· Web viewWeb-pages provide variety of themes about election subjects. For example, presentation of majority candidates, pre-election meetings, CEC initiatives, activities of

Election Media Monitoring

July 16 – September 3, 2012

Civic Development Institute conducted monitoring of 12 information portals within the period of July 16 – September 3, 2012. The following key findings were identified as a result of the monitoring:

Web-pages provide variety of themes about election subjects. For example, presentation of majority candidates, pre-election meetings, CEC initiatives, activities of NGOs regarding the elections.

There are brief news articles as well as longer, analytical notes. These articles review news, followed by comments from the journalist and respondents.

Journalists try to show issues or events from different perspectives, often offering opinions of politicians on certain issues. There are mainly several sources, expert evaluations in materials published.

According to the materials, top three subjects are “Georgian Dream”, “United National Movement” and the government (including activities of the authorities), all have high percentage.

Out of all opposition parties, biggest space is allocated to Coalition Georgian Dream. Other opposition parties have significantly less coverage. Only Christian Democratic Movement and New Rights Party are leaders in this regard.

Political subjects are mainly covered using neutral tone. However, there are cases of positive and negative coverage as well.

Some of the leaders of neutral coverage are netgazeti.ge, liberali.ge, civil.ge, palitratv.ge, dfwatch.net and tabula.ge. However, same web-pages also propose positive tone towards ruling party as well as

1CDI – Election Media Monitoring (July 16 – September 3, 2012)

towards Coalition Georgian Dream. The exception is liberali.ge with 100% neutral coverage towards both parties, although negative tone has also been detected while covering government-related issues.

Biggest percentage difference between first (Georgian Dream) and second (Ruling Party) subjects was identified on droni.ge and pressa.ge web-sites. Coalition Georgian Dream has highest rates of positive coverage, followed by government and ruling party.

Several web-pages are especially critical towards Georgian Dream and its leadership (droni.ge, pressa.ge) as well as ruling party and the authorities (for.ge, tribuna.ge). These web-pages often used discriminatory terms as well as violated presumption of innocence and media standards (unchecked facts, targeted coverage of biased and similar materials).

Correctness of facts, verification with several sources, showing different opinions, observing balance and journalistic ethics is a priority for journalists of netgazeti.ge, liberali.ge, civil.ge, palitratv.ge, dfwatch.net and tabula.ge.

In terms of illustration monitoring, three web-pages, droni.ge, pressa.ge, for.ge often use photo editing, caricatures and negative photos with comments. Other web-sites usually offer neutral photos.

Methodology and Analysis

This report covers the period of July 16 to September 3. Election monitoring of information web-pages is comprised of qualitative and quantitative components. Quantitative components concern time allocated to election subjects and tone of coverage. Components of qualitative monitoring look at balance, accuracy, facts-based reporting, and evaluation of headlines and visual materials of the articles.

Qualitative data is provided in diagrams attached to this report. Information about the subjects on diagram is expressed in percentages. 100 percent is a volume of text allocated to all subjects by all sites during pre-election period, as described in the title of each diagram. If the diagram does not indicate political party that was subject of observation, it means that no coverage was allocated to this party during this period of time. Parties that were given at least a certain


space are reflected on the diagram (sometimes by 0 percent). “Other” indicates subjects that received 1% or less on these web-pages.

The tone of coverage is displayed when a subject is talked about by others or when the subject talks about himself/herself. Diagrams show three categories of the tone: positive (green), neutral (yellow) and negative (red). The tone is evaluated while counting volume of the text allocated for the subjects. Attention is paid to the text of the journalist as well as respondent and general context of the respondent.

Allocation of time in terms of tones is evaluated as follows: evaluation of the tone of the volume of text allocated for the given subject on the web-site and the tone of how journalist talks about the subject. Coverage tone is displayed in percentages. During the first case 100 percent is a volume of the text allocated to a particular subject on a particular web-site in total as well as the volume of text allocated by the journalist to that particular subject.

Qualitative monitoring also looks at balance, or how the articles represent different viewpoints. It also looks at accuracy, where monitor observes whether the materials used in the article and conclusions of the journalist are in line, if there are mistakes in names, numbers, and respondents.

Netgazeti.ge

Netgazeti.ge provides equal coverage of election activities of the ruling party as well as opposition parties. This web-site mainly publishes analytical articles, with some news and press releases. News review is mainly followed by comments of the journalist and respondents. The web-site reviews political views of election subjects as well as their election programs. Most of the articles provide in-depth review of events. In spite of critical evaluations of journalists, there are no unethical statements, and thus journalistic standards are followed.

Quantitative data in terms of volume (number of words) between the subjects: opposition and authorities (president, government, parliament, ruling party) are almost the same, however, out of all opposition parties the biggest space is allocated to Coalition Georgian Dream. It occupied 31% of all area. United National Movement was only allocated 14% of the space, authorities – 10%, government – 4%, President – 2%. The picture of opposition parties is as


follows: Christian-Democratic Movement – 4%, New Rights Party – 3%, Georgian Troupe – 1%.

Evaluation of the tone of coverage shows that the subject with most space was mainly covered using neutral tone (59%), although there are certain cases of negative (17%) and positive (24%) tones. National Movement was mainly covered using negative tone (41%), although neutral (46%) and positive (12%) tone is also shown. There is a clear negative tone in coverage of the authorities – 67%, with insignificant positive (7%) and neutral (26%) coverage. Opposition parties are mainly covered using negative tone.

While separating tone of the journalist it turned out that significant portion of neutral tone towards president and authorities falls on the journalist. The National Movement itself is mainly covered neutrally by the journalists (84%), while negative coverage is only 16%. Opposition parties are almost always covered using neutral tone: Georgian Dream – 90%, Christian Democrats – 82%, Free Georgia – 69%.

Articles of netgazeti.ge have brief and accurate headlines. They bear information that adequately shows the main essence of the article. For example: “Obligatory sales of donors of the parties” (Aug 3), “Students in Politics” (Aug 22).

Visual materials for the articles are mainly selected accurately. There are hardly any photos indicating negative tendencies. However, the exception is July 24 article – “Georgian Government hired US lobbyists for 330 thousand dollars,” followed by edited photo of Ivanishvili and Saakashvili on the background of US dollars. The article talks about agreements signed with US lobbying companies both from the side of Georgian Security Council (secretary – Giga Bokeria) and Bidzina Ivanishvili. In this regard the article is balanced, but the headline only talks about the government of Georgia, and the edited picture of the politicians in dollars is an exception on the web-site (July 24)

Articles of netgazeti.ge are balanced in terms of sources. Journalists offer different angles to the issue. The reader is able to objectively evaluate the events covered. For example, the article “Results of anti-advertisement videos of political leaders” (August 28) talks about anti-advertisement campaigns against politicians. It reviews videos against Ivanishvili and Saakashvili. We are able to hear opinions of authors of videos of both sides. In conclusion the author offers expert evaluation: “Such videos are part of propaganda technique… While displaying such videos it’s the public that becomes defeated, it becomes more manageable, and indicates lack of maturity


and lack of civil society” (Aug 28). Other articles also offer evaluations of experts as conclusions.

