REPRESSION OF JOURNALISM IN RUSSIA IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE

COMMENTARY

By Gordon Hahn

American mainstream media produces an inordinately large number of articles highlighting the murders of journalists in Russia.  These articles are in part motivated by, and often include data from the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) which does important work on documenting murders, beatings, and imprisonments of journalists across the world.  However, the use of CPJ’s raw data can sometimes be misleading.  For example, their list of the 20 ‘deadliest countries’ for journalists does not take into account that many of the countries on the list have few independent journalists to be killed and many off the list who have none – and this is why they do not appear on the list. 

Journalistic and analytical articles usually cite the raw figure for the number of killings per country for one year or several, but these data are never put in context.  For example, the size of the population and the number of journalists influences the likelihood of such violence.  The larger the population and the number of journalists in a given country, should increase the likelihood and occurrence of such events.  The more molecules or atoms in a given space, the more often they will collide if in motion.  Similarly the greater the population the more journalists there are likely to be, the more corrupt bureaucrats and businesses to be investigated, more crimes to be exposed and so on.  All this increases the likelihood that someone under investigation by a journalist will use force or use their connections with the state apparatus to shut down investigating journalist’s activities.  Below, Russia Media Watch takes a first step towards incorporating other factors into the calculus by bringing in population size. 

A better methodology would also factor in the number of journalists in each country; unfortunately, reliable data for all countries is unavailable.  It would also be good to factor in the population in the years each journalist was killed and produce an average population over the period 1992 through July 2009, the date for which the population figures are relevant.  Regardless of the limits of bringing in the single new factor of country population in order to put the CPJ’s raw data in better context of population, it is more useful to consider this factor than not to.  The results of this factor’s inclusion are included in the tables below.

Russia in Global Comparative Perspective

Simply using the number of killings leaves Russia, with 52 killings since 1992, appearing as one of the world’s worst violators of journalists’ rights and free speech with the fourth highest volume of murdered journalists. When one introduces the country population factor into the CPJ’s list of the “20 Deadliest Countries” for journalists, a rather different picture of Russia appears.  Russia moves from the position of fourth highest volume of murdered journalists to fourteenth in the top twenty on the CPJ list as of December 2009 (see Table 1).  

TABLE 1. CPJ Ranking and Number of Journalists Killed since 1992 for Countries Listed in CPJ’s “20 Deadliest Countries” List Compared with Journalists’ Murdered Per Capita for the Population of the Countries Listed on CPJ’s “20 Deadliest Countries” List with an Adjusted Rank.

A comparison of the CPJ ranking and the per capita rank shows just how much a difference this contextual factor makes.  The rating of democratic but very populous country like India highlights the skewed effect of ignoring the population variable.  Its ranking under the per capita method becomes more commensurate with its relative political comity and respectable record of protecting civil rights.  It also should be noted that some countries that were not included in the top twenty that used CPJ’s simple counting method, would likely surpass India and even Russia among others on the list, if the per capita method were used; Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Latvia among them (see below).  Furthermore, there are numerous other intervening variables.  For example, the entire CPJ ‘20 Deadliest Countries’ list is composed of countries where there has been some significant level of press freedom along with war, most often jihadist insurgencies, or major criminal drug cartel violence.

Comparison with other Post-Soviet States

Simply using the number of killings leaves Russia, with the highest number of journalists killed among the post-Soviet states since 1992, tainting Moscow as the worst violator of journalists’ rights and free speech in the region.  However, when the per capita method is used, Russia emerges as an average post-Soviet country (see Table 2).  The worst violators become Tajikistan,Georgia, Azerbaijan. These three countries as well as democratic and NATO member Latvia turn out to have more journalists murdered since 1992 per capita than Russia.

TABLE 2. Number of Journalists Killed Since 1992 in former USSR by Country Listed in Order of Highest Number of Killings Per Capita Population (CPJ Number of Killings since 1992 in brackets if any, CPJ Ranking in List of “20 Deadliest Countries” if any in parentheses)

The Imprisonment of Journalists in Russia in Comparative Perspective 

The murder of journalists is actually more prevalent in less authoritarian and weak democratic regimes.  More authoritarian and totalitarian regimes arrest them before they can get very far in their investigations.  Such regimes have tight control over their allies in government and business, usually state-owned or state-controlled and the ruling party’s, clique’s, or junta’s penetration of society is so deep that dissident journalists are uncovered and arrested before they can challnge a protected state elite or economic interest.  This becomes clear when one looks at the CPJ’s list of countries in which journalists are imporisoned and the number imprisoned in each (see the CPJ’s table 3 below).  The top three oppressors are neo-tatalitarian China, Iran, and  Cuba. 

TABLE 3. CPSJ's List of Imprisoned Journalists for 2009

Russia’s lone imprisoned journalist wound find himself in prison in most countries around the world.  Even in some democratic countries he would be judged as having violated the law by calling for the overthrow of the constitutional order and cooperating with terrorists.  Boris Stomakhin, imprisoned in march 2006, wrote numerous articles supporting the Chechen separatists and Caucasus jihadists on their site www.kavkazcenter.com.  These jihadists, now calling themselves the Caucasus Emirate, have killed and wounded some six thousand people since the end of the second Chechen conventional war in 2002.  

