Tajikistan - Central Asian paradise for journalists
Recently, there were two good news about journalists in Tajikistan. One was about the initiative of the Republican association “Media Alliance Tajikistan” there will be fixed up a memorial plate “In the memory of journalists of independent Tajikistan”. The initiative was supported by all the journalist associations of Tajikistan.
The memorial plate was designed by the local designer Nataliya Vasilievna and it was crafted by the chief architect of the Ministry of culture, Nizomitdin Valiev.
The plate was designed in the memory of all the journalists killed during the Civil War. The real number of all murdered journalist in the period of civil confrontation is not known. Different sources give different numbers. Some of them were killed by the United Tajik Opposition and some were killed by the Popular Front.
The US-based Committee to Protect Journalists recorded at least 29 killings of journalists over the five years of conflict, while the Foundation for the Commemoration and Protection of Journalists in Tajikistan, FCPJT, believes the number lies between 73 and 81.
Besides that the Reporters Without Borders released their annual report, which puts Tajikistan on top of the list of Central Asian countries where the journalists have the most favorable environment for activity. In the list of the countries Tajikistan is standing on 117the place out of 168 countries. Other countries among the Central Asian stand as follows: Kyrgyzstan (123), Kazakhstan (128), Uzbekistan (158), Turkmenistan (167).
It is worth to mention that Afghanistan stands on 130th place, less better than Kazakhstan, and much better Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
The rating was done with the help of many organizations which promote freedom of speech, correspondents, independent experts, researchers and human rights activists. However the results of the poll barely coincide with reality.
Probably, those who have done this rating have never been to this region if the report states that it is much safer to work as a journalist in Afghanistan then in Uzbekistan or Turkmenistan, or the conditions for the journalist activity are better in Tajikistan than in Kyrgyzstan.
on October 27th, 2006 at 2:31 am
I have my doubts about the usefulness of RSF’s numbers myself. They seem to pay very little attention to infrastructure or legal environments. Freedom House has very different rankings, and they do pay attention to legal frameworks, etc. (Plus, I trust them because they don’t come off as professional activists to me the way RSF does.)
on October 27th, 2006 at 5:21 am
Yes Nathan, you\’re right. Freedom house is more informed about the real situation. But heres is what the RSF has in its report about Tajikistan:
That\’s all. Nothing else. I think it does not say anything.
on October 27th, 2006 at 9:12 am
Vadim,
I have not taken Reporters without Borders’ ratings seriously since last years when their representative interviewed me about the media situation in Tajikistan. She was probably one of the most unprofessional employees of international organizations that I have met in my life. I hope she was only an exception.
on October 27th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Alexander, in what I’ve seen from them in my work, she is probably par for the course. They are nice and well-intentioned people — I’ve never had a negative experience in corresponding with them — but they do have an activist’s view of the world. That is, they take a very superficial view of things. High-profile but isolated cases apparently make an enormous impact in their appraisals of media freedom, for example. (Never mind that the cases they mention for the United States have, in my opinion, to do with areas to which freedom of the press arguably does not extend. And their characterization of the Judith Miller case reveals a deep misunderstanding of the case and US law.) They seemingly pay less attention to more serious, institutional and legal matters. Using the US again, it is hard to argue that the UK, for example, has a more favorable legal environment than the US when the UK has such strong libel laws.
Looking at their methodology, I can’t help but want a bit of transparency. I cannot believe who they had scoring the list, and I think that it is a sign of their lack of seriousness that they not only went about it this way, but also that they did not release the questionnaire responses along with the report.
All told, the big differences between their report and Freedom House’s is that Freedom House’s will be occasionally be used by academics as a fairly objective and realistic measurement and that RSF’s reports will continue to get far more attention due to its apparently more effective press releases.
on September 30th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
myspace music [url=http://picture.iega.info/sm.html#1278618455]myspace music[/url] http://picture.iega.info/sm.html 570807917