Information offered on the web-sites is verified through several sources. There were only several cases when the journalist could not find comments from official structures or political subjects.

Reasoning of journalists is argument-based and strengthened with facts. The article often has conclusion of the journalist, based on the facts and discussions in the article.

Topics of the web-site are various, and it provides thorough information to the reader on the topics covered. It almost equally intensively covers activities of leading party as well as those of the opposition. The reader is able to evaluate events described as desired. Most of the articles display critical attitude of authors towards certain issues. Language of journalists is moderately critical and correct, without any discriminatory terms or phrases.

Droni.ge

Droni.ge offers limited amount of materials for review, topics are similar. Articles are only about one election subject. Articles are not balanced; conclusions are not supported by facts. Journalist ethic regulations are often violated.

Biggest space (number of words) is allocated to coalition “Georgian Dream” – 95%, Government – 3%, President – 2%. No information is provided on other opposition parties.

Evaluation of the tone of the material shows that the subject with most space is mainly covered using negative tone – 97%. Neutral tone is only rarely shown towards this subject – 3%.

If the tone of the journalist is reviews separately, it is obvious that negative tone towards Georgian Dream (98%) fully falls on the journalist, and neutral tone is used in only 2% of cases.

Topic of the web-site is the same, mainly discussing Ivanishvili or other leaders of coalition as well as criticism towards them and evaluation of their past political steps. None of the articles were published on pre-election campaign of any opposition party or National Movement. Articles are long enough (600-700


words). They are not supported with facts. Facts and comments are not separated, and opinions and conclusions of the journalist are biased.

Headlines contain negative tone and incorrect statements: (Jul 19) – “Gelashvili said, why did you go to Abkhazia unless you were crazy”, (Jul 30) – “How was Bidzina Ivanishvili chased out of Becho school yard by Svans”, (Aug 5) – “Ivanishvili was chased out of Beshumi: the Oligarch says people were transported by Marshutkas”, (Aug 11) – “Ivanishvili promises bad future for children of journalists”, (Aug 15) – “Another fiasco of Kakhi Kaladze in Samtredia”, (Aug 27) – Ivanishvili named the brother of a thief as a majority candidate”.

Articles often have incorrect comments on photos, edited photos, or photos that do not correspond to the content of the articles: “Kaladze in Samtredia” (Aug 17). The same can be said about the photo of the next article: “Who is Bidzina Ivanishvili? – Billionaire is also disclosed by foreign media” (July 27) – photo of Ivanishvili is pasted into the question mark on the black background.

Articles presented on this web-site are not balanced. Information is provided only partially, and facts provided by journalists often require verification with several sources. Even though sources of the facts provided are often anonymous, authors of the articles never doubt those facts. Journalists often provide general discussions based on such facts. For example, “Another fiasco of Kaladze in Samtredia” (Aug 15). Voters did not turn out to a meeting with Kakhi Kaladze in several villages of Samtredia. The author concludes: similar to other inhabitants of Samtredia, they don’t believe in Kaladze, the lover of autogoals.

In the article copied from presa.ge, “Ivanishvili promises bad future to children of journalists” a journalist offers own interpretation of the speech made in Poti: “you either take my side and serve me and “my truth”, or know what will happen to you and your children”; “It turns out, that journalists that don’t become part of Bidzina’s pocket media outlets, should not expect calm life… Ivanishvili threatens future of kids of the journalists;” “He [Ivanishvili] has no chance of winning the government… although, if he is allowed, will torture to death everyone that did not obey him, and will do the same to their children… He is very much like Putin.” (Aug 11). Such often incorrect interpretations provided by journalists enable to conclude that readers are deliberately confused.


In several articles the author makes such decision: “Pre-election PR campaign has officially started on the territory of occupied Abkhazia” (Aug 8) – as the local population says. However, reliability of information is doubtful, since it is not verified with any sources.

The very first article of this web-site has the following headline: “Gelashvili said, why did you go to Abkhazia unless you were crazy” (Jul 19), and describes the meeting of Valeri Gelashvili in Baka village. Such dialogue does not comply with the facts provided. The article finishes with the list of other candidates of Georgian Dream, followed by the conclusion of the author: “as they say, match of color, dreams, and grace to Putin.”

General negative tones of the articles are worsened by unethical phrases: “Main dreamer” (Jul 19), “The Big Oligarch” (Aug 11), “Boria Ivanishvili of Russian Mentality,” “Tyrant-Despot Oligarch,” “Russianized Little Man from Chorvila,” “Potential Executioner,” “Kaladze the lover of Autogoals” (Aug 15), “Surrounding group of Ivanishvili force him to take majority candidates that they like” (Aug 27).

Qualitative analysis shows that the only subject of the web-page is Coalition Georgian Dream, mainly covered using negative tone. There are no balanced articles, and reliability of sources is also doubtful.

The journalist does not prevent from unethical statements, discriminatory terms or humiliating quotes. There are also articles that were copied from other web-sites, with also unbalanced and non-argument-supported discussion.

Internet.ge

On average 10 materials a day are published on the web-page. Most of them are brief information notifications, press releases of official agencies and small articles. Analytical articles are rarely published. The web-site offers thematic diversity in terms of election subjects, e.g. presentation of majority candidates, meetings with voters, CEC initiatives, activities of NGOs for elections.

Journalists mainly use neutral tone, although on several occasions the journalists showed negative tone towards the leadership of the Coalition Georgian Dream, while covering demonstrations and meetings with population.


Main content of the news articles is about current events of the day. Therefore, information is diverse, and mainly states facts without any evaluations of the journalists.

Summary of quantitative data shows that there are three main political subjects: National Movement (26%), Georgian Dream (25%), and New Rights (10%). Other subjects have very low percentage.

The tone of political subjects is very distinct from each other. Only three subjects showed all three tones: National Movement (negative – 4%, neutral – 93%, positive – 3%), Georgian Dream (negative – 12%, neutral – 87%, positive – 2%), Government (negative – 75%, neutral – 21%, positive – 4%). Remaining subjects only spoke with negative or neutral tone: New Rights – 95%, opposition – 83%, government – 93%, president – 96%.

