. Ardyn Erkh is a new newspaper, but was selected for monitoring because its circulation has been increasing rapidly and it has quickly become popular.
The 5 tabloid weeklies are in the top 10 most-read newspapers, though their monthly circulation does not exceed that of the daily newspapers.
Media outlets selected for monitoring:
1. Broadcast media
No Media outlets/ownership Scope of coverage Weekly broadcast time (hours)
1 Mongolian National Radio - state-owned National 120
2 Mongolian National TV - private National 89
3 UBS - state-owned Local, UB 112
4 Channel 25 - private Local, UB 49
5 TV5 - private Local, UB 116
6 TV9 - private Local, UB 92
7 Eagle TV (EBC) – US investment, private Cable, local, UB 42
2. Print media
No Newspapers Ownership Frequency Distribution Daily circulation
1 Odriin Sonin (Daily News) Private Daily National 12,413
2 Zuuny Medee (Century News) Private Daily National 10,360
3 Onoodor (Today) Private Daily National 9,038
4 Adyn Erkh (People's Right) Private Daily National 5,000
5.2 MONITORING METHODOLOGY
Monitoring team
The monitoring was carried out by a team of 12: 3 for analysis, 6 in data gathering, 2 in data entry and one consultant. Two had monitoring experience in the 2004 parliamentary elections and 6 were selected from 20 students in the faculties of journalism, socio-sociology and politics at the Mongolian National University. The team was given intensive training and accepted the Code of Conduct as part of their contract.
Monitoring facility
GI rented a monitoring room and equipped it with 6 TV sets/video recorders and a computer. Two new TV sets/videos recorders were purchased as suggested by the NDI trainer and 3 others were rented. GI contributed one computer and a TV/video. One radio was purchased for radio monitoring. For good quality recording, a cable network was installed.
Daily newspaper subscriptions were taken out for the period to May 22, 2005, and some were bought for test monitoring.
A total of 40 audio and 380 video tapes were used for recording broadcast news and programs.
Time of monitoring
Television news and current affairs programs broadcast between 6pm and midnight were recorded by 2 persons, while data gathered by 6 monitors was processed and analyzed. Radio newscasts at 6am, 11am, 1pm, 7pm, and 10pm were recorded and analyzed. The whole content of 4 newspapers (news, articles, interviews and other material) was monitored by 2 staff.
Methodology
The monitoring tried to quantify and qualify time dedicated to candidates and political parties by the media. However, not all forms of media coverage could be evaluated either quantitatively or qualitatively. Therefore, a special category was established for events of manipulation and bias by the media, called media effects. Results of quantitative and qualitative analysis and specific examples of media effects on the general public were used to determine whether the information about a political contestant in the media was fair and balanced.
Media monitors were specially trained to conduct qualitative and quantitative analysis of electronic and print media coverage, to see whether it fell within the basic parameters of balanced and fair journalism. The monitors filled out specially-designed monitoring forms; a data collector then fed all this monitored data into a computer. All recorded data and newspapers were stored in archives for future checks or controls should the results should be questioned. As the data collector controlled monitoring sheets and fed them into a computer, it was important that monitors wrote clearly and agreed on acronyms for selected political subjects in advance, to avoid misunderstanding or incomplete results.
Quantitative analysis
Quantitative analysis measured the total amount of space and time devoted to coverage of selected monitored subjects or topics (eg elections) by the media. In broadcast media, monitors used stopwatches (or the VCR timer) to measure the actual time of appearance of selected political subjects on camera as well as when they are mentioned or quoted by someone else. In newspapers, the area dedicated to political entities was measured in cm2. The monitoring also covered all instances when various relevant subjects were referred to by someone else (eg by a news presenter or political opponent). These were recorded as reference or remark (per cm2), also included in both quantitative and qualitative charts.
