CAMPUS

The Fourth-rate Estate: Journalism in Post-Communist Countries

“There are a lot of memories from the time when I was growing up [under] communism. The propaganda and the brainwashing … cultivating a fear of the enemy. The repression … the stories of my father’s expulsion from school for organizing an anticommunist armed youth unit … his later being denied access to higher education for being ‘unreliable’. My great uncle, a high-ranking counterintelligence forces officer and his everlasting silence about his work. I’m just glad the Cold War is over.”

This is the manner in which Georgi Georgiev, who lived under communism during his childhood, described his experience to CNN in an interview a few years ago.

The world was much different when Georgiev was a boy. The threat of nuclear holocaust loomed large as the world’s two superpowers were locked in a battle of will that would shape the course of history. And while there were beacons of freedom shining out through the dark, far too much of the globe was shrouded in the pervasive darkness of totalitarianism.

Life in communist countries was disrupted, the normal affairs of its citizens irrevocably altered during this time. One of the many aspects of life that was shattered was the operation of a free and unencumbered press. Although this was just one of many institutions mangled in the wake of communism, it was an essential one. As countries have set out to repair their homelands from the corrosive effects of totalitarianism, well trained journalists have proven to be an essential tool to shape their growth.

Moreover, the lessons learned in the process are of special importance in an age where forms of communism and its repressive echoes still haunt the world in far too many places. Those who have fought to refashion the fourth estate, a vital element of any free society, in their countries must become role models for others around them and around the world who have set out to do the same.

Throughout history, communism has consistently used subterfuge to achieve its means. It has always attempted to present itself in an innocuous fashion. Most often it attempts to enact its destructive ideology as a remedy to the ills of the modern age. Indeed, this was exactly the tactic that communists took in the Czech Republic. Communists used the anger towards the agreements reached after the close of World War II to fashion itself as the party which cared about the plight of the common man. Jiri Grusa, head of the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna, said in an interview to the Czech News Agency in 2005, “We’re a specific country, we actually voted for the [installation of] communism in 1946. In this respect, we resemble the Germans who elected Hitler in the same way in 1933, therefore we have nothing to reproach each other for.”

With the worldwide fall of communism, many countries struggled to reestablish themselves as a sovereign state. In that effort, people attempted to reassemble the institutions that are a hallmark of any democratic state including, of course, a probing, free press corps. But the path to a vibrant fourth estate has been a difficult one for many post-communist governments. Chief among the roadblocks is a cultural impediment honed after years of communist oppression.

One such cultural impediment is the blind acceptance of the government’s rhetoric. Under communism, the only version of events was the “official” version, the version proffered by the government. Therefore, it is understandable that the skepticism of authority that is natural among the American press, fostered after years of open and often combative relations with the US government, would take awhile to cultivate in former Soviet bloc countries.

A related phenomenon is the adjustment to work ethics. Although much progress has been made on this front, many suggested to the students attending the Geo-Strategic Journalism course that this was still an issue for the Czech Republic. During communism, there was a general attitude of anger towards the failed system of government. As such, stealing from the government was looked upon as a normal, even accepted behavior. During one of the sessions for the Geo-Strategic course, a young executive from Skoda Auto explained this sentiment. “Under Communism,” he related with a half-smile, “we had a saying that he who doesn’t steal from the state, steals from his own family.” This account is echoed by Henry Danziger, a Duke alumnus who moved to Prague during the in 1993. Frustrated by the lingering attitude of communist-era labor, Danzinger explains that “theft from the company is a huge problem.” Expounding on the saying offered by the Skoda executive, Danzinger explains that “the company was equated with the state, and it’s been tough to get them [the Czech populace] to think of it as their own. People don’t believe that if you work harder, you’ll benefit more.”

This phenomena was described most eloquently by President Havel in a New Year’s Address to the Czech Republic.

“The worst thing is that we live in a contaminated moral environment. We fell morally ill because we became used to saying something different from what we thought. We learned not to believe in anything, to ignore one another, to care about ourselves. Concepts such as love, friendship, compassion, humility or forgiveness lost their depth and dimension. Only a few of us were able to cry out loudly that the powers that be should not be all-powerful.”

With all of these growing pains from the long road from communism to democracy, it is no wonder that Western style journalism has been slow to develop.

But despite the changes that have taken places in countries like the Czech Republic, many are concerned about the pace of progress being made, as well as the creeping threat of totalitarian resurgence in a number of countries. And, unfortunately, such worry is not unwarranted.

James Greenfield, former foreign editor for The New York Times, founded the Independent Journalism Foundation in 1991. The organization was created, according to the group’s website, to “help fellow journalists in post-Communist countries upgrade their reporting skills, technology and business practices.” The coalition has been successful in training aspiring journalists, as well as hosting lectures and workshops around the world. But even this expert group of seasoned journalists was uncertain of the prospects of returning democratic-inspired journalism. According to an article in The New York Sun, “one of their [contributors] asked Mr. Greenfield, ‘How long is the long haul?’ Mr. Greenfield thought at the time that his foundation perhaps needed to stay in business for four or five years. ‘It’s now 16 years later, and we’re still in it for the long haul,’ he said.”

As if the sluggish pace of journalistic renewal wasn’t bad enough, there are also some signs that there is a resurgence of state control of the media in many countries.

One prominent example, of course, is Russia. Although the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991, many critics say the oppression that typified that power has not been significantly lessened by the emergence of the Russian state, especially as it applies to the operation of a free press. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, roughly 44 reporters have been murdered since the fall of the Soviet Union and around 14 have been killed since Vladmir Putin’s ascendancy to power in 2000. One of the most notable examples is that of Anna Politkovskaya, who had extensive coverage on war crimes in Chechnya. According to an article from Reuters shortly after her murder, “Politkovskaya, 48, was shot in her apartment building as she stepped out on her way to fetch shopping bags from her car. The killer first fired in her chest, then finished her off with a shot to the head.”