According to the tones of the journalists, different data was only identified for National Movement and Georgian Dream: National Movement (99% neutral, 1% positive), Georgian Dream (6% negative, 96% neutral). All other subjects were covered using neutral tone.

Headlines of the articles are linked to the content, are neutral and descriptive. Headlines usually repeat quotes of the respondents. For example: “The tempo of building the country should not slow down” – Mikhail Saakashvili (Aug 22), Dreaming of returning the past is the worst thing opposition can offer – Gigi Ugulava, the author of quotation (Aug 16).

In terms of illustration monitoring, it should be noted that all of the materials are complemented with photos, but none of them display negative tone. Photos occupy bigger spaces than news articles themselves. Often, same photos are used for the same information. At the same time, the design of the site is distinct from others, since it contains large photos and provides advertisement and links of other sites. For example, ITV, Presa.Ge, Droni.Ge, etc.

Looking at the issue of balance, there are frequent opposing opinions, although in different materials and not within the same article. Different opinions are often provided in material the day after. Source is always indicated with quotes or opinions. However, there were several cases when accusations of the journalist were not followed by explanations of the respondents. For example: “As internet.ge found out, Kaladze was physically and verbally humiliated by bodyguards.” “To remind, Kakhi Kaladze, originally from Gomi village of Samtredia district was chased out of the village by Gomi population. Kaladze


was holding pre-election meetings in the village (Aug 17) – Kaladze was chased out of Gomi.”

However, such information was only published month after the monitoring started. Therefore, we considered this material as an exception. However, such violations of standards were frequently shown by the site, especially while covering activities of Coalition Georgian Dream.

Several violations were found while monitoring accuracy of information. There are frequent cases when the web-site relies on anonymous source to provide credibility to the facts. Main sources are usually state agencies and their representatives.

In terms of compliance, there are frequent cases of shifting emphasis to other issues. For example, material presenting majority candidates of the National Movement mainly emphasizes who was presented and who was the presenter – mainly Mikheil Saakashvili or Gigi Ugulava. The candidate or his/her comments are rarely presented in the articles. At the same time, coverage of Georgian Dream demonstration also shifted attention to other issues – incidents and clashes during demonstrations. For example: “According to internet.ge correspondent on spot, several minutes ago the first incident took place among activists of Georgian Dream.” This indicates, that it should be followed by other incidents. “Activists could not share t-shirts with Georgian Dream logo and this was the cause for their clash. Incident was finished as additional t-shirts were provided to activists.” (Aug 19)

Several articles had special indications on the number of population attending demonstrations of the Georgian Dream. Also, quotes of the President and National Movement often recall opposition as the force of the past. There are no specifics provided on which force is meant here. Such vague indications are often provided through quotes.

Main part of the materials is in line with journalistic standards, supported by facts, although there is a lack of variety and such the balance is violated.

Liberali.ge

Liberali.ge was monitored for its news and article blocks, since political subjects selected for monitoring are mainly talked about in these sections.


News section mainly offers brief news announcement with similar themes, for example, presentation of majority candidates from the side of National Movement or the opposition, with less specific information on other activities of election political subjects. Information on activities of CEC, NGOs, party ratings, international observers and voter lists are also frequently provided.

Articles are built based on facts and provide more than one source. There are no unethical statements. Articles display no subjectivity, and strictly draw the line between facts and comments.

Liberali.ge allocates biggest space to Coalition Georgian Dream, 36%, while other subjects are covered almost the same way – National Movement – 12%, Government – 15%. Government includes mainly activities implemented by the ruling party, while activities of the National Movement is limited to presentation of majority candidates, party meetings, etc.

Among other political subjects New Rights party is allocated space on the web-site (1%), Christian Democrats (2%), and opposition (11%) in general context, without any specifications.

Liberali.ge often publishes activities of local NGOs (3%) and international organizations (1%) in election contexts.

Evaluation of the tone of the subjects shows that political subjects representing particular parties are only covered using neutral tone. As for the subjects of more general nature, they are presented using negative and neutral tone. This concerns the government (56% negative 44% neutral), president (17% negative, 83% neutral), and the parliament (57% negative, 43% neutral).

Summary of tone of journalists in liberali.ge indicates that they prepare materials using neutral tone only. Different tone is only detected in the quotes of the respondents. There is no material covered using positive tone.

Pictures and headlines of liberali.ge are of a neutral and descriptive nature. None of them contain any positive or negative tone. Quotes of the respondents are often used as headlines, for example, “Chiora Taktakishvili: NGOs have distributed unverified information” (Aug 21), “GYLA – Audit service should annul anti-legal act” (Aug 15).

Articles on election subjects concern specific facts, for example, sanctions of audit service towards leadership of Georgian Dream. In this article the journalist brings several specific facts about penalties, names sources, and always


includes comments of authorities. There are no opinions or conclusions of journalists.

During the process of monitoring only one interview with representative of the Coalition Georgian Dream, Paata Zakareishvili was published. The interview was about political situation of Georgia, election environment and further activities of the coalition. Respondent has displayed negative tone towards the government.

There are no violations of journalistic standards in liberali.ge articles. The reader is able to find information on the pre-election campaigns of election subjects, and their positions. However, there is no discussion of election programs and thorough analysis. Main accents are shifted to evaluation of election environment and sanctions of audit service towards other parties. Therefore, election topics are not too diverse.

News.ge

News.ge web portal mainly offers brief news articles with minimal analysis/review. Most frequently published articles are about Coalition Georgian Dream, although it should also be mentioned that the tone of coverage is mostly negative. Since the web-page is a news portal, fact- and events-based coverage is a substantial tendency. However, during the monitoring we found specific examples where accuracy of facts or their interpretation is doubtful.

Frequency of coverage is unequally distributed between government and opposition subjects, however, it should be noted that Coalition Georgian Dream is covered most frequently among opposition parties. It is allocated 28% of all coverage. Next subject that has the most space allocated is United National Movement with 16% of total coverage. Parliament, president, government and local governance together have 9% of coverage.

Evaluation of the tone of the articles show that subject with most space was mainly covered using neutral tone (81%), although positive and negative coverage was also visible (3% and 16% respectively). In case of the National Movement 19% of coverage was negative, 14% positive, while 67% positive tone. Least neutral tone was used for government – 3%, while negative coverage was 55% and positive coverage of 43%.


Several tendencies were allocated in terms of headlines. Most frequently headlines include phrases of the respondents and do not show the sources of these quotes. It should be mentioned that such headline-phrases are usually of affirmative form and contain either blame towards other subject or affirmative opinion about the author of the quote. Another tendency is about findings of the journalists and some headlines show evaluative discussions of the authors of the article.

