Bulgaria’s government mirrored in the media

I wrote this piece for "Index on Censorship"

An election is always a good litmus test for a country’s media freedom — particularly in Bulgaria. It consistently ranks last amongst European Union members for media freedom, and the US Department of State called its “gravely damaged media pluralism” one of its most pressing human rights problems, Georgi Kantchev reports.

In the run-up to the 12 May parliamentary election, former ruling party GERB received the most mentions in Bulgaria’s media, ahead of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), and the Turkish minority movement DPS — mirroring the election results.

Media coverage, however, does not accurately capture the gap between parties. GERB was mentioned 3,642 times in election coverage — 80 per cent more than BSP. In the polls, the difference between the two parties was less than four per cent.

Bulgaria’s media grants over-exposure to those in power, and the industry seems to quickly adapt to a new political situation. While the New Bulgarian Media Group (NBMG) editorial stance was against the GERB in the 2009 elections, it changed its tune almost overnight after the party’s victory.

Given the close ties between the media and political parties in the country, distorted election coverage is not very surprising. For instance, a high-ranking DPS member owns the NBMG, which owns the Telegraph, the highest circulated newspaper in the country.

The tangles between politics and the Bulgarian media has drawn the attention of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). In a report released ahead of the election, the body expressed concerns over the “growing concentration of media ownership in the hands of a restricted circle of business people.” According to the OSCE, this “raised concerns about the independence of media from undue economic and political pressure.”

“Most media find themselves in a passive position and practically shun their most important function — to build an informed public opinion, and through that to support the political choice of the people”, says Orlin Spassov, professor of journalism at the University of Sofia. “The result of this campaign was a deficit of informed choice.”

Bulgaria has measures put in place to distinguish editorial content from political advertisements for broadcast media, but not for the press. The OSCE pointed out that “paid media coverage is often not labelled as such, thus potentially misleading the audience about the nature of the reporting.”

Bulgaria’s murky relationship with the press also creates trouble for journalists, who sometimes feel pressure for their reporting. In April Boris Mitov, a journalist for news site Mediapool.bg was summoned for questioning by prosecutors after writing an article accusing a Sofia deputy city prosecutor of illegal wiretapping. The prosecutors placed pressure on Mitov to reveal his sources, and after he refused to do so, they reportedly told him that he could face up to five years in prison for disclosing state secrets.

More troubling is the culture of self-censorship arising from pressure placed on journalists from business groups. Most common is economic pressure — which trickles down from media outlet owners to editors and reporters. The NBMG group, for instance, is largely financed by the Corporate Commercial Bank (CCB). The CCB has also held a large percentage of state-owned enterprises in the transport, energy, and defence sector — which means that NBMG is practically financed with public funds. This helps explain why the group is often cosying up to those in power.

While infrequent, sometimes journalists face direct threats from businesses. After writing a series of articles critical of a local business group last year, investigative journalist Spas Spassov received Sun Tzu’s book The Art of War in the post. Included was a note quoting a line from the book: “You should avoid those you can’t either defeat or befriend.”

The most recent election results, however, have left an unclear picture of who is in power: since no party has gain

ed a majority in Parliament. Coalition building was undermined by a deeply polarising election — which means that the media will have a difficult time knowing who to pledge allegiance to.

An unhappy election

I wrote this article for the print edition of The Economist

“IN THE middle of the crisis, the head of state was left alone,” complains Rosen Plevneliev, Bulgaria’s president. He is still upset by the decision of Boyko Borisov to resign as prime minister in the midst of the country’s worst anti-government protests in 16 years. Mr Borisov, a burly ex-bodyguard, did not want to be part of an increasingly unpopular government which protesters blamed for rampant corruption and high energy bills. He may have hoped his resignation would improve his chances of re-election.