In June of this year, media representatives from around the world traveled to Moscow to show their solidarity with members of the Russian press who have been oppressed, threatened, and all too often murdered for their independence and criticism of the Russian government. As this group points out, the loss of editorial independence was slow but steady. According to a New York Time editorial in May of this year, television stations were among the first to lose their editorial control. Print and radio news, explains the author, followed shortly thereafter. As the piece concludes, “polls show President Putin’s popularity has soared. No wonder. Fewer and fewer Russians can see or hear from anyone who opposes him, his policies or his government.” Nina Ognianova, of the Committee to Protect Journalists, concurred, stating, “The process of squeezing critical journalism out of the public space is now near complete.”

Another example is Cuba. Although repression of media is nothing new in Cuba – it’s been a continuous factor for the almost 50 years – it is noteworthy for the attention it has received. Unfortunately, the coverage is not to bring to light the abuses of this tyrannical dictatorship, but rather all too often it is to fawn over Castro’s “accomplishments”. In fact, the Latin American Federation of Journalists (an organization affiliated with the United Nations) recently awarded the Cuban dictator a medal for “his dedication to truth, his understanding of the importance of journalism’s role in society, and his fight against falsehood, disinformation, and media manipulation.” As Bree Nordenson in the Columbia Journalism Review correctly pointed out, Castro is deserving of none of those laudable titles. Indeed, Cuba under Castro is described by Reporters Without Borders as one of the “worst predators of press freedom.”

One needn’t look far for proof that Castro’s regime is unfriendly to a free press. The Cuban Constitution states, “Citizens recognize freedom of speech and press conform to the needs of the state.” But as the truism goes, actions speak louder than words. In 2003, Cuba jailed 28 journalists, who were all found guilty of “working with a foreign power to undermine the government” which carries sentences up to roughly 30 years in jail. In 2005, the number of jailed reporters was up to 32. But yet, Western media has continued to praise the Cuban system. Tom Korski, writing for the Canadian Hill Times, compiled some of his favorite descriptions of Castro. During his tenure, the island’s despot has been described in all the following ways: “remarkable”, “heroic”, “superman”, “Herculean,” “visionary”, and even “brilliant.”

It is this alleged lack of distance and perspective among Western journalist that many find disconcerting. Say such critics, such exuberant praise of areas where free press has been choked off is much worse than simply ignoring the situation, because at least in the latter, Western journalists don’t serve to further the propaganda of dictators. “Why is Cuba our pet police state?” writes Korski, “Perhaps it reflects a northern fascination with Latin culture and media’s pulse of anti-Americanism.” At one point in his article, Korski quoted an Amherst Daily News article which stated that Cuba “is not as badly off as some other nations.” As Korski quipped, “Many Cubans don’t think so; 2,834 fled the island on rafts last year.”

It is absolutely imperative for the future of a strong and, most importantly, an independent news media, that the lessons of the past not be forgotten. Unfortunately, there is disconcerting evidence that this is not the case, even in countries where the stale odor of communist oppression should be the most pungent.

In 2005, a group of Czech artists banded together to create the “T-Shirts Against Communism” campaign to highlight the repressive dangers of communism and the frighteningly naïve and superficial knowledge of the philosophy among many youth. “There are situations where we should recollect why we [Czechs] were hit by communism. Many people have forgotten it already. They cherish a sentimental, nostalgic feeling of having been young at the time; therefore it must have been better [than the present regime]. It is necessary to stem this nostalgia,” said Jiri Grusa, who was presented with one of the T-shirts.”

But this is not a problem local just to the Czech Republic. Even Russia, which was at the epicenter of the Soviet Union is also suffering from collective amnesia about the dangers of its past. According to a November 2005 edition of the Ottawa Citizen, “What Mr. Putin and Russians have done is create a useful past by selectively forgetting, says sociologist Boris Dubin. “We now live in peace with our past, but excluding the Communist ideology and all the negative things that happened then. We just know that it is our past now.”

For many, this is a troublesome development. As the article continues, the author brings Germany into the mix. “There is no amnesia in Germany, we know. Awareness of Germany’s Nazi past is near absolute and Germans overwhelmingly accept that horrible crimes were committed. There are no Hitler T-shirts for sale under the Brandenburg Gate.”

This is a perfect example of something that a dogged media would be responsible for fighting. However, many media critics cite poor training for many of these nations’s youngest crop of journalists. Livia Thova wrote a piece for the Slovak Spectator entitled, “What Happened to All the Good Journalists?” in which she discussed this very dilemma. “Newspapers, news agencies and TV stations are full of people who claim to be journalists,” she writes, “but the truth is that only a few of them are really good.”

According to Matus Korstolny, an editor of a Slovak paper who was featured in the article, the problem is essentially that “we lack a really good journalism school in this country.” There is a lack of finances and adept professors to teach the material which results in an increased return of stagnated classes.

Although the media coverage in much of the former Soviet Union-dominated countries has the potential to continually improve, a concerted effort must be made. Current journalists must be the mentors that the younger generations so desperately need. After all, the older journalists should be much more cognizant of the signs that repression is growing, as it was not too long ago that they felt the stings of government censorship. And it is these tools, along with an increased tutelage in the practices of Western media, as well as a constant vigilance with which real change can be accomplished and cemented. With this done, the final words of President Havel’s New Year address can ring out without any contradiction: “People…your government has returned to you!”

Brandon Stewart was a participant in the Collegiate Network’s 2007 Geostrategic Journalism Course which takes place in Washington D.C. and Prague, Czech Republic. Brandon graduated from Wabash College and is currently a program associate at FIRE.