For example, headline “Ivanishvili is not ready to bear free media in this country” (August 21) is definitely of an affirmative nature and belongs to the press-speaker of National Movement. However, the reader does not know about that until reading the article, and if only the headline is viewed, it may impact his/her opinions.

“Levan Vepkhvadze blamed Georgian Dream of non-consequential foreign policy” (Aug 22) – the article states that Levan Vepkhvadze, representative of Christian Democratic party blames both Georgian Dream as well as National Movement in non-consequential policy. However, the journalist has only included the statement about Georgian Dream in the headline.

Visual materials that complement articles are mostly neutral and are in line with the topic discussed on the article.

Articles mainly observe balance of sources and accuracy of facts. However, it should also be mentioned that for some articles comments of different parties are published later, in different articles. However, this does not change the situation much, since readers do not start looking for opinions of other parties in different articles.

Most frequently compliance is not an issue. However, during the monitoring period we still identified several articles that we thought we could pay attention to.

“Prosecutor requests additional time to present witnesses for the case of Dreamers” (Aug 21) – article talks about court trial of Georgian Dream representatives with accusations of bribing voters. For the moment of publishing the article, the new thing (fact) is that the prosecutor asked to postpone hearing under the argument of inability to bring all witnesses. As additional information it says that postponing of hearing was requested by the prosecutor with the purpose of gathering additional evidence (Jul 31). The journalist mistakenly emphasizes July 31st trial, mixes two facts, which may confuse reader.


There are no frequent cases of use of incorrect language, although there are some exceptions. It should be noted that such cases usually concern Georgian Dream or associated persons. For example, “Dreamers of Tkibuli talk about prosecution by the law enforcement agencies” (Jul 16); “Baghaturia stepped back from Kukava-Shashiashvil-Asatiani and moved towards Georgian Dream” (Jul 18). “Murman Dumbadze, a candidate, excluded from Republican Party is now majority candidate of Georgian Dream in Batumi” (this phrase is repeated three times in the text) (Jul 20).

Pressa.ge

Together with news reports, the web-page offers interviews and articles. During the monitoring period there were fewer brief information reports, while articles contained discussions and opinions of journalists. Biggest number of words was allocated to coalition Georgian Dream. Mainly negative tone and rarely neutral tone is shown towards Georgian Dream. In some cases journalists use unethical expressions towards certain subjects, mainly towards Bidzina Ivanishvili and Kakhi Kaladze – leaders of the coalition.

According to quantitative data the highest percentage on the web-page (number of words) was allocated to Georgian Dream (70%), with no other political subjects having the same high numbers. There is a big difference in percentage of following political subjects. Democratic Movement – Unified Georgia (3%), Labor party (3%), New Rights (2%), Christian Democrats (2%), Government (4%) and President (4%).

The web-page provides materials on activities of CEC (5%) and local NGOs (5%).

Monitoring of the tone of subjects has shown that Georgian Dream has 88% negative and 12% neutral tone. Other percentages are as follows: New Rights (36% negative, 64% neutral), Democratic Movement – United Georgia (81% negative 19% neutral), Labor party (8% negative, 91% neutral).

Positive tone is only detected while covering National Movement (29%) and president (71%).

Tone of the journalist towards three subjects is distinctly negative: Georgian Dream (93%), Democratic Movement (100%), and local NGOs (100%). Local NGOs are entities that the journalist believes, are linked to the Georgian Dream. For other subjects the tone is mainly neutral.


Headlines of articles are mostly negative, containing irony and humiliating analogies, metaphors towards Georgian Dream. For example, “Crazy Boris” (Aug 31), “Dreamer Criminals in Racha-Lechkhumi” (Sept 4), “Kakhi Kaladze and 40 thieves” (Aug 23), “Confused Kaladze, humiliated Aldamov and lost Olympians by Ivanishvili” (Aug 6).

The web-page provides variety of illustrations, and all photos associated with the Georgian Dream are followed with negative comments. The photos are neutral, but comments are always in neutral context. Same does not apply to other subjects, as their photos usually display neutral tone.

Articles are mainly analysis of the journalist, always based on unconfirmed facts, assumptions and suspicions. For example: according to the information of the source close to Ivanishvili circle “the flour princess should have said no to participation in the elections, and would have received large amount of money instead. At the moment its unknown how many millions will be added to millions found through bread mafia, although, looking at Nino’s political experience, she usually sells her conscience well” (Aug 9)”. Also, “Kaki Kaladze is not liked by Samtredians as well. Several hours ago famous autogoal person met Bashi village representatives. But to say correctly, tried to meet with them. Representatives of Bashi simply had him chased out the village.” (Aug 13).

Articles often provide information based on anonymous sources. “Presa.ge learned about…,” “Information is spread…”, “According to presa.ge information…”

None of the news articles observe any balance. There are rare cases when opinions of both parties represented in the same articles. In some cases there are serious accusations, but answers from the object of accusations are never provided. However, finding official comments from government structures is never an issue for presa.ge journalists. “It seems that Kaladze loved watching Alibaba and 40 Thieves movie in his childhood. Now, he is planning to challenge Samtredia villages with his 40 thieves. It’s a known fact that Kaladze was chased out of all villages of Samtredia. Locals accused him of pro-Russian orientation and sins of his ancestors” (Aug 23).

“Initially they were supposed to propose Maia Panjikidze (Mother Owl) as a candidate in Ambrolauri, bit they realized that the owl that screams in the forests at nights would have been more famous than the Mother Owl. So they somehow dug out David Darakhvelidze. Even without these facts, it’s obvious that the oligarch is surrounded by criminals – this what Ivanishvili relies on. Bidzina himself is the last hope of this criminal world” (Aug 14).


“Kaladze visited village Nigortskva, where he could not even hold an imitation to the meeting. Locals were so aggressive towards him that nobody was happy to see Kaladze and his team. Samtredia inhabitants do not believe of former football player, locals think he will do nothing and only makes promises to get more votes during elections. Kaladze, disappointed by aggression of Nikortskva population, cancelled all of his meetings for today” (Aug 17).

Presa.ge is only interested in other election subjects as they relate to the Georgian Dream. There are frequent interviews with representatives of the parties that mainly have negative attitude towards Georgian Dream and Ivanishvili, for example, Labor Party and New Rights. There are hardly any interviews with leaders of the Georgian dream. For example: “Giga Liparteliani, political analyst blames the leader of Georgian Dream to be connected to the death of Otar Kvantrishvili, thief living in Russia. The thief was found killed in 1994. Liparteliani insists that 160-page book describes black deeds of the Georgian Dream leader. The author writes about the death of the thief in this book. PS. Presa.ge wrote about possible connection of Ivanishvili to this assassination even before this book was published. Details of Otar Kvantrishvili Death” (Jul 30).

