According to media experts, local media generally report military operations in Ukraine in a neutral way. The focus is made on how the consequences will affect Kyrgyzstan and its residents.
Monitoring of key local media shows that in the beginning of military operations editorial staff tried to report on the large-scale conflict in a measured and restrained manner, while focusing on local events and issues – coronavirus situation, preparation for spring field work, attraction of investment, ‘reforms’ by health minister, and other news.
However, as the military conflict began to affect the economy, financial situation, migrants in Russia and other sectors of life in Kyrgyzstan, local media began to increase the number of materials dedicated to the military conflict and now almost half of all content published by local media is anyway related to military actions and their consequences for the country.
According to media experts, the media of Kyrgyzstan report on the military conflict in a neutral and balanced way, generally, while focusing more on the Kyrgyzstan context – namely, how it affects the economy, what measures are taken by the authorities, what situation is with food provision, economic forecasts, evacuation of citizens of Kyrgyzstan and their family members from Ukraine, etc.
The only day when local media covered the political aspect of the military conflict was the day when the president of Kyrgyzstan Sadyr Zhaparov addressed the members of parliament, when he specified the official position of the Kyrgyz Republic regarding the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
President Zhaparov in his address emphasised that Kyrgyzstan, just like many other states, called on the parties to peace, to resolve the disputes by political and diplomatic means, and the country’s position in this question remained ‘neutral’.
“In fact, we are a small country. We do not have influence to stop the conflict. Therefore, we need to remain unprejudiced,” he said.
At the same time, speaking about particulars, there are some nuances about the approach chosen by any given media outlet or editorial staff of foreign media conducting their activities in Kyrgyzstan.
In particular, state-run media of the country try to avoid reporting on the conflict itself, preferring to focus on the consequences for the country and the measures taken by the authorities. If they report anything on the conflict, they do it in terms of the official position.
Independent media, mainly websites, report not only on the consequences for the country, but also publish what happens in the action area, turn attention of the audience to high-profile statements of Ukraine, Russia, other foreign leaders, publish materials about refugees, evacuation, high-profile video footages. All of this gives rise to active discussion and disputes on the websites of the electronic media and under posts.
Opinions of media experts
According to Leila Saralaeva, prominent journalist and media expert, local media outlets report on the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine differently. State-run TV channels speak mainly about how this situation affects the economy of Kyrgyzstan and provide information with reference to official Russian media outlets.
“Independent media such as 24.kg and Kaktus, provide information about the Ukrainian party, as well. Such media outlets as Kloop and April call it a “war” and provide much information from the Ukrainian media and social media. Thus, we can say that independent media outlets provide more diverse information,” she said.
According to her, no violations of international journalism standards have been seen in the coverage of this topic by the media.
“I don’t see violations of journalism standards by the media outlets. However, in social media many journalists take sides and provide publications of any given party as a proof,” Saralaeva said.
According to Inga Sikorskaia, director of the School of Peacemaking and Media Technology in Central Asia, local media outlets were confused in the beginning of the events in Ukraine.
“They kept silence for some time and journalists did not know how to report this information. However, there is a difference between how the events were covered two weeks ago and now. In the beginning, some media outlets relied on information from Russia, other media relied on Ukrainian sources, and some outlets relied on western sources. There was no unified narrative for our audience and this is a problem. In this regard, 36 organisations turned to the president asking him to block Russian channels. Their key message was to open access to objective information in Kyrgyz so that people could understand what happens in reality,” Sikorskaia said.
According to Sikorskaia, some broadcasting media of Kyrgyzstan prefer to provide information in the ‘No comment’ mode, which is not a severe violation, but it is unacceptable to provide information in this mode during conflicts and military actions, according to the rules of journalism.
“A certain focus should be made: focus on peace, emphasise the role of the country and consequences for our citizens, i.e. information expected by the people. The mainstream population received information from the Russian media because we are in the same information field with Russia and some people get information from foreign media outlets,” media expert Sikorskaia said. “This is due to the fact that we do not have own reporters in the field.
If we could forecast ahead, local media outlets would make sure to have their reporters not in the “conflict zone”, but at least near those countries.”
Media expert Gulnura Toralieva said that local media outlets do not generally violate the journalism standards when covering the conflict in Ukraine. She also emphasised that local journalistic materials do not contain the propaganda of war, do not use hate speech.
“Leading media outlets of Kyrgyzstan try to cover the conflict in a balanced way, provide information from both Russian and Ukrainian sides. Many publications are made by Kloop, Kaktus Media, 24.kg, Azattyk. Compared to foreign media, our local media outlets match them in terms of promptness. They provide updated information with references to Ukrainian and Russian media, official sources all the time. They mainly provide information in their “news” relying on the sources of reputable foreign media. Our journalists do not have an opportunity to go to the place of conflict and report on it in the field, unfortunately. So far, we don’t have enough expert opinions and analytics,” she said.
According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, more than a dozen of foreign media outlets are accredited in Kyrgyzstan.