Qualitative analysis
Qualitative analysis evaluated whether information about selected monitored subjects was positive, negative or neutral in content. An evaluation mark was also attached to all subjects, in addition to space and reference, which provided information on how the subject was portrayed. This was attached to all monitored subjects to determine whether the subject was presented in negative, positive or neutral light. The evaluation scale had 5 grades: grade 1 or 2 meant that a certain political subject was presented in a very positive (1) or positive (2) light and the news coverage was favourable. This meant that the subject was praised or admired and the presentation included positive feeling and emotions. Grade 3 was a neutral mark, implying that the coverage of a political entity was matter-of-fact, without expressive or emotional charge. Coverage marked 4 or 5 meant that a political entity was presented in a negative (4) or very negative (5) light. This meant that negative emotions, accusations or one-sided criticisms dominated the item. This five-grade scale provided monitors with a large choice range in evaluating presentation of political entities. Balanced news coverage meant that a media outlet attempted to cover events in a balanced, fair and objective manner, offering time or space to all subjects of a certain item to present their views. Such a news item was purely informative and did not contain any one-sided evaluating standpoints or criticism.
Media effects: this was a special category used for occasions that were not possible to monitor quantitatively or qualitatively, as they simply did not fall into any of the categories. In other words, these were stories or items presented with the specific intent of manipulating or affecting the public. The reason for this category was the obvious absence of basic journalistic principles and standards. Each story which did not meet the basic requirements for a non-biased story fell into the category of media effects. The main criteria for such evaluation were what the stories lacked: relevance, exactness, transparency, matter-of-fact, balance, variety, timely and clarity.
5.3 PUBLICITY
The project staff, with NDI experts Scott Keirin and Rastislav Kuzel, held their first press conference on March 22, 2005, to announce the goals, needs and methodology of the media monitoring.
Four separate press conferences were held on April 25, May 9, 18 and 25 to announce the findings of the 4 monitoring periods, attended by an average of 40 journalists, media leaders, civil society groups, foreign embassies and internatioal organisations. Journalists covered these events widely. Project leader H. Naranjargal, project coordinator J. Tuul and project consultant S. Bayaraa, were interviewed by TV and radio; Eagle TV twice invited project staff onto its nightly news program.
To evaluate the media monitoring, project staff held a round table on July 7, 2005, inviting a wide representation of media, NGOs, political parties and international organisations. The ...…attendees discussed the general conclusions of the media monitoring. Project leader H. Naranjargal gave a presentation on how to cover elections, and spoke on the main international principles and standards of election reporting. Partricipants also discussed and adopted the draft recommendations from project staff. Journalists at the round table expressed their support and cooperation for implementation of the action recommended to parliament, government and international donor organisations.
SIX: RESULTS AND FINDINGS OF MONITORING
6.1 HIGHLIGHTS
1 MNTV allocated 31% of its political and election prime time coverage to N. Enkhbayar, with an overwhelmingly positive or neutral tone. The second most-covered candidate, B. Erdenebat, received 25% of MNTV political and election prime time coverage, also mostly positive or neutral. The other two candidates, M. Enkhsaikhan and B. Jargalsaikhan, received 22% and 22% of the coverage respectively. The bias in favour of N. Enkhbayar at the initial stage of the monitoring, although it lessened at the end, still provided an advantage to this candidate on MNTV.
2 Three of the five monitored private TV channels, UBS, TV-9 and TV-5, provided N. Enkhbayar with the biggest portion of their political, and election prime time coverage. M. Enkhsaikhan was the most often-presented candidate on Channel 25. Eagle TV throughout the whole monitoring provided its viewers with the most balanced coverage about candidates of all monitored TV stations.
3 Mongolian National Radio devoted fairly equal amounts of political and election prime time coverage to candidates: N. Enkhbayar 22%, B. Jargalsaikhan 23%, M. Enkhsaikhan 27% and B. Erdenebat 28%. Coverage of all candidates was overwhelmingly positive or neutral in tone.
4 The print media provided a plurality of views, but often showed strong bias either for or against a candidate. Consequently, voters were only able to form an objective view of the campaign if they read several publications.
5 In a positive development, a televised debate involving all four candidates took place on MNTV. However, the format did not allow for real interaction between candidates.
6 While most monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates in the last four weeks of the campaign, this balance was not achieved because of improved reporting, but because most TV channels sold prime time news time to candidates (on an equal basis). This practice is totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics.