There is a tendency of the agency constantly repeating old information in new articles. Seems like the same information is published deliberately. New article includes few new facts or opinions.

Language of articles is often unethical, uses discriminatory terms, violates presumption of innocence. Different journalists often use the same attributes, e.g. “Oligarch St. Bidzina the Rich” (Aug 27), “Coward, low man,” (Jul 19), “Russianist, Putinist” (Jul 18), “Dreamers, Intelectualemotionalspasmic people” (Aug 27), and so on.

“”We can’t talk about Europe, but top 10 members of Bidzina have definitely rescued Georgia. This is what we call “dead man has risen” (political corpses…)” (September 3).

“Once “my Eka” said, If Bidzina is in trouble, I will step out, but she was saving herself until then. Eka, come out, Bidzina is already in trouble…” (Aug 27).

“Coward” and “no-man” Valeri Gelashvili was chased out of Vaka village” (Jul 19)

“Those who watched morning show of the famous robber would finally be assured that Bidzina Ivanishvili is a person with unstable psychical condition.


Even Shalva Ramishvili, a man capable of anything was surprised hearing abnormal statements of the oligarch. Ramishvili tried to bring the oligarch back to human trails, but in vain. With crazy face, pale, blue lips oligarch looked much more of short statute, than he is in reality. He suffers from severe psychos. Passive schizophrenia is also possible.” (Aug 31)

Oligarch from Chorvila transforms into dictator and Tiran right in front of our eyes. Tiran is dangerous when he is smart, but stupid is even more dangerous. Smart Tiran does not talk what he thinks, while stupid ones don’t hide what’s in their hearts (Aug 31).

Civil.ge

Civil.ge publishes brief information stories as well as longer, analytical articles. Mostly, articles of this site are review of news, followed by comments of the journalist and respondents. In some cases the site offers only dry, brief information regarding significant events throughout country.

Journalists of this outlet always provide modest discussion of one or the other subject. However, there are cases of criticizing specific event or person, but it should also be noted that such critique is always based on the facts and there have been no cases of personal or exaggerated critique of any subjects.

During the monitoring process civil.ge allocated most space to Georgian Dream (26%) and government (21%), followed by National Movement (19%). Compared to other subjects civil.ge allocates more space to the president (7%), international organizations (7%), CEC (6%), state audit service (4%) and local NGOs (4%).

Among intensively represented subjects the highest rates of neutral tone are allocated to Georgian Dream (91%), while negative tone is displayed against president (39%) and government (30%). Positive tone is shown towards government (8%) and United National Movement (8%). It should also be mentioned that tones of express summary of comments of journalists and respondents. As for the journalistic tone only, in this case it’s mainly a neutral tone, meaning that articles of civil.ge do not express any biased reporting on any of the subjects. An exception is a positive tone of the journalist towards CEC


(4%) and bit of negative tone towards government (2%). All other cases are neutral.

Headlines published at civil.ge mainly display positive tones. During the period of monitoring there have been no cases of the headlines expressing biased attitude towards any of the subjects. Also, there have been no cases of using discriminatory or informal language. An exception could be one article – “Ruling party attacks Georgian Dream in a TV video about the behavior code” (Aug 1). This particular headline shows informal language, by using word “attacks”. However, this term does not really violate ethical norms. Therefore, the act is that unless we give consideration to the later example, there have been no serious violations during the monitoring process.

Civili.ge articles are hardly ever accompanied with visual materials. During the process of monitoring we only saw several photos provided by press office of the Georgian Dream. Given photos are always of a neutral nature and do not express positive or negative attitude towards any of the subjects.

Articles of civil.ge usually follow balance of sources. During the process of monitoring we have not seen articles that would provide only one-sided criticism of a specific subject. We often came across articles that provided diversity of respondents. Good examples of those are articles about election regulations. They often provided comments of the ruling party as well as opposition parties, NGOs, CEC and diplomatic representatives. National Movement and Georgian Dream are the parties that provided most comments. It should also be mentioned that balance of the text allocated for these two subjects is also observed.

Articles of civil.ge are mostly prepared based on facts. There are hardly any cases when opinions and comments of journalists or editors are not verified by facts. Therefore, conclusive section of articles usually met general structure of the articles and served as logical finale. Also, we have not discovered any cases of fact manipulation from the side of journalists. Discussions provided by journalists did not go beyond news context and did not generalize or extend it to support any opinion of the editors.

Articles of civil.ge were mostly prepared based on reliable information. Monitoring did not reveal any cases of providing any information based on anonymous or unreliable sources. Excerpts from various official documents were often provided. This approach was most commonly used in articles on election regulations, party financing, voter lists.


It should also be mentioned that during the process of monitoring no cases of violation of journalistic ethical standards were detected. Also, there have been no cases of using discriminatory terminology or hate speech.

Tabula.ge

Tabula.ge reviews almost all important events related to elections. Topics are diverse. Articles are mainly of analytical nature, although there are brief news messages as well. Critical or positive attitude towards one or another political subject is often felt, but journalists show correct attitude, trying to represent two or more sources and different opinions in the article.

Volume of the text (number of words) is almost equally distributed between opposition and government subjects (president, government, parliament, ruling party). Biggest space is allocated to the Coalition Georgian Dream (32%), followed by the National Movement (20%), president – 3%, authorities – 7%. Percentage of other opposition parties is as follows: Christian Democratic Movement – 4%, Labor party – 1%, New Rights – 1%.

According to summary of tones of the subject Georgian Dream is allocated biggest space of the web-page. It is mainly covered using neutral tone (79%), negative tone (19%), and positive (2%). National Movement is also mainly covered with neutral tone (75%), although negative tone is also displayed in 8% of the cases and positive tone in 17% of the cases. Neutral tone is mostly shown towards the government and president (62% and 50% respectively). Georgian Dream as well as other opposition parties are also covered using neutral tone: Christian-Democratic Movement – 86%, Labor Party – 72%, New Rights – 59%.

Journalist tone towards each of the subjects: Georgian Dream, which was allocated biggest space on the site, is mainly covered using positive tone (86%), while 14% is of negative tone. Main negative tone is displayed towards president (100%) and government (96%). Apart from Georgian Dream, other opposition parties are also covered using completely neutral tone.

Positive tone is displayed towards the National Movement (11%) and election observers (12%).