If so, his hopes seem to have been dashed. In the general election on May 12th his centre-right GERB party won 31% of the vote against 27% for the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP). The Turkish minority party, DPS, came third with about 11%. The fourth party to win seats was Ataka, an ultra-nationalist group, which took 7%. “For the first time in Bulgaria’s new history a party has won two consecutive elections,” declared Georgi Markov, a former judge at the Constitutional Court. Yet, also for the first time, a party won with fewer votes than before. The outcome suggests a hung parliament, observers say. With 97 deputies GERB is well short of a majority in the 240-seat chamber. The party lost about a third of its support compared with the 2009 election.

Mr Plevneliev wants a new government to be formed as soon as possible so that parliament can start work on a new special law for the energy regulator and several other reforms. Yet party leaders are likely to indulge in weeks of horse trading. “It is clear that GERB will not be able to form a government,” said Sergei Stanishev, the Socialists’ leader. The political leaders of DPS and Ataka have promised not to back GERB. Mr Stanishev has proposed a technocratic government led by the Socialists in alliance with these two smaller parties. In this he seems to be disregarding Ataka’s anti-Turkish (and anti-Roma) stance and its call for a ban on the Turkish minority party.

This was a listless election at an unhappy time. Turnout was at a record low of just above 50%. The run-up to the election was overshadowed by wiretapping scandals and accusations of vote-rigging. A day before the vote prosecutors found 350,000 unaccounted-for ballots at a printing plant whose owner is said to be close to Mr Borisov’s party. Allegations of illegal wiretapping led prosecutors to accuse GERB’s campaign manager and Tsvetan Tsvetanov, a former interior minister, of “deliberately allowing his subordinates, the directors of the wiretapping department, to commit crimes”. Mr Tsvetanov, who cannot be charged because of his parliamentary immunity, has denied wrongdoing.

“We were shocked by the alienation between citizens and institutions,” said Andreas Gross, head of a Council of Europe observer delegation, after the vote. Worn out by rising unemployment and growing poverty, Bulgarians have lost confidence in the electoral process and in state institutions. Unemployment is 13-14%, up from 6% in 2007. The average salary is €400 ($515); over a fifth of the 7.4m population lives below the poverty line.

Is a new election the answer? “Quick elections after elections won’t change anything,” says Mr Plevneliev. Somehow the four parties that got over the 4% threshold to enter parliament must cobble together a government. But it is unlikely to provide the stability Bulgaria badly needs.

An inconclusive election at an unhappy time

I wrote this article for The Economist

THREE months after the resignation of the government of Boyko Borisov (pictured above) on the back of the biggest demonstrations in 16 years, Bulgarians went to the polls on May 12th. The result of the election will do little to give Bulgaria the clear leadership and stability the poorest member state of the European Union so badly needs.

After a campaign marred by wiretapping scandals and accusations of vote-rigging, Mr Borisov’s centre-right GERB party won 31% of the vote against the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), which got 27% of the vote, according to preliminary official results. The Turkish minority party, DPS, came third with about 11%. The fourth party to enter parliament was Ataka, an ultra-nationalist group, which received about 7% of the votes.

“For the first time in Bulgaria’s new history a party has won two consecutive elections,” said Georgi Markov, a former judge at the Constitutional Court. “However, also for the first time, a party has won with such a few number of votes, just about a million.” The outcome of the vote suggests a hung parliament, observers say. With 98 deputies GERB is well short of a majority in the 240-seat parliament. The party lost about a third of its votes compared with the elections in 2009.

GERB’s slim lead means that weeks of horse trading and backroom deals are likely to ensue. This is about the last time Bulgaria needs at a time when people are angry and disillusioned with the political elite. A coalition including GERB seems unlikely because all party leaders refused to negotiate with Mr Borisov. A minority government led by GERB is also improbable. In fact, there are a few options for a stable government according to Ognyan Minchev, a political analyst. “The results will probably be a ‘hidden’ coalition, whether it’s called a programme or expert government.”