7 Another disturbing finding of GI throughout this project was the consistent practice by most monitored media outlets of neglecting to air opposing views in the body of a story.
6.2 DATA FOR PARTICULAR MEDIA OUTLETS
Broadcast media
Time allocated to individual candidates:
No Candidate MNTV UBS Eagle TV5 TV9 Channel 25 MNR
1 B. Jargalsaikhan 22% 21% 28% 15% 18% 3% 23%
2 M. Enkhsaikhan 22% 20% 25% 21% 16% 59% 27%
3 N. Enkhbayar 31% 42% 24% 34% 53% 14% 22%
4 B. Erdenebat 25% 17% 23% 30% 13% 24% 28%
Television
Mongolian National Television (MNTV)
In the seven weeks of the official campaign in the media, Mongolian People’s Revolutionary Party (MPRP) candidate N. Enkhbayar received 31% of prime time coverage on MNTV news and analytical programs, 44% of which was for his role as Parliamentary Speaker rather than for his campaign activities. This amount of coverage was beyond that which was reasonable for his role as Parliamentary Speaker. The tone of the coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. The second most-covered candidate, B. Erdenebat, received 25% of similar airtime, also positive or neutral. The other two candidates, B. Jargalsaikhan and M. Enkhsaikhan, each received 20% of the coverage.
Generally, there was very little negative information about candidates on MNTV news and current affairs programs; most of the candidate coverage was either positive or neutral. N. Enkhbayar was given the largest proportion of direct airtime to present his views and convey his message to the electorate. By displaying bias in favour of N. Enkhbayar, MNTV failed to meet its obligation to provide a balanced treatment of all candidates during the election process.
Ulaanbaatar Broadcasting System (UBS)
UBS TV also showed support for the Parliamentary Speaker, giving him 42% of its prime time coverage, overwhelmingly positive in tone. The next most covered candidate, B. Jargalsaikhan, received 21% of the channel`s political and election prime time coverage. While the tone of his coverage was mainly positive or neutral, B. Jargalsaikhan also received some criticism on the channel`s prime time news. Candidates M. Enkhsaikhan and B. Erdenebat were given 20% and 21% of such coverage respectively, all mainly positive or neutral in tone.
Eagle TV
Eagle TV prime time news programs offered its viewers the most balanced picture of the campaign. The media monitoring indicated that all four candidates received roughly equal proportions of the channel`s political and election prime time coverage: M. Enkhsaikhan (DP) 25%, B. Jargalsaikhan (MRP) 28%, B. Erdenebat (MP) 23% and N. Enkhbayar 24%. In tone, the coverage of the candidates was generally balanced, with all four receiving a slightly more positive than negative coverage. N. Enkhbayar received the most negative coverage.
TV-5
TV-5 devoted the largest proportion of its coverage to N. Enkhbayar, who received 34% of the channel`s prime time election and political coverage, a significant portion being in his role as Parliamentary Speaker. The second most-covered candidate was B. Erdenebat (30%). The other two candidates, M. Enkhsaikhan and B. Jargalsaikhan, received 21% and 15% of the coverage respectively. Coverage of all candidates was mainly positive or neutral.
TV-9
Like MNTV and UBS, TV-9 showed support for Parliamentary Speaker N. Enkhbayar, who received 53% of the prime time news and current affairs coverage of activities and opinions of candidates. The tone of the coverage was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. In the same period, his main opponent M. Enkhsaikhan received only 16% of such airtime, with equal proportions of positive and negative tone. B. Jargalsaikhan received 18% of airtime, more negative than positive, while B. Erdenebat was given 13% of the coverage, mainly neutral or positive in tone.
Channel 25
Channel 25 was the only TV broadcaster to offer wide-ranging and favourable coverage to M. Enkhsaikhan and a critical approach towards N. Enkhbayar. M. Enkhsaikhan was given as much as 59% of the channel`s prime time election and political coverage, the tone of which was overwhelmingly positive or neutral. In sharp contrast, candidate N. Enkhbayar received only 14% of such coverage, predominantly negative or neutral. The other two candidates, B. Jargalsaikhan and B. Erdenebat, received 3% and 24% of the coverage respectively. The former received equal proportions of positive and negative coverage.
