🚀 go-pugleaf

From:
                      DON FITZPATRICK ASSOCIATES
                              "SHOPTALK"
                       Monday October 12, 1998
                 <http://www.tvspy.com/shoptalk.htm>
o o o o o
Submitted By:
Jerry Huffman, Almaty, Kazakhstan
huffman@internews.ru
RE: Not politics as usual

Don,

Like many Americans, I've been watching as fellow journalists struggle
with the best way to cover the Clinton story as Congress lurches
toward impeachment hearings.

Recently, my company Internews, helped produce the first ever "live"
TV debate among Parliamentary candidates in the Khyrghyz Republic.
Internews is a California based non-profit that supports TV stations
in the former Soviet Union with everything from journalism training to
legislative advice. What made it unique is that 60 minute debate was
broadcast from the government's owned and operated television station
without censorship.

I'm attaching a column I wrote for a company newsletter that I hope
you will consider running in Shoptalk.  In a time when our own version
of democracy seems to be struggling for a sense of perspective...it
was exciting to be part of something new, that television made
possible, in a country struggling to define its own democratic values.


                          OPENING A NEW DOOR

>From the back of the television studio it looked like any other
candidate debate.  Five cameras ringed the nervous candidates. There
was a flurry of activity as the moderators checked final scripts and
the audience settled into their seats.  I felt that familiar
tightening in my chest when the red camera light finally came on.

But this wasn't just another debate. Behind the candidates hung the
new Kyrghyz Republic national flag, a cutout of the Parliament
building and a sign that read, "Election 98".  This was the very first
televised debate between Kyrghyz parliamentary candidates.  Everyone
in that studio was part of a new chapter in this former Soviet
Republic's transition to democracy, and it was going to be broadcast
live.  The door to a new era in political participation was opening.
The next hour would help determine if it would stay open or slam shut.

Efforts to organize the debate had taken several weeks.  Internews
agreed to help produce the debate, and be part of a larger group that
held a training session for the media, political groups, and non-
profits from all over Central Asia.  At first the government's central
election commission supported the idea of a debate.  Then they backed
out.   Then they decided to support it again.  Then they threatened to
cancel it again.  Several laborious discussions later, the commission
did finally support the debate and put their stamp of approval on it
by opening the program with a recorded statement marking the
historical significance of the event.

The key element was to broadcast the debate live.   A "live" broadcast
would eliminate both the temptation and option for candidates to ask
to edit their answers after the debate.  It also meant the government
couldn't shelve the program if it didn't approve of its content.   But
this created what appeared to be another problem.  The only way to
broadcast it live was on the government's own state owned and operated
television station.  Many people including the candidates and seminar
participants, were betting that the government would not allow a fair
and balanced debate to take place on their own station.

State TV officials were as skeptical as everyone else was, and their
attitude was reflected in the questions they asked.  Still they
accepted our answers, such as, "No, you can't censor the debate" and
"Yes, the candidate that doesn't like the President will be part of
the debate".

Eventually, we found ways to eliminate the potential problems.  No
single person had enough authority to scuttle the credibility of the
debate.  We agreed to use two of their journalists as moderators, but
they weren't allowed to ask any of their own questions.  The questions
that were asked came from seminar participants, a panel of independent
journalists, or audience members.  Seminar participants volunteered to
be timekeepers and candidate responses were kept to strict time
limits.  The only question the candidates knew in advance was the
basis for their opening statement, "Why should I vote for you"?

The best part of the debate was that it reflected values that are
important to the Kyrgyz people.  Fellow trainer, Carol Larson, and I
helped them build the framework.  We kept them on track when some of
the ideas weren't practical, but it was their show.  My favorite
question was when the moderator asked if any of the candidates knew
the words to their national anthem.  None did.

Show night is a blur of memories.  All of the candidates showed up and
it was an interesting hour.  The human rights activist criticized the
government and its tolerance of corruption.  The candidate who
supported the government rarely strayed from official policy.  The
businessman candidate walked the line between wooing voters and
pursuing his own interests.   You have to wonder what a Kyrghyz viewer
thought that night tuning in to the government's own television
station.

None of the candidates were particularly at ease on camera but each
could say what they wanted.  In the end all of the candidates were
pleased they had participated and promised to support future debates.
For the first time live television had been used to introduce
candidates to the voters in an unbiased format.

The most revealing remark I heard was the next day when one of our
employees at the Internews office in Bishkek said she hadn't decided
whom to vote for until she watched the debate.  That one kept me
smiling for a long time.

Another door to democracy opened that night in Bishkek.  Instead of
the usual style of politics that is shrouded in secrecy, for one
night, the door was open so everyone could see whom they were really
voting for.

It's a door that will be hard to ever close again.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

:-) :-) Message Ends; Signature File Begins (-: (-:
CAUTIONS, Disclaimers & NOTE TO EDITORS :-
Because of the nature of email please check ALL sources & subjects.
Original material (c) copyright 1998 G.A.Lessard
& may be quoted, resent, reproduced, stored or
forwarded provided the copyright notice is attached.
Forwarded or mined material is the property of the
original copyright owners.
Some material is provided to a limited and
defined audience without permission from the
copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism,
comment, background information and research under
relevant provisions of some copyright laws.
These materials may not be distributed for other
purposes without permission of the copyright owner.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107,
this material is distributed without profit or payment
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
this information for non-profit research and
educational purposes only.

          George Lessard, Media Activist
           Community Communication Arts,
         Training, Management & Mentoring
       http://members.tripod.com/~media002/
       This message may be archived @
  MediaMentor list searchable public archive
  http://www.findmail.com/list/mediamentor/
For a free subscription to MediaMentor send a blank message to
      mediamentor-subscribe@makelist.com
To Unsubscribe: e-mail to mediamentor-unsubscribe@MakeList.com

It doesn't bother me and I suggest that if it bothers you
- that's why God (or Bill Gates)
gave us a delete key. (David NL Day)

                 - 30 -