During the process of monitoring Tabula.ge published articles that reviewed all important events of the pre-election period. Articles are not large – mainly brief reviews of facts or activities of election subjects.


Headlines of the articles are of descriptive nature and are not focused on scandal-causing statements. They briefly and accurately show the key point. Here is a different case: article published on August 10 has the following headline: “Ivanishvili: Russia’s been wanting to step into the Caucasus for several centuries and that’s normal.” Author repeats this sentence and continues: “He [Ivanishvili] added that Russia is not the only neighboring country that has certain wishes towards Georgian territories” (Aug 10). This article is complemented with the video (32.53 minutes) and while watching, it becomes obvious that “it’s normal” means that such behavior is normal, expected and natural of such countries. But the headline, without such context gives a definitely negative impression.

Visual materials of the site are plain, photos are neutral. In most of the cases articles are accompanied with logos of the organizations, parties or coalitions discussed. There are several video materials, for example, “Bidzina Ivanishvili met with Nino Burjanadze” (Aug 19), “Ivanishvili: Russia’s been wanting to step into the Caucasus for several centuries and that’s normal” (Aug 10). One photo we have to discuss here is the one included with the article “Bidzina Ivanishvili’s visit to Terjola was followed by incident” (August 28). Incident is discussed correctly and briefly, although the picture of Ivanishvili is a bit comical and creates ironic attitude of readers.

There are several articles that have no balanced sources. Illustration of these is articles: “Event of Georgian Dream in Batumi” (August 5), “Beshumi Incident” (Aug 4), “Ivanishvili does not agree to debates with Merabishvili” (Aug 21). Position of Ivanishvili is displayed by the journalist (paraphrasing), while the position of the other side is provided by press speaker – Chiora Taktakishvili, which is complemented with the statement from Public Broadcasting, giving opponent of Bidzina Ivanishvili more credibility. It seems like Ivanishvili is inaccessible for representatives of the press.

There are rare cases of showing attitude of the journalist or biased approach. For example, title of the article gives conclusion: “Issues of NATO membership, education, healthcare and democracy will be handled better by the ruling party.” This conclusion is based on NDI research results (Jul 16). However, it also shows position of the journalist and that of ruling party.

In spite of the above example, there are rare cases of subjective evaluation of the authors. Amongst neutrally covered articles negative tone is only shown towards Georgian Dream, however, journalists of this web-page do not normally provide exaggerated criticism towards subject of the web-sites.


Journalists of Tabula.ge try to show events or facts from different sides. They offer different opinions of politicians, and different sources, expert evaluations.

Language of the articles is politically correct without any unethical expressions, aggression, hate speech or discriminatory terms.

Tribuna.ge

Tribuna.ge offers articles of various size and content. Position of authors is well demonstrated during coverage of the events. Articles are mainly unbalanced. Humiliation tone is noticed towards certain structures.

Biggest space on the web-page is allocated to the Coalition Georgian Dream – 34%, National Movement – 19%, government – 14%, President – 4%, authorities and parliament – 1% each. Opposition parties apart from the Georgian Dream are provided with very little space: Christian Democrats – 2%, Free Georgia, New Rights, Labor Part and European Democrats – 1% each.

Tone used towards subjects is even more unequal. More negative tone is seen towards governmental subjects: negative tone towards the president – 64%, Government – 81%, local self-governance – 84%, Parliament – 92%, National Movement – 50%.

Neutral tone is also found in case of the National Movement – 35%, while positive tone is 15%. Neutral coverage of the government is 14%, and president – 33%. Georgian Dream is mainly covered using neutral tone – 52%, negative tone – 13%, while positive tone has high enough indicators – 35%.

Opposition parties are mostly covered using neutral tone. New Rights Party – 59%, Christian Democrats -68%, Free Georgia – 62%. Even though international organizations and observers are mainly covered using neutral tone, 58% and 92% respectively, negative tone indications is quite high in their case: observers – 8%, international organizations – 16%.

As for the tone of the journalist, the situation is also different here: negative tone towards president – 48%, towards government – 46%. Neutral tone is found towards these subjects as well: president – 52%, government – 54%. Journalists of this outlet are more loyal towards the National Movement – neutral tone – 66%, negative tone – 28%, positive – 65%.


Georgian Dream has significantly high neutral tone – 83%, negative – 11%, positive – 6%. Tone of the journalist towards other opposition parties is more neutral. However, negative tone is also shown towards Christian Democratic movement – 26%.

Headlines of the articles are diverse as well. there are informative, business-like headlines as well as slogans arousing emotions of readers, for example, “Grigolia: Saakashvili should resign from chairing National Movement and we’ll see what kind of boys they are” (Aug 1); “Supporter of National Movement: If someone does not vote for Misha, I will find out about it, write down my list, and then the person will see” (Aug 6); “Soso Shatberashvili: I request from Ivanishvili to stop funding Saakashvili” (Aug 23), etc.

On August 16 article with the headline “Gamgebeli’s son: Ivanishvili transferred 80 million because he lost” was published. “12-year-old son of village Gamgebeli [name included] together with other children tore Georgian Dream newspapers and started political debates with members of the coalition [words of the child are also provided]. Adolescent was nervous during the incident, and later began to cry.” Public discussion of children’s words, and especially in political contexts, is highly unethical because of the interests of the child. During the incident the journalist should have not identified the adolescent.

As for the visual materials, we would like to point out one photo of Ivanishvili. Logo on the background of the photo places sun rays behind the head of Ivanishvili, looking like a halo. Below are the images of people praying with hands held high (Aug 16).

Most of the information of the articles provided on the web-page is not balanced. It is interesting that balanced articles are usually the ones copied from other web-pages or information agencies, or is a review of those articles. For example, Jul 19: Eurasianet: “Pre-election campaign moves to villages,” or Jul 22: Radio Free Europe: “Nationalists step out with the initiative concerning holding elections.”

Articles display different kinds of mistakes. For example, article “Soso Galumashvili: Time first worked in favor of Ivanishvili, now works for Saakashvili” (Aug 2), while explanation within the article is different. This is followed by the phrase: “after reviewing ratings dynamics elections were to be appointed as soon as possible, since longer the time, fewer the supporters of National Movement would become, and the ruling party would have more trouble retaining supporters.” There are factual mistakes as well, for example,


last name of the member of Labor Party is mistaken, and is Dzagania or Dzaganidze at different places.

Position of the authors is very sharp. There are frequent cases of sarcasm, humiliation, and not just in terms of the tone, but content as well (“Son of Gamgebeli,” “Supporter of National Movement”). Language of the journalist is correct, but if the respondent uses abusive expressions, the journalist repeats them with pleasure, for example, “Nazi Dream majority candidates” (Aug 17); “I am Saakashvili’s woman” (Aug 8).

