The IJC released its third report monitoring ten TV stations during the 2025 parliamentary election campaign, with conclusions for each channel
The Independent Journalism Center (IJC) released on Tuesday, September 23, its third monitoring report on the election campaign for the September 28, 2025, parliamentary elections. The report reflects the results of monitoring ten television stations—Moldova 1, TVR Moldova, GRT, Jurnal TV, Pro TV Chișinău, TV8, Exclusiv TV, Cinema 1, One TV, and N4—selected based on criteria such as audience, form of ownership, and language of broadcast. The third monitoring report covered the period from September 13 to 19.
The IJC focused on the main news bulletins, direct and indirect election-related programs, and election debates.
Thus, the public broadcaster Moldova 1 covered the election campaign in a neutral manner, giving space to most of the candidates running in the election. Patriotic Electoral Bloc, PAS, and Moldovan National Party benefited from the highest visibility in the news, with the tone of coverage being predominantly neutral. At the same time, frequent reports featuring central and local public authorities referring to various achievements may constitute an advantage for the ruling party by transferring a positive image.
The regional public broadcaster GRT covered the election campaign in the news in a neutral and impartial manner. All electoral competitors were quoted or mentioned in the relevant materials, which included summaries of their electoral programs. The debates provided space for all electoral competitors, but the moderation did not always manage to ensure balance, which led to the PAS electoral competitor being placed in a negative context.
TVR Moldova covered the election campaign in neutral and balanced news reports, but the electoral competitors’ access to the news was limited. There was no obvious favoritism or bias towards any competitor in the news, and the debates were moderated fairly and impartially. At the same time, the editorial orientation in favor of topics with frequent appearances by central authorities in positive news items can be interpreted as an indirect advantage for PAS, the ruling party.
Jurnal TV covered the election campaign actively and, in general, fairly, giving visibility to a large number of candidates and largely complying with ethical standards. The station did not focus only on controversial material, but also on publicizing the electoral priorities of the candidates, without favoring or disadvantaging any of them. With a few exceptions, there were no serious shortcomings or deviations in the moderation of the programs, but there was a lack of pluralism of opinions.
Pro TV Chișinău actively covered the campaign in news and debates, without major deviations from professional and ethical standards. Controversial materials were balanced, and some of the news ensured diversity of sources. The station provided access to news and debates for most of the candidates in the elections. The tone of the coverage of the candidates was mostly neutral, with no obvious bias in favor of any candidate. The Patriotic Electoral Bloc, the Great Moldova Party, and the Alternative Bloc were disadvantaged by most of their appearances in negative contexts.
TV8 covered the election campaign in a generally balanced manner, without any bias, both in its news and in its programs. The station gave visibility to a large number of competitors, who most often appeared in controversial materials or in contexts other than the presentation of electoral priorities. Patriotic Electoral Bloc is the competitor with the most appearances in a negative context, both in news and in programs. The debates were moderated fairly, giving candidates the opportunity to present their priorities.
Exclusiv TV covered the campaign through news, debates, and election-related programs, without clearly favoring or disfavoring any electoral contestant. In the news, the station gave reduced visibility to the contestants, who were more present in programs and debates. Overall, the news respected the principles of impartiality and neutrality, but did not ensure diversity of opinion. In programs, the government and PAS were most often portrayed in a negative light.
Cinema 1 gave visibility to a large number of candidates, with the tone of coverage being predominantly neutral. Most of the material respected the principle of impartiality, although most was based on a single source. Representatives of central public authorities were frequently present in the news, with a predominantly positive tone, which generated an indirect advantage for the ruling party, PAS. The debates were organized under fair conditions for all invited competitors.
One TV covered the election campaign through news, programs, and debates. Less than half of the electoral competitors registered in the race had access to the news. PAS was the only party whose campaign events were covered, with the rest of the candidates being presented mostly in conflictual or critical contexts. The ruling party was also favored by the extensive presentation of the top 20 candidates on the list and by the transfer of the positive image of the central public authorities. On the other hand, cumulatively, in news and programs, the Alternative Bloc was most frequently presented in a negative light. During the debates, the participating electoral competitors were disadvantaged by the analyses of the experts present in the studio, and the rules imposed by the moderators regarding the language spoken limited the freedom of expression of one competitor.
N4 covered the campaign in news, debates, and programs. The number of news items featuring electoral competitors was relatively small, with the station failing to ensure sufficient visibility for electoral competitors. The coverage of the candidates in the elections was mostly neutral, with the exception of PAS, which was portrayed more positively. Central public administration was covered predominantly positively, with this editorial approach generating an image advantage for central public authorities and, indirectly, for PAS.
“If we compare the first two weeks of the campaign with the third, we notice some differences. For example, the debates on the stations that organized them were also reflected in the news, which led to an increase in the visibility of some electoral competitors. We also noticed a reduction in news stories featuring central public authorities. Even when some stations reported certain public events, ministry representatives were no longer quoted, as was previously the case. This is a way of covering events of public interest without focusing on ministers’ statements, which is important because their mere presence in the news implicitly creates a favorable image for the ruling party, which is in the electoral race,” said Nadine Gogu, executive director of the IJC, at the press conference where the third report was launched.
The monitoring was carried out within the framework of the Civic Coalition for Free and Fair Elections. The IJC will release another report during this election campaign. The first two reports were released on September 9 and 16.
This report was produced with the financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in the Republic of Moldova. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the donor.