Among them, there are representatives of Russian media such as Interfax, Sputnik, Mediazona, “VGTRK Rossia”, “RIA Novosti”, “Argumenty i fakty”, and of western media such as “Azattyk Media”, BBC, Reuter, Eurasianet, France Press, and others.
The attitude to the Russian-Ukrainian conflict can be seen in the materials of journalists of every country. Thus, if we look at the materials of Sputnik, we can see that the media use the term “special military operation”, and the words “war” and “attack” banned by Roskomnadzor are not used in the articles and news.
Moreover, more information from Russian sources and video footages of President Vladimir Putin are published on the website of the outlet.
As to the sanctions imposed against Russia, journalists of the news agency try to report on them in a positive way.
Pro-western media in Kyrgyzstan report on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict otherwise. If we look at the materials published by the Kyrgyz service of Radio Liberty “Azattyk”, Eurasianet and Reuters, we will see disapproval of the military invasion by Russia: more articles are published about the sanctions imposed against Russia, rouble decline, negative influence of Russia’s actions on the EAEU countries, and the terms “war” and “attack” are used in their articles.
“The war has definitely unfolded in the information space as well. We see it as the same fact presented by both Ukrainian and Russian media. For example, the bombing of the maternity hospital at Mariupol. Russian journalists wrote that there were no expectant mothers, but only military forces stationed there. Ukrainians presented this fact as the atrocities of the Russian army, even published photos of pregnant women. But there are questions to both sides. In recent days I have no confidence in either media”, Leila Saralaeva said.
According to Inga Sikorskaia, in a world of modern hybrid warfares, everyone has their own truth.
“A few years ago, we talked about terrorism and if, for example, one country lists a group as terroristic, another country does not think so. Here we can draw an analogy: Sputnik is a media dominated by Russian propaganda and politics. They implement the state viewpoint and in the Russian media this war is called “special operation” and, of course, they use this term. Azattyk, in turn, presents information in a different way. Some local media certainly make a good reference, but the idea is not to show two points of view,” she said.
According to her, the media can be blamed today for broadcasting one or another propaganda politics. But the media must take on a higher role today – they should focus on peace and implement the journalism of solutions to make the audience think critically.
“In any case, we understand that war is the last resort and is not acceptable in any solution. Therefore, it would be great if the media could publish comments of experts. For example, peace building experts could be referred to today – we have very few in Kyrgyzstan, but there are many neutral experts in peacemaking, peacebuilding and peace-maintenance in the world. They could give food for thought from various viewpoints,” Sikorskaia said.
According to the media expert, local journalists should move to a new level in reporting the events.
“Is there misinformation or propaganda? Europe does not accept this narrative and the term “special operation” means fake for it, while for Russia this is not a “war”. And we, as observers, cannot give our estimate. In turn, common citizens need to be directed and provided with information. Not so long ago, Zhany Ordo TV channel provided opinions of local political analysts, who were debating. Unfortunately, it has a narrow coverage and is available on the internet only. It is desirable for KTRK, which covers the whole country and is available to many people in the digital package, to take on the main role,” she said.
According to Inga Sikorskaia, director of the School of Peacemaking and Media Technology in Central Asia, local journalists provide available information and do not use any standards.
“There are standards of peacemaking journalism that allow making materials more analytical and including certain messages there for the audience. Local Kyrgyz-language media outlets have a better situation with it because they provide more analysis and opinions of local political analysts who explain the situation. As to local Russian-language media outlets, they play it safe and try to keep to their own standards, which does not make any sense as we have little and insufficient information. This is the problem,” she said.
Also, the media expert said that the media outlets report now differently from previous reportages. This is the sign of some trends going on.
“This is based on the political situation and fear of the future. Now it’s difficult to speak about the balance and standards because there are internal problems in the media as they have no introductory information. Journalists take the information available in the information space, but there is different information provided amid the hybrid warfare, including fake news. The audience is not satisfied with it because we can hear questions from everywhere,” she said.
According to her, there is a range of factors that make the media outlets keep from comments. By results of the 2021 monitoring, the level of self-expression declined in the country, while self-censorship increased because of the new regulations adopted in the new constitution.
“Journalists have a chance to provide access to information. Another question is whether they desire to do it. If our journalists were in the field, information would be more objective,” Sikorskaia said.
In the meanwhile, according to her, social media have played its negative role in reporting the events in Ukraine ahead of the media outlets.
“They simply were spreading the content that could be considered as banned in our conditions. Information was uncontrolled and fuelled speculations even more because of no analytical information. The media should have played the outreach role at that time,” she said.
Media expert Leila Saralaeva, in turn, said that some media outlets might avoid publishing information because of fear to publish unchecked information.
“My media outlet has made only one publication so far by results of one week of the war. It was done because I have no reporters based in Ukraine and I know that there may be manipulations from both sides. I use only verified information coming from foreign media or accomplished facts,” she said.
In turn, Gulnura Toralieva emphasised that some media outlets do not report on the conflict, but only write about its economic and social consequences for our citizens.
“This is normal. They are guided by the local audience, its interests. Now we keep track of how the conflict will affect us,” the media expert said.