For.ge

Articles that were monitored are mainly large analytical or evaluation pieces. At the same time, there are frequent translated articles, copied from www.foreignpress.ge. These articles are translated from different foreign outlets. During the monitoring process we came across several opinion editorials, written mainly by politically active persons. Interviews were also seen frequently.

Frequency of coverage was almost equally distributed between government and opposition subjects. However, it should be mentioned that Coalition Georgian Dream was covered most frequently between opposition parties. According to the tone of coverage of journalist the most negative tone was shown towards government, and positive towards Coalition Georgian Dream.

For.ge allocates most space to Georgian Dream, with 27% of all coverage. It should be noted that coverage of the Georgian Dream is not significantly different from the United National Movement and the government. The first one was given 21%, while another 21% again. The web-site provides almost equal space to the above three subjects. Other political parties are significantly less represented, but more coverage is allocated to the president (8%) and international organizations (6%).

Evaluation of the tone of articles shows that the subject with most space was mainly covered using neutral tone (68%), although high enough positive coverage (25%) was shown towards the same subject. In case of the National Movement indicators are radically different, since negative coverage was 72%, while positive was only 3%. High percentage of negative coverage was also shown towards government (87%) and the president (76%).


Table of the tone of journalists showed that negative or positive tone towards subjects also came from the side of journalists. Highest negative tone is shown towards the government (84%); same indicator towards National Movement is 69%, and 63% towards the president. In parallel, positive coverage of Coalition Georgian Dream is 16% and 1% for National Movement.

The web-site offers more or less neutral as well as sharp evaluative headlines. The latter, as a rule, are negatively directed towards one particular party, and this party is mainly government or the ruling team. For example, a headline “Trick from government sack” (July 19) is for the article talking about pre-election initiatives of the government. Also, article discussing actions of authorities against Georgian Dream is entitled “Another black PR of the government does not work” (Aug 14).

Visual materials accompanying articles are mainly neutral and are substantially associated with the topics discussed in the articles. However, during the process of monitoring we came across certain visual materials, edited photos that are somewhat humiliating and contain comic sub-texts towards representatives of the government and their supporters (Aug 14 and Aug 26).

It can be clearly stated that articles placed at For.ge rarely observe balance. At the same time, there are articles of interview types, which don’t allow any balance because of its format. There are also articles translated from other languages. However, the latter provides more balance than articles of the for.ge journalists, which are mainly basing their writing on anonymous sources and assumptions of the authors.

Article titled “Members if the “Dream” damaged by natural disaster are refused assistance” (Aug 10) talks about reimbursement of damage caused by disaster in Kakheti. In some cases population was discriminated according to political views, which is reported by the journalist based on information provided from two majority candidates. Because of seriousness of the accusation the article should show another side, which would be given opportunity to answer this accusation. However, such respondent is not shown in the article.

Another article is based on several sources, but both on the same position and no person with different opinion is shown. Article “Trick from State Sack” (July 19) talks about pre-election program, evaluated by two independent experts, and both of them provide negative criticism. Besides, one of the respondents gives opinion that pre-election program includes elements of buying voters, which is another reason for existence of response from another party (National Movement in this case).


Most of the articles of For.ge have problems with compliance. The problem is that articles are often based not on facts, but assumptions.

“Ambrolauri is quickly painted as Saakashvili is expected” (Jul 18) – article has not just compliance, but lack of accuracy of facts challenge. “Building facades of Ambrolauri are quickly painted and rehabilitated. The thing is that Saakashvili’s visit to Ambrolauri was planned for September, but plans changed and the date was shifted earlier. For.ge heard about Racha events from reliable sources (two) through internet and phone calls.” Article which started by such passage is continued by saying that Mikheil Saakashvili will go to Ambrolauri and open branch of the Bank of Georgia and the pool, but it’s unknown whether the pool will only work for the day or even afterwards. It is also unknown who will swim in this pool. Information about that is secret and most importantly, calm Racha population is forced to become quick and work 24 hours. Most importantly, the journalist makes comparison between Sanzona and Ambrolauri (as Saakashvili has already visited Sanzona and he witnessed this fact). Based on this experience, he concludes that before Saakashvili flies in on a helicopter, broken asphalt will be quickly fixed and will find kids in Ambrolauri that will scream “Misha-Misha”, and women will be there to guide this. All of this is assumed by the journalist, since “this is how it happened in Sanzona, and same would most likely be repeated in Ambrolauri.” At the end of the article the journalist expresses hope that construction work will be conducted peacefully, nobody would fall from carcass and cement walls will not fall on anyone.

The journalist concludes that Racha people know how to make ballot papers useless and how to criss-cross it. Nothing in the article indicates how the journalist makes such assumptions.

Authors of the articles often rely on anonymous sources or simply provide own interpretation to facts.

Article “Nationalist logics and basics of arithmetic, or how it 47 equals to 36 (July 17) the journalist reviews party ratings published by NDI. This research shows that ratings of National Movement have fallen compared to February. Therefore, the author concludes that the government has though of the best way to calm itself and leaders of the party convince other members that results have not changed and have remained the same. At the same time, the journalist states that the person who believed in existence of the same ratings was shown by the journalist the document stating that National Movement had 47% popularity in February and is now 36%. Since the journalist could not convince the person anyway, he concluded that Nationalists decided, no matter


how, to convince members and supporters on stability of their ratings, even if it violates basic math rules, and still stubbornly prove that 47 is equal to 36. It is noticeable that the journalist does not name any names and last names, or names of National Movement that preached stability of ratings, or the person he tried to convince himself.

Articles on the web-page in most cases have inadequacy of journalistic language, mainly towards political parties. However, in this case, attention is paid to showing hate speech towards national minorities.

Article “Paramount of Georgian “Siloviks” [law-enforcers]” (Aug 16) talks about law enforcement ministers in the country, including Dimitri Shashkin. It is the nationality of Shashkin that the author pays attention to. “Ethnical Russian born in Tbilisi, Dimitri Shashkin has received minister portfolio.”

“Nationlaists had Azeri population celebrate “Didgori Day” (Aug 15) – “It is said that David Agmashenebeli has left his last will, to step on his gravestone, so that he would know Georgian nation still existed. It is unknown what David Agmashenebeli would feel if he saw that in 2012 on Didgori valley the victory was celebrated by Azeris, while ordinary Georgians were hardly able to make it to party celebration.”

Web-page is mainly characterized by critical articles towards National Movement and the government, but often these articles lack logical basis, discussion and foundation. On the contrary, there are frequent cases of displaying positive attitude towards Coalition Georgian Dream.