Radio
Mongolian National Radio (MNR)
This state-funded radio station devoted the biggest proportion of its news coverage of the candidates to B. Erdenebat (28%) and M. Enkhsaikhan (27%). The other two candidates received roughly equal proportions of MNR coverage: N. Enkhbayar 22%, B. Jargalsaikhan 23%. The tone of the coverage was somewhat more positive about B. Erdenebat.
Newspapers
The print media offered a plurality of views, but invariably showed strong bias either for or against a candidate. Consequently, voters could only form an objective view of the campaign if they read several publications.
People’s Right
People's Right gave M. Enkhsaikhan 43% of its total space devoted to the candidates, with a mainly positive or neutral tone. His main rival, N. Enkhbayar, received 32% of such coverage, more negative than positive in tone. The other two candidates, B. Erdenebat and B. Jargalsaikhan, received 13% and 12% respectively of the coverage, mainly negative in tone.
Today
Today allocated as much as 42 % of its candidate coverage to B. Erdenebat, mainly positive or neutral in tone. The second most covered candidate was N. Enkhbayar (25%) and third M. Enkhsaikhan (24%). N. Enkhbayar was the only candidate to receive mostly negative coverage. The fourth candidate, B. Jargalsaikhan, received 9% of the coverage.
Daily News
Daily News devoted 41% of its candidate coverage to N. Enkhbayar (MPRP). His main opponent M. Enkhsaikhan (DP) received 32% of such space. While the coverage of the DP candidate was exclusively positive or neutral, the MPRP candidate received heavy criticism.
The other two candidates, B. Erdenebat and B. Jargalsaikhan, received 21% and 6% respectively of the coverage.
Century News
Unlike the above two publications, Century News showed clear support for N. Enkhbayar, giving him as much as 67% of its candidate coverage, almost exclusively positive or neutral in tone. By contrast, M. Enkhsaikhan received only 14% of such coverage, predominantly negative in tone. The other two candidates, B. Jargalsaikhan and B. Erdenebat, received 9% and 10% respectively.
Media Effects
Broadcast media
TV-5
Candidate B. Erdenebat appeared three times on TV-5’s regular Fostering Mongolia program, broadcast right before the major evening news program, immediately after campaigning began. On April 25, he was introduced as an individual and a businessman. The next day, April 26, B. Erdenebat talked about his election platform. On May 4, he was shown when the program discussed the development of Darkhan city. None of the other candidates appeared on the program.
On May 6, TV-5 showed Speaker N. Enkhbayar meeting journalists on World Press Freedom Day, when Mongolian Journalists’ Confederation President Ms. D. Sarangerel (who is also a TV-5 director) presented to N. Enkhbayar a traditional blue ribbon and silver cup with milk and wished him success in the presidential election.
TV-9
This TV channel presented an unbalanced coverage of the issue of the debt owed by the Buyan company (whose former director was presidential candidate B. Jargalsaikhan) to the Japanese Marubeni corporation. While being critical of Buyan, the channel gave no opportunity for the company nor candidate B. Jargalsaikhan to respond on the issue. (April 25, May 1).
On the April 28 news bulletin, candidate M. Enkhsaikhan was accused of harming small and medium business when, as Prime Minister, he abolished import taxes, a decision reversed by candidate N. Enkhbayar when he was Prime Minister. M. Ehkhsaikhan was given no fair chance to respond.
MNTV
On the May 2 6pm TV news, candidate N. Enkhbayar was shown, although his name was not mentioned in the text, on an item concerning a visit by Energy Minister T. Ochirkhuu to the construction site of the Taishir hydro power station.
UBS
The UBS TV 8.30pm news on May 1 reported that candidate N. Enkhbayar when Prime Minister did much to support local producers. The story said that when candidate M. Enkhsaikhan was Prime Minister, he abolished import taxes, so harming domestic industry.
