The IJC Launches the Fifth Monitoring Report on Ten TV Channels during the Electoral Campaign. Statements Regarding Each Channel for the Second Round of the Presidential Elections

On Tuesday, November 5, the Independent Journalism Center (IJC) launched the fifth media monitoring report regarding the electoral campaign for the presidential elections, which is the last one of the series of similar reports. The IJC monitored ten TV channels: Cinema 1, Exclusiv TV, Gagauziya Radio Televizionu (GRT), Jurnal TV, Moldova 1, N4, Pro TV Chisinau, TV8, TVC21, and TVR Moldova.

The fifth monitoring report covers October 21 – November 1, 2024, the interval of the second round for the presidential elections held on November 3, 2024. During this term, the IJC analyzed 696 direct and indirect electoral materials, including 625 news items, 69 programs, and two debates.

While presenting the final monitoring report, Nadine Gogu, IJC Executive Director, stated that, unlike during the previous election campaigns, during the current elections, no large-scale favoring or disfavoring certain candidates was observed. She emphasized that some candidates were presented in negative or positive contexts, but not to the extent when it could be said that certain channels promoted a particular candidate. “We urge our colleagues to read the reports attentively, paying attention to particular detected deficiencies, so that we could have fewer cases of this sort during the next campaigns,” Nadine Gogu added.

According to the conclusions regarding each channel, Cinema 1 covered the second round of the elections in news items and programs, providing relatively equal access to both candidates for the position of head of state. The tone of presenting them in the news items was neutral in most cases. In the programs, the tone of presenting Maia Sandu, the PAS candidate, was mostly negative, and that of presenting Alexandr Stoianoglo was mostly positive. The political parties which had designated the election candidates were presented predominantly neutrally, and the tone of presenting the state institutions was predominantly neutral and sometimes positive and negative.

Exclusiv TV covered the election activities extensively, relatively equally presenting both candidates for the position of president of the Republic of Moldova. Maia Sandu and Alexandr Stoianoglo were presented predominantly neutrally in the newscasts and positively and negatively in the programs, depending on the context of the topics discussed. The PSRM and the PAS had several neutral appearances, and the tone of presenting the central public administration was mostly neutral, as well as positive, slightly favoring the candidate of the governing party.

The GRT regional public TV channel continued briefly covering the campaign in the newscasts, and electoral topics were mostly presented in the programs. The tone of presenting the election stakeholders was mostly neutral, as well as negative for Maia Sandu and positive for Alexandr Stoianoglo, especially in the programs. The PAS was presented only negatively, and the CPAs were presented neutrally. In conclusion, Maia Sandu was disadvantaged by a great number of appearances in a negative context, as well as by the negative tone of presenting the PAS. Alexandr Stoianoglo was advantaged by many appearances in a positive context.

Jurnal TV treated both election candidates equally in the newscasts, and they benefited from a relatively equal number of appearances and airtime for indirect appearances. The tone of presenting Alexandr Stoianoglo was neutral in most cases, as well as negative, and Maia Sandu was presented neutrally and sometimes positively, especially in the programs. The PAS had neutral appearances/mentions, and the PRSM was mentioned in a negative context more frequently than in a neutral one, which disadvantaged the candidate nominated by the party. The tone of presenting the Government and the Parliament was equally neutral and positive, favoring the PAS candidate during the elections.

Moldova 1 public TV channel covered the second round of the campaign for the presidential elections in the newscasts, programs, and debates. Both candidates were presented mostly neutrally. Maia Sandu was advantaged both by positive appearances/mentions and by positive presentations of the Government. Alexandr Stoianoglo was disadvantaged by negative contexts. The political parties which had nominated the candidates for the elections were mostly presented neutrally.

N4 covered the election campaign in the newscasts and programs, providing relatively equal access to the newscasts to both remaining election candidates. No obvious favoring or disfavoring the candidates was observed in the N4 newscasts. Maia Sandu was advantaged in the newscasts due to positive appearances/mentions of the Government, but she was also disadvantaged in the programs due to criticism against her and the PAS, as well as against the executive authorities.

Pro TV Chisinau offered access to the newscasts to both candidates; Maia Sandu was also invited to a program, and Alexandr Stoianoglo refused to accept the invitation. The campaign was covered neutrally, with no obvious favoring or disfavoring any candidates or the political parties which had nominated the candidates for the position of the president of the country. The central public administration was presented mostly neutrally.

TV8 provided relatively equal access to both election candidates who were presented mostly neutrally and sometimes negatively and positively, depending on the context of the topics. Alexandr Stoianoglo was disadvantaged by four negative appearances. The tone of presenting such political parties as the PAS and the PSRM, as well as that of the Government, was mostly neutral, and sometimes negative.

On TVC21, both Maia Sandu and Alexandr Stoianoglo had disadvantageous and advantageous appearances as candidates. Maia Sandu was also disadvantaged by the appearances of the PAS as the governing party and the Government in a negative context.

TVR Moldova favored Maia Sandu due to the large frequency of positive appearances/mentions and disfavored Alexandr Stoianoglo due to the large number of materials presenting him negatively. Due to image transfer, Maia Sandu was also advantaged by the positive tone of the materials dedicated to the activity of the executive authorities, and Alexandr Stoianoglo was disadvantaged by mentions or appearances of the PSRM, the party which had nominated him, in a negative context.

In total, the IJC released five reports covering September 20 – November 1, 2024. The monitoring took place within the framework of the Civic Coalition for Free and Fair Elections, of which the Independent Journalism Center is also a member.

This monitoring report was made possible by the generous support of the American and British people through the intermediary of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the British Embassy in Chisinau. The content is the responsibility of the Independent Journalism Center and does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Kingdom, USAID, or the Government of the United States.