Language of the authors of the articles is serious issue as well. Authors often use hate speech and irony.

dfwatch.net

During the monitoring period Dfwatch.net mainly published average size articles. Articles were mainly review of news, complemented with comments of the journalists as well as respondents. Dfwatch.net rarely offered brief, only informational articles. Most of the products were analytical, provided in-depth review of the issue, analysis, and critical evaluation. There is a high percentage of negative journalistic tone towards the government and the ruling party.


Dfwatch.net allocated most textual space to Georgian Dream (42%), followed by the government (16%), United National Movement (10%) and election observers (8%). Compared to others, this web-site pays more attention to local NGOs (5%), CEC (4%), and committee on voter lists (4%), state audit (4%), president (3%), and parliament (3%).

Highest indicators of neutral tone are with observation missions (100%), while National Movement has highest indicators for the negative tone (75%) along with government (41%). Positive tone is shown towards the government (10%) and Georgian Dream (7%). It should also be noted that given tones combine tone of the journalist as well as respondents. However, journalist tone separately is usually neutral, with some high indicators for negative tone, for example, in terms of parliament (76%) (including chair and vice-speakers of the parliament), National Movement (45%) and government (23%). There is a little positive journalistic tone used for the government (10%) and Georgian Dream (7%).

Headlines of Dfwatch.net are mostly neutral although there are several headlines with negative evaluations. For example, “Government took millions in loans while running Cartu bank” (Jul 31), “Georgian Olympic athlete let down due to opposition sympathies” (Aug 3), “Speaker of parliament is abusing his position” (Aug 7), “Georgia’s ruling party concealing commercials as public ads” (Aug 15).

It is worth noting that headlines that have certain tendencies usually provide criticism of the government and ruling party. During the monitoring process dfwatch.net has not published any headlines that criticized opposition side. However, it should also be mentioned that articles indicated above did not provide biased criticism – it was usually done within a certain context and not on a personal level or based on unconfirmed facts.

Dfwatch.net articles are mostly not accompanied with visual materials, and the few ones that were, had photos with neutral nature without any positive or negative attitude towards any person. It should also be noted that Dfwatch.net photos indicated that these materials were provided by Interpressnews agency. Thus, the copyright is highly respected by the editorial team.

Palitratv.ge


Videos published on the web-site are mostly brief, and of an informational nature. They are mainly records of briefings/press conferences.

During the monitoring process the web-page intensively covered activities of Coalition Georgian Dream. No use of incorrect language was detected in any of the materials published on the web-page. It should also be mentioned that certain part of videos are placed without comments or only provides comments of the respondents.

Frequency of coverage is unequally distributed between governmental and opposition subjects. However, it should be mentioned that Georgian Dream is covered most often. According to the tone of the journalists most negative tone is used towards government (without any specifics). Tone of the journalist/video author is mainly neutral.

Among monitoring subjects Palitratv.ge allocates biggest space to the Coalition Georgian Dream, with 34% of all coverage, or 2902 seconds. The following subject is the National Movement, with 17% or 1452 seconds. Parliament, President, Government (without any specifics) is provided with 22% of all coverage, or 1902 seconds. Other political parties covered include Free Georgia, New Rights, Democratic Movement – Unified Georgia, Georgian Troupe and Christian-Democratic Movement.

Tone of the video materials show that the subject with most space was mainly covered using neutral tone (68%), although positive tone was also detected (15% and 17%). At the same time, special difference is shown between covering president (positive – 10%, negative – 80%, neutral – 10%). Difference between the tones of other subjects is far less. In case of National Movement 39% is negative, 21% is positive, while 40% is positive tone. Lowest indicator for neutral tone is for the government (without specification) – 3%, while 55% of its coverage is negative, and 43% is positive.

Negative tone towards subjects was also detected from the side of the journalists. Most frequently negative tone is displayed towards government (85%), and least of all, towards Coalition Georgian Dream (1%).

Based on the specifics of the web-page the headlines are mainly unbiased and neutral, except for few rare exceptions. There are few cases of scandals and attraction of viewers: “Stones instead of mud – 2012 Karaleti and 2003 Bolnisi stonefall” (July 16), “I am Saakashvili’s woman – activist of a National Movement


during meeting with Georgian Dream” (Aug 6), “Who taught how to yell “Gaumarjos” to Bidzina Ivanishvili” (August 19).

Visual materials published on the web-page usually display press conference, briefing, comment, or statement of a particular election subject. However, there are materials where video shots are provided without any comments. This is especially true when we are dealing with specific clashes.

For example, video material “Stones instead of mud – 2012 Karaleti and 2003 Bolnisi stonefall” (July 16) reflects physical tension between the local government and Georgian Dream representatives in village Karaleti. Video shots are mainly provided without any comments.

In general, there has been no material that could be identified as unbalanced. However, there are video materials that could use more balance and statement of the position of another party for more reliability. For example: “Ivanishvili knew three months ago that I planned to become majority candidate in Saburtalo district – Jondi Baghaturia” (Jul 20). After hearing this information, the question naturally arises – did Ivanishvili really know about this or not.

Since the web-page usually publishes brief video materials with minimal analysis/review/evaluation, the issue of compliance hardly ever arises. However, during the process of monitoring we found several videos that are not for public interest and are no less relevant. For example: “Who taught Ivanishvili how to yell “Gaumarjos” (Aug 19), the video is 58 seconds long and is an excerpt from Georgian Dream demonstration where Ivanishvili says he shouted Gaumarjos incorrectly, until Zviad Dzidziguri pointed out the mistake.

Absolute majority of materials presented on the web-page is based on facts. There are no materials created for effects, or no edited material.


Annex - Diagrams

Diagram: Volume 1

Diagram: Volume 2


Diagram: Volume 3

Diagram: Volume 4


Diagram: Volume 5

Diagram: Volume 6


Diagram: Volume 7

Diagram: Volume 8


Diagram: Volume 9

Diagram: Volume 10


Diagram: Volume 11

Diagram: Volume 12


Diagram: Tone 1

Diagram: Journalist’s Tone 1

Diagram: Tone 235

CDI – Election Media Monitoring (July 16 – September 3, 2012)



Diagram: Tone 3



Diagram: Tone 4



Diagram: Tone 5



Diagram: Tone 6



Diagram: Tone 7



Diagram: Tone 8



Diagram: Tone 9



Diagram: Tone 10



Diagram: Tone 11



Diagram: Tone 12



Documents

· Web viewWeb-pages provide variety of themes about election subjects. For example, presentation of majority candidates, pre-election meetings, CEC initiatives, activities of