Reporters conducted street interviews on the resolution of the debt to Russia. Each interviewee said that for this, N. Enkhbayar deserved extremely well of his country. No alternative opinion was asked. (May 3, 8.30pm news)
Mongolian National Radio (MNR)
The MNR evening news block contained candidate information, but the sources were given very differently. Sometimes it was called ‘information from the press office’ of the political party, at other times it was ‘our reporter/special reporter says,’ often with no indication of where the information came from (11pm news, May 3, 4, 5, 6 ).
Election news blocks contained information about candidates that was sometimes too much like propaganda. For instance, the 11pm news on May 5 reported on candidate N. Enkhbayar, saying, “A head of the state will be elected from the homeland of Chinggis Khan after 800 years.” April 28’s 6pm news reported, “When candidate Enkhsaikhan was meeting seniors in the constituency, he took it as a good sign that some people addressed him as President.”
Newspapers
Today
In the article headed From Begging to Pride published on April 27, candidate M. Enkhsaikhan was accused of causing poverty by abolishing import taxes, while the reporter said that N. Enkhbayar saved the country by reversing that decision. No facts were provided to support the allegation.
In the article headed Enkhsaikhan’s Government Created a Legal Environment for Selling Mongolian Land to Foreigners, the author wrote about events that dated back 8 years.
Daily News
This newspaper printed a number of articles accusing candidate N. Enkhbayar of corruption or being loyal to wrongdoers (issues of April 19, May 2, 4, 5 and 6). These articles dug too much into what had happened long ago.
People’s Right
This newspaper published signed articles of opinion labelled ‘paid publication’ (May 3, Trade Unions are MPRP Affiliates).
In issue #79, a journalist used a well-known Mongolian saying, “Mongolians are strong when united" in the context that Mongolians would be stronger with Enkhbayar. The newspaper published an edited photo of M. Enkhsaikhan in front of the statue to Zorig, the murdered popular democrat.
Century News
Century News published an article (April 27) headed 1996-2000: Peak of Corruption, referring to a time when the Democratic Union coalition led by Prime Minister (now presidential candidate) M. Enkhsaikhan was in power; digging in the past.
An article was published (May 4) about tax relief worth 294 million MNT provided by then-Prime Minister and now presidential candidate M. Enkhsaikhan to a company owned by candidate B. Erdenebat. This happened 8 years ago, and no opportunity was given to these candidates to present their points of view.
The monitors observed many media effects in the dailies. Publications were too biased, or written about events 8-10 years old, or with no reference to information sources. It seemed to monitors that such materials were paid advertising. Unfortunately, there was no clear distinction between paid programs or publications and journalism. These items often misled the public by appearing to be objective information on the candidates.
During the election campaign, voters received a lot of negative or critical information on candidates without the chance given to the candidate to express his opinions or explain the situation. For example:
Negative information on N. Enkhbayar focused mainly on the payment of a debt equal to $250 million to Russia and $50 million which went missing while he was Prime Minister. Other allegations concerned a corruption network.
Negative information on M. Enkhsaikhan concerned his past position as Prime Minister, and mostly concerned allegations of an unprofitable contract signed with a Canadian mining company on Oyu-Tolgoi, the abolition of import taxes and bank bankrupcies.
Negative information on B. Jargalsaikhan was mainly about the debt allegedly owed by his Buyan company to the Japanese Marubeni corporation and to the Mongolian government.
Negative information on B. Erdedebat centred on his alleged tax debt to the govrnment.
Unfortunately, some negative information went through the Election-2005 news block without being indicated as paid material, so misleading the public. Indeed, no serious investigations were conducted by journalists. Negative information was heavy during the last days of the election campaign.
International standards allow a newspaper to announce openly which party or candidate it supports editorially, but none of the dailies so informed the public.
The daily newspapers published interviews about the TV debate between candidates, with commentaries on each particular candidate and a subjective assessment of who was good or bad.
There were no programs or publications on voter education other than GEC advertisements calling for the electorate to turn out to vote. Media outlets lacked solid journalism such as analysis of election platforms or questioning of political interests.
Media effects also measured how fairly the media covered important election events. The monitors saw the following events as important to the elections.