The leader of the Socialists, Sergey Stanishev, proposed such a programme cabinet led by the BSP and supported by DPS and Ataka. How such a configuration would work is unclear: the nationalist Ataka has long antagonised the Turkish minority party and wanted it banned.

This was a listless election at an unhappy time. Voter turnout was at a record low with just above 50%. The run-up to the election was overshadowed by scandals. A day before the elections prosecutors found 350,000 unaccounted-for ballots at a printing house whose owner is reportedly close to Mr Borisov’s party. That led the opposition to accuse GERB of trying to rig the vote. “This was a preparation for the total falsification of the elections,” said Mr Stanishev. Allegations of illegal wiretapping led prosecutors to accuse GERB's campaign manager and Tsvetan Tsvetanov, a former interior minister, of "deliberately allowing his subordinates, the directors of the wiretapping department, to commit crimes". Mr Tsvetanov, who cannot be charged because he has immunity as a parliamentary candidate, has denied any wrongdoing.

A recent report by the German Friedrich Ebert Foundation said that “what remains after the protests and the elections is the large discrepancy between those in power in politics and business and the ‘simple’ citizens. It gives the impression that the Bulgarian society is split not along the ‘left’ and ‘right’ lines but by ‘above’ and ‘below’. To overcome this division is one of the biggest future challenges for the Bulgarian policy. Otherwise there is the danger that the gap between policy and those who do not feel represented by it will grow further.” The new government (if it can be cobbled together) has a big job at hand.

Eastern Europe's Watergate

I wrote this article for The Economist

A grey Chrysler Voyager van equipped with antennas called “The Catcher”. A former official of the interior ministry who interrupts his 50^th birthday party to destroy data on the ministry’s computers' hard drives with a screw driver. A former minister of agriculture wired with recording equipment, presumably attached to his chest with scotch tape, who visits the home of the former prime minister. These are all scenes from the “Bulgarian Watergate”, a wiretapping scandal that could have profound implications for the elections on May 12th.

The story reached its climax on April 26th when the chief prosecutor in Sofia, Nikolay Kokinov, resigned following leaked wiretaps of a conversation between him, the former agriculture minister, Miroslav Naydenov, and Boyko Borisov, the former prime minister. In what observers call a “vulgar and cynical” conversation, the three men discuss a corruption case against Mr Naydenov, absorption of European Union funds, relations with the media and the choice of Bulgaria’s chief prosecutor earlier this year. Mr Kokinov told Mr Borisov: “You chose him, don’t smile now”.

The leaked chat, which raises serious questions about the independence of the judicial system, follows an interview with Mr Naydenov on April 25th where the ex-minister accused the former interior minister, Tzvetan Tzvetanov, who is Mr Borisov’s right-hand man, of illegally wiretapping everyone in the previous cabinet. Earlier this month, prosecutors pressed charges against four former police officials accusing them of wiretapping political figures, businessmen and journalists. According to Mr Naydenov, even Rosen Plevneliev, the president, was a target: Mr Naydenov cited a meeting with the president when the two had to leave their mobile phones in another room and turn on the television to avoid being wiretapped.
Mr Tzvetanov denied ordering any surveillance and instead blamed the Socialist opposition of stirring up the scandal. Mr Borisov went even further: the former prime minister spoke of a “private interior ministry” which is involved in illegal activities and manipulations and is organised by people from the surroundings of Sergey Stanishev, the leader of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP).

The current controversy follows a long tradition of wiretapping senior politicians in Bulgaria including Mr Borisov himself in 2011. The American State Department cites the abuse of wiretapping as one of Bulgaria’s most pressing human rights problems.

The current scandal might have profound implications on the upcoming snap elections following the resignation of Mr Borisov’s government in early February. “The undecided voters now have a strong motive not to vote or to vote for one of the smaller parties,” says Rumyana Kolarova, a political scientist at Sofia University. “While Borisov’s party might lose some votes, it is clear that the opposition, especially the Socialists, will not profit from this scandal.”

