How 10 television stations covered the last week of the 2025 parliamentary election campaign. Final conclusions
The Independent Journalism Center (IJC) released on Tuesday, September 30, its fourth monitoring report on the election campaign for the September 28, 2025 parliamentary elections. The report, the last in this series, 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 report covered the last week of the election campaign, September 20-26.
The IJC focused on the main news bulletins, direct and indirect election-related programs, and election debates.
Moldova 1 actively covered the election campaign in news and debates, giving visibility to all electoral competitors. Most of the news was accurate and balanced, but there were also some insufficiently documented materials. In the news, PAS enjoyed the highest visibility, including through repeated mention of the BUN’s decision to withdraw in its favor and through positive coverage of central public authorities, which indirectly favored the ruling party. The six election debates were conducted fairly, overall.
GRT briefly covered the election campaign in the news, giving limited access to electoral competitors. The station failed to report on the court’s restriction of the activities of the Heart of Moldova Party, a member of the PEB, and its exclusion from the electoral race, which can be interpreted as manipulation by omission. Most of the programs analyzed were unbalanced, biased, and partial, portraying the central public authorities and the ruling PAS party in a negative light.
TVR Moldova covered the election campaign in a neutral and balanced manner, without any tendency to directly or indirectly favor certain candidates. However, the frequency of materials about the country’s European vector, the presence and interventions of central authorities in these news items, and the tone of the monitored program could have constituted an image boost for the PAS electoral competitor through image transfer.
Jurnal TV covered the election campaign in its news in a predominantly neutral, fair, and balanced manner, providing visibility for more than half of the candidates. PAS, PEB, and Alternative Bloc had the most appearances. PAS was covered in a predominantly neutral manner, while PEB and the Alternative Bloc were disadvantaged by several news items that portrayed them in a negative light. During the debates, the moderation of the discussions on was at times biased and lacking in impartiality, which led to the favoring of some electoral competitors and the disadvantaging of others.
Pro TV Chișinău covered the campaign in news and debates in a neutral and balanced tone, with no violations of professional standards noted. Less than half of the candidates on the electoral list were mentioned/quoted in the news, with the tone of coverage being predominantly neutral for most of them. The PEB, Moldovans Alliance, and Alternative Bloc candidates also appeared in a negative context. The election debates gave equal voice to all candidates present in the studio, with no tendency to favor or disadvantage any electoral competitor.
TV8 covered the election campaign in a balanced and neutral manner, providing visibility for more than half of the electoral competitors. For the most part, their visibility was ensured by their presence or mention in controversial topics or in news stories based on the election debates. The PEB and PAS benefited from the most appearances/mentions, most of them in a neutral context. In general, the moderation of the debates was balanced, although there were moments of tension between candidates or between moderators and candidates.
Exclusiv TV covered the campaign without favoring or disfavoring any electoral competitor. The news was, for the most part, accurate and neutral, and the debates were organized without any deviations. At the same time, the programs showed shortcomings in terms of moderation, giving space to some competitors to make accusations that were not always counterbalanced by the moderators.
Cinema 1 covered the election campaign in a generally neutral and accurate manner, both in the news and in the debates. The station provided visibility for 21 of the 23 candidates, with most of the material being presented in a neutral tone. PAS benefited from the most appearances, including through the activities of the central authorities, which gave it an indirect image advantage. The Alternative Bloc and PEB also had an increased number of appearances, but their coverage was generally neutral, with some negative accents. The debates were organized fairly, and the moderation was neutral and fair.
One TV actively covered the campaign in news, programs, and debates. Most of the news was accurate and balanced, but there were also biased reports that put some candidates at a disadvantage. The news provided access to half of the electoral competitors, with the tone of coverage being mostly neutral, except for the Great Moldova Party. PAS benefited from a relatively large number of positive appearances by central public authorities.
N4 covered the election campaign through news, debates, and programs. The number of news items about the competitors’ activities was low, which reduced their visibility. PAS and PEB had the highest exposure. PAS was generally covered in a neutral tone, while PEB benefited from coverage that was divided between negative and neutral tones. Central authorities were predominantly presented in a favorable light, which gave them an image advantage and indirectly reinforced the positive perception of PAS.
Nadine Gogu, executive director of the IJC, pointed out in the press conference that, in general, there is a difference between how the current campaign was covered on TV stations and what happened in previous elections. “It should be noted, however, that the list of TV stations monitored in this campaign differs from those analyzed previously. At that time, a larger number of media outlets showed visible signs of bias, especially in news and programs, openly favoring certain candidates and disadvantaging others. This time, the situation in the news is significantly different: the news bulletins are much better produced. Even though some appearances by electoral candidates had a rather positive or negative context, their frequency was not high enough to significantly influence viewers’ perceptions,” she noted. Nadine Gogu also says that television programs, especially debates, remain fertile ground for bias, as moderators have a responsibility to ensure that candidates’ statements do not harm other participants. “Often, these interventions border on defamation, accusations are made without evidence, and in such situations there should be firm intervention on the part of the moderators,” said the executive director of the IJC.
The monitoring was carried out within the framework of the Civic Coalition for Free and Fair Elections. The first three reports were released on September 9, 16, and 23.
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.