• Agreement on a fair contest between political parties
The media reported that the 4 candidate election management offices signed an agreement on a fair contest on ...., 2005. This comprised 5 articles and stated that if the parties engaged in activities contrary to the agreement, it would be considered violated. The agreement was valid until the time that parliament enacted a Law on Accepting the Power of the Presidency. Chapter 2, entitled Duties of the Parties of the Agreement, said: ‘It is strictly prohibited to act illegally’ (2.1.1) and 12 actions were defined as illegal.
TV9 gave the public the full text of the Agreement and brought out the role of the MPRP election manager. MNTV reported briefly on the event while Channel 25 gave it great significance. UBS and TV5 paid little or no attention to the event.
• Statement on resignation of General Election Committee (GEC)
On May 12, 2005, the Democratic Party, Mother Land Party and Republican Party called the press conference and demanded the resignation of the GEC. They claimed that the GEC had printed 80,000 extra voting ballots, 11% more than the allowed reserve. They claimed that this was a deliberate wrong-doing by the GEC in order to cast confusion on the election. The parties also claimed that party represenation in electoral districts and sub-districts was unbalanced and said that if GEC did not take action, they would continue to fight.
The parties held a public meeting called Fair Elections! on May 13, 2005, in Sukhbaatar Square. Earlier, on April 6, 2005, the GEC issued a statement denying that one party was over-represented, saying that of the 282 persons working in the sub-regions, 94 were MPRP members, 63 DP, 30 MLP and 17 RP. Of the 5,296 persons working in the electoral districts, 5,296 were MPRP members, 4,331 DP, 949 MLP and 286 RP. On April 27, 2005, J. Yadamsuren told journalists that, because of the claims of the three parties, he would be resigning if parliament agreed. Allegations of MPRP party over-representation on the GEC always excite great suspicion among other parties at election time. Resignation of the GEC was also a demand of the Healthy Society public movement.
There were reports on TV5 and UBS, and interviews with the Chairman and Secretary-General of the GEC, claiming, “It is impossible...there is not a big enough budget...the time is too short..." Channel 25 was more balanced in its reporting of the events, covering the complaints of the 3 parties and the GEC explanation. Eagle TV reacted quickly and the events were covered without any explanation.
Many public movements such as Healthy Society, For Social Development, the veterans' movement to increase pensions, the student movement to reduce tution fees, and trades unions were active before the presidential elections. TV5 and UBS were critical and negative about the events. MNTV was neutral in its reporting of the demand for the GEC to resign by the 3 parties and the Healthy Society citizen movement. TV9 was critical of the resignation call and said they had been told it was an attempt to create confusion in the elections.
UBS and TV5 covered the trade union movement without media effects and showed the meeting by movement representatives with N. Enkhbayar, and his promises to meet their demands.
Eagle TV was more neutral and balanced in covering these events.
• Car accident of MLP candidate.
On May 9, 2005, B. Erdenebat, Mother Land Party candidate, finished his campaigning in the provinces and went back to Ulaanbaatar. Before leaving Sharyn Gol, the candidate and his team called their party election office and the State Department of Security and asked to be met. They were 5 minutes late, but no security cars arrived. The team waited for a while and moved on to the city. When passing the White Gate, security car 00-04 crashed into the candidate's car.Both cars were seriously damaged, but fortunately no one was injured. Three days later, on May 12, 2005, MLP election manager H. Chuluunbaatar and press officer Sh. Sukhbaatar held a press conference and gave the party's statement on the accident. Their spokesman said that they were suprised that there had been nothing published on the three-day-old accident, so they decided to publicise it. He pointed out that the Law on Presidential Elections guarantees the security of candidates.
TV5 and UBS reported on the press conference without explanations or effects. MNTV covered the event as party advertising, TV9 tried to show that the candidate's driver was at fault and interviewed the driver of the security car. Channel 25 was more focused on the responsibilty of the security depatment.