Mr Borisov’s centre-right GERB party is currently leading the polls with up to 25% ahead of BSP with up to 19%. According to analysts, the lack of a clear winner and the polarised campaign will make it difficult to build a coalition after the elections and increase the chances of a new vote. The strongest parties after GERB and BSP are the Turkish minority party and the ultranationalist Attack, which both come in at around 5%. The centrist party of Meglena Kuneva, a former EU commissioner, is currently hovering around the threshold for entering parliament (4%) but it could take away some votes from GERB’s periphery in the wake of the scandal, Ms Kolarova says.

The outcome of the election will depend on the undecided voters, which constiture about a fifth of the electorate, according to a recent opinion poll. “The voters of GERB and BSP are like opposing football fans,” says Tihomir Bezlov from the Centre for the Study of Democracy in Sofia. “They cannot vote for the other team and cannot miss the game— that would be treason. Those who will not go to the stadium are the undecided voters.”

Gravely damaged media pluralism

I wrote this article for The Economist

ONE of the most discussed issues in Bulgarian media is the topic of the deteriorating media freedom in the country. Consistently ranking last among European Union members the country keeps regressing. Bulgaria now ranks 87^th in Reporters Without Borders’ latest annual Press Freedom Index, down from 35^th in 2006.

“There is a growing concern that most of the media have retreated from their main function, to inform the public on relevant topics,” says Nelly Ognyanova, a Bulgarian media law expert. “The media is often serving political parties and various economic groups.”

Several calls from abroad underline Ms Ognyanova’s assessment: the American Department of State counts the “gravely damaged media pluralism” in the country as one of its most pressing human rights problems; the European commissioner for digital agenda, Neelie Kroes, wrote a letter to the then prime minister Boyko Borisov urging him to protect independent media. Matthias Höpfner, the German Ambassador to Bulgaria, is often quoted commenting on the “dangerous challenges” facing the media freedom in the country.

One of these challenges is the fact that “reporters continue to face pressure and intimidation aimed at protecting economic, political, and criminal interests", Freedom House wrote in its latest “Freedom of the Press” report. The pressure comes from all sides, even from the state: in early April a journalist, Boris Mitov, was questioned by prosecutors in connection with an article of his that alleged a connection between the Sofia deputy city prosecutor, Roman Vassilev, and illicit wiretapping. Mr Mitov was pressured to reveal his sources. When he declined he was reportedly told that he could be jailed for up to five years for disclosing state secrets.

Last summer, Spas Spassov, an investigative journalist from Varna, received a more subtle reminder of the boundaries journalists should not cross: after a series of critical articles on a local business group, he got Sun Tzu’s"The Art of War" in his mail. Included was a note quoting a passage from the book: “You should avoid those you can’t either defeat or befriend.”

Another distinctive feature of Bulgarian media is the lack of transparency of who owns it  “Media ownership in Bulgaria is like a Matryoshka doll: there is always one figure behind the other,” says Orlin Spassov at Sofia University. For instance, New Bulgarian Media Group, a company with close ties to the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, a political party, owns numerous high-circulation newspapers and a popular TV channel. Before the parliamentary elections in 2009, the newspapers owned by the group were highly critical of the Movement’s political rival, the GERB party and its leader, Boyko Borisov. After GERB won the elections, the group’s papers changed their tone overnight and became strong supporters of Mr Borisov.

One Matryoshka doll behind, the New Bulgarian Media Group is largely financed by the Corporate Commercial Bank (CCB). As it happens, in recent years the rather small private bank held a large portion of the funds of the state-owned enterprises in the energy, transport and defence sectors. This means, observers say, that the CCB is, in effect, financing the group’s media outlets, including the country’s highest-circulation newspaper, Telegraph, with public funds.