Russian authorities convicted him for the following words: “Let tens of new Chechen snipers take their positions in the mountain ridges and the city ruins and let hundreds, thousands of aggressors fall under righteous bullets! No mercy! Death to the Russian occupiers! ... The Chechens have the full moral right to bomb everything they want in Russia.” (Database on Imprisoned Journalists, CPJ, www.cpj.org/imprisoned/2009.php, accessed December 14, 2009.) 

To conclude, the raw numbers, shorn of context and analysis of intervening variables provide an exceedingly misleading snapshot of the comparative strength or weakness of any particular state’s repression of terrorists.  The raw numbers are often used by the U.S. mainstream media to convey to American readers that Russia is among a handful of grevious violators of journalists’ rights and freedom of speech.  Although that record is not particularly good, it is not nearly as bad as the U.S. mainstream media or the raw numbers would lead one to believe. 

Comments

[Sublime Oblivion]

An excellent "myth-busting" article, Gordon.

I would also like to point out that serious questions have been pointed out in the CPJ's methodology for counting journalist deaths by Fedia Kriukov in An Audit of the Committee to Protect Journalists Claims (http://fkriuk.blogspot.com/2008/02/audit-of-committee-to-protect.html).

In summary, CPJ claims that 17 journalists were killed in Russia in since 2000 due to their professional activities. Examination of each case found that out of 17 claims, only 5 were correct (Domnikov, Khasanov, Klebnikov, Makeev, Politkovskaya), 8 were complete falsifications (Skryl, Ivanov, Scott, Shchekochikhin, Sidorov, Kochetkov, Maksimov, Safronov), and 4 were partial falsifications (Yatsina, Yefremov, Markevich, Varisov). If we assign the truthfulness value of 50% to partially falsified claims, the overall truthfulness rate of CPJ, given this sample, is 41%. Clearly, CPJ's definition of "strict journalistic standards" as being only 40% truthful is at variance with what any reasonable person would expect. But it is very much in line with what one would expect from a propaganda outlet.

[Sublime Oblivion]

Sorry, the link got messed up on the first post - http://fkriuk.blogspot.com/2008/02/audit-of-committee-to-protect.html

[John Crowfoot, IFJ analyst]

This is an interesting comment and represents more thought on the subject than is often the case. But - and it's a big but - it remains disappointingly formalistic in certain respects.

It remains at the abstract level of statistics and this is not enlightening when it also fails entirely to offer the legal and judicial context! You cannot say much of significance without considering the individual cases. And how do you rate levels of impunity (or partial justice) without consideration of what investigations there have been and whether any of the cases have come to court?

The comments "discussion" slips back into the usual, old poorly supported assertions - that these are "pro" rather than "anti" Russia makes not a whit of difference. The deaths of Ivanov (presumably Valery - the contributor doesn't seem to know that two murdered journalists had this most common of Russian surnames), Yury Shchekochikhin, Alexei Sidorov, Ivan Safronov and, worst of all, that of Maxim Maximov were NOT "complete" falsifications, contrary to your contributor's second-hand remarks. There are areas of uncertainty in many of these cases but what source (Internal Affairs, prosecutor's office, Investigations Committee, FSB?)- given the inadequacies of investigation and lack of a trial in all but one of those cases - can give your contributor (and his Russian source) the confidence to make such a sweeping and unsupported assertion? But then the give-away comes in the rather shy Mr Oblivion's very last two words - "propaganda outlet". Tua res agitur!

Anyone genuinely interested in the subject should look at two serious reports issued this year on journalists in Russia: "Partial Justice", jointly produced by the IFJ and Russian Union of Journalists, and "Anatomy of Injustice", produced by the CPJ. They offer detail on the cases, as opposed to the unsatisfactory diet of statistics from Dr Hahn, and they permit interested Westerners without knowledge of Russian rather more opportunity to gauge for themselves where the main areas of uncertainty lie.

[Sublime Oblivion]

As a matter of fact I was quoting Fedia Kriukov's conclusion. If you wish to dispute his findings, go read his article and take it up with him.

[PD]

Among Soros funded analysts, there's a certain manner of righteously suggesting what is and isn't kosher.

On another front, there's something positive to be said in opposition against a cliqueish rooting, that leaves out other sources, which (at times) constitute a better option.

[JOHN CROWFOOT, UK]

I shall happily read Mr Kriukov's article and respond directly to him, if need be. It will be interesting to see what sources he quotes. Thank you for making his comments accessible, Mr (or Mrs/ Ms) Oblivion.

More important than silly innuendos by Mr or Ms PD about funding is the fact that I worked with Anna Politkovskaya, as compiler, editor and translator of "Dirty War" (2001), her first book in English. After her murder - which I doubt Oblivion, PD or Dr Hahn or any of your other contributors would dispute was linked to her investigations and publications - I began to compile a database from Russian sources of journalists killed in Russia since 1993.

The results can be found at http://journalists-in-Russia.org. This work, ongoing, is based on serious reports over the last 16 years by Russia's own media monitors. It was subsequently sponsored by the IFJ.

John Crowfoot, IFJ Russia analyst

[Wes]

....seriously.

You put all this effort into defending russia, in that 'they repress less than TAJKISTAN'.

Doesn't this demonstrate YOU have a bias?