MNR did not report on the Fair Contest Agreement; their position on the call for resignation of the GEC was neutral; and the accident was reported on the Election-2005 block as MLP paid news. They gave only brief reports on the Healthy Society movement and the Oyu Molgoi 50:50 movement
SEVEN: CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It should be noted that Mongolian journalists understood the importance of media monitoring and their attitude towards monitoring was very positive and respectful. The major media fairly reported to the public on the monitoring results, and GI is sure that many journalists worked fairly and honestly during the presidential elections.
The monitoring team reported that Mongolian voters received sufficient election information during the election campaign.
While most monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates in the last four weeks of the campaign, this was not because of improved reporting, but because most TV channels sold prime time news time to candidates (on an equal basis). This practice is totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics. Another disturbing finding of GI throughout this project was the consistent practice by most monitored media outlets of neglecting to air opposing views in the body of a particular story. The monitoring results revealed disturbing problems in news and current affairs coverage of candidates in most monitored media outlets. This situation made it very difficult for Mongolians to get an accurate and unbiased coverage of political parties, candidates and other issues. In general, the biased media coverage of the election demonstrated that Mongolia lacks a strong and independent media able to provide objective and balanced information to the electorate to enable them to make a well-informed choice at the ballot box.
1. When compared to the 2004 parliamentary elections, the broadcast media were more balanced than the print media, but while most monitored TV channels provided a more balanced coverage of the candidates in the last four weeks of the campaign, this balance was not because of improved reporting, but because most TV channels sold prime time news time to candidates on an equal basis. This practice is totally unacceptable from the point of view of journalistic ethics.
2. Another disturbing finding of GI throughout this project was the consistent practice by most monitored media outlets of neglecting to air opposing views in the body of the particular story. The monitoring results revealed disturbing problems in news and current affairs coverage of candidates in most monitored media outlets. This made it very difficult for Mongolians to get an accurate and unbiased coverage of political parties, candidates and other issues. In general, the biased media coverage of the election demonstrated that Mongolia lacks a strong and independent media able to provide objective and balanced information to the electorate to enable them to make a well-informed choice at the ballot box.
3. In the Mongolian media there was insufficient independent journalism for analysis of election platforms, promoting of debates and providing pluralistic views and professional investigations
4. The televised June 18 debate on MNTV was not able to provide sufficient information to influence a better choice by voters. The format did not meet proper standards, with candidates answering prepared questions from an interviewer rather than a moderator. Candidates did not have the chance to debate each other or to ask each other questions.
5. The Mongolian media has so far failed to serve as a forum for the exchange of opinions, public debate, confrontation, investigation and commentary that would offer the public fully informed, analyzed and assessed views of persons seeking elected office.
7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Basing on election coverage standards and findings of election media monitoring, Globe International recommends the following to NDI and other international organizations working for democracy, freedom of expression, information and the media.
We note that Mongolia has achieved significant results in guaranteeing freedoms of expression and the media, and in the promotion of free and independent media. We emphasize that in order to strengthen democracy, particularly to promote democratic elections and enhance the role of the media in elections, Mongolia needs reforms for a better political, legal and economic environment for the free media, and empowerment of journalists and media professionals through promotion of professional journalism and enhancement of their professional skills.
1. To promote professional journalism, it is necessary to:
• Hold intensive training courses for journalists, editors and media owners on election coverage standards and principles, and the media's role in democratic elections.
• Provide workshops on independent journalism.
• Provide training on the production of effective television debates.
• Raise awareness of politicians and enhance their knowledge of the importance of television debates.
2. To encourage a more favorable legal environment, it is necessary to:
• Conduct a study of the media legal environment and promote media legal reform, including amendments to relevant media-related provisions to the Law on Presidential elections.
• Conduct a study of the economic environment of the independent media and provide training to enhance knowledge of media management and how to survive long-term without relying on election advertising income.
• Promote efficient implementation of the Media Freedom Law and campaign against censorship.
• Accept international standards of editorial democracy and guarantee editorial independence.
• Assist the media to establish a media self-regulatory body and support the media, particularly the public media, in an adoption of media standards for election coverage.
• Demand that media owners, particularly of the broadcast media, to disclose their names and let the public be aware of the sources of the information they receive from those media.