This is not an isolated case. Financial troubles in the media industry have left many outlets depending on public funds. (The advertising market has contracted by more than a third since 2008.) While there are no official subsidies for the press, according to Freedom House, the advertising expenditures of state agencies represent the second-largest source of advertising revenue for the print media. Since 2009, the state, through its ministries and government agencies, has directed over 28m leva ($19.5m) to private media by placing advertisements and launching information campaigns. Most of these funds come from the EU’s programmes. A telling anecdote is the case of a 25-year-old former employee of the Ministry of Agriculture and Food who received €50.000 for the task of creating Facebook and Twitter profiles for promoting the EU's Rural Development Programme.

“It is widely believed that by using public resources the authorities are securing media comfort,” says Nelly Ognyanova. “The EU membership did not lead to more media freedom. On the contrary, EU funds are increasing the rift between media close to the government and the rest.”

This rift is becoming especially apparent during election campaigns. Bulgaria is facing a snap poll on May 12^th after the government resigned amid mass protest earlier this year. The (legal) practise of political parties paying for coverage becomes problematic since the paid-for political reports are rarely identified as such.  The Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) noted on the previous election campaign in 2011 that “virtually all campaign coverage in the media had to be paid which resulted in a near-absence of editorial coverage of the campaign”. Not much seems to have changed this time around as the Council for Electronic Media, the independent media regulator in the country, has acknowledged.

Election coverage, opaque ownership structures and harassment of journalists are the main reasons for the deterioration of media freedom in Bulgaria. Some disagree. According to Tzvetan Vassilev, a banker, there is too much media freedom in Bulgaria. Mr Vassilev is the majority shareholder in the CCB.

A microcosm of Bulgarians' plight

For this article for The Economist, I went to the North East of Bulgaria, to Kaolinovo, the town with the highest unemployment rate in the country - 64%.

LOOKING at Kaolinovo’s newly built playground with its red slides and green swings, one might wonder for a moment which western European town this is. But then one turns one’s head and sees a tumbledown, windowless building. And only a quick look at the run-down, oversized Soviet-style administrative buildings around the main square makes one realise that Kaolinovo must be somewhere in eastern Europe.

Kaolinovo is the town with the highest unemployment rate in Bulgaria. Over 64% of the workforce in this municipality in north-eastern Bulgaria are without a job, five times the national average. Bulgaria ranks among the worst performing European Union (EU) countries for employment trends since the beginning of the global economic crisis, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit. Almost 430,000 jobs have disappeared since 2008. More than half of unemployed have fallen below the poverty line. As a consequence of poverty, unemployment and high utility bills, Bulgaria saw the largest nationwide protests in 16 years during the last two months.  The demonstrations put an end to Boyko Borisov’s centre-right government. Six people set themself on fire during the demonstrations. Four of them have died.
Back in Kaolinovo, Dimitrina, a middle-aged shopkeeper, admits she doesn’t understand politics. She points to the shelves in her store: “I have 40 breads and I cannot sell them since yesterday. People are penniless.” A few who work on “the Project” are employed, she says meaning the couple of dozens construction workers renovating the main square and the children’s playground , a project financed by the EU. The rest of the municipality’s 12,000 people, predominantly of Turkish ethnic origin, are either jobless or work on the tobacco fields. Few lucky ones, says Dimitrina, have a job at a nearby mining facility for kaolin,  a white rock used in the paper and porcelain industry that gives the town its name. “Before the factory employed 500 people, now it’s no more than 20-30,” she says.
A few hundred metres away from her store, Sevdalin has a similar story to tell. The old man runs a “Store for 1 Lev”, a cheap shop that sells everything from cosmetics to church candles with prices that rarely exceed one Lev (half a euro). Despite the prices, however, the store is empty. “Whatever it costs, when you don’t have any money, you simply can’t buy anything,” says Sevdalin with a sad smile on his wrinkled face.

Six years after joining the EU, Bulgaria remains its poorest member. People in the country earn an average monthly wage of €400 ($520) with pensions of less than half that.  According to a new report by the European Commission, nearly half of the population (which stands at 7.3m) is at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Unemployment rose to above 12% in February, the highest since 2005.
“The half a million job losses in the last four years are the main reason for the stagnating household incomes and the increasing burden on the social budget,” says Georgi Angelov, an economist at the Open Society Institute in Sofia. Excluding EU funds, nearly half of the state budget is allocated for social spending.  The employment crisis hit those without educational qualifications the worst: just 15.5% of Bulgarians with a basic education are employed.
This helps explain the high jobless rate in Kaolinovo where two thirds of the people have never made it to middle school. “I may not have been to university, but I can count the money I made so far today,” says Sevdalin. “It’s zero.”
Sevdalin and Dimitrina’s stores may be empty but there is one place in Kaolinovo that is full people, mostly young men: the betting shop. Drinking beer and watching football games on a Monday afternoon, most men are engaged in lively discussions about the next championship game. “They come here every day,” says Ognyan, one of the older visitors, who is sipping coffee at the bar. “They have no work so all they do is bet.” Are they trying to find work? “No, football offers much better odds.”

Poverty protests

This is my contribution for the print edition of The Economist on the government crisis in Bulgaria, available here

Poverty protests

Desperate demonstrations against an ephemeral government

SIX people have set themselves on fire in Bulgaria in less than a month. Three have died. The death by self-immolation of Plamen Goranov, a 36-year-old amateur photographer and rock climber, especially shocked the public. Mr Goranov has become Bulgaria’s Jan Palach (the student who set himself on fire in 1969 to protest against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia), a symbol of the protests that have rocked the country in recent weeks. “You fired up our courage and love for freedom”, said one banner at the national day of mourning following his death.

Self-immolation is not a new phenomenon in Bulgaria. According to Médecins Sans Frontières, a medical charity, Bulgaria, a country of 7.3m people, had an average of 7.4 self-immolations a year between 1983 and 2002, most of them politically motivated. Yet this wave of protests—and individuals’ willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice for political goals—is worse than any previous one since the collapse of communism. Bulgarians have been worn down by rampant corruption, mismanagement in both the public and the private sector, useless bureaucracy, high unemployment and poverty. “The deep-seated cause for the political crisis is poverty,” says Kristofor Pavlov, chief economist at UniCredit Bulbank in Sofia.

The protests have already brought down the government of Boyko Borisov, who resigned last month, ostensibly because, in his own words, he “won’t participate in a government under which the police are beating people”. In early March Rosen Plevneliev, the president, announced a caretaker cabinet led by Marin Raykov, a former ambassador to France (who will also double as foreign minister). On the day the president announced the interim government a couple of hundred protesters threw toilet rolls at the parliament building and carried brooms and signs saying “Let’s sweep out the trash”.

The new government of mostly competent technocrats cannot do much before the general election on May 12th. “We will try, with the limited resources and little time at our disposal, to help the most vulnerable parts of the population,” says Deyana Kostadinova, deputy prime minister and labour minister. Unemployment went above 12% in February, its highest since 2005. More than 22% of the population live below the official poverty line. The average monthly wage is €400 ($517).

The question is who will win the election in May—and whether the winners will be able to restore calm, stick to Bulgaria’s policy of fiscal austerity and finally clean the Augean stables of corporate Bulgaria. This would help the country to secure much-needed European Union (EU) funds. Until now it has been a laggard in absorption of EU money.

In the first opinion polls since his government’s resignation, Mr Borisov’s centre-right Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB) held a slight lead over the Socialist opposition. According to Gallup, support for GERB was at 19.7%, down from 22% in February; support for the Socialist Party fell to 18.6% from 22%. Mr Borisov’s resignation (widely seen as a tactical move to preserve the political capital that GERB had left) seems to have paid off. More worrying is the rise of the far-right nationalist Attack party: its support jumped to 5% from 1.2% in February. Attack will be the election’s wild card: none of the main parties wants to form a coalition with the extremist group.