In order to restore media freedom, it is necessary to approach the issue with a new consciousness

***

- Gulu muallim, have there been any changes in the quality and content of the Azerbaijani television space lately?

- To be fair, we can say that there is some movement on television in one form or another, the dynamics on the screen has increased, many TV executives have changed, so they are trying to make some innovations. For example, many televisions have tried to cover this pandemic condition at a professional level. One created a headquarters, the other multiplied live broadcasts, and so on. They were able to go to a certain level. But when it comes to quality, unfortunately, there are problems with TV channels and professionalism. But in general, the changes in televisions can be divided into two parts. The first is the traditional cosmetic changes. That is, the presenters, the format of the programs, the headlines change, the images that bring dynamics are shared. They try to attract the attention of the audience with certain innovations. Such processes are going on. But these are certainly not changes directly related to the content. These are the obverse. But the primer, that is, the content is more important. Secondly, to what extent do these cosmetic changes allow free activity and free thinking on televisions? There are certain processes in this area as well. Until now, there were people who were not allowed close to Public Television, but now they are constantly appearing on television. AZTV involves new specialists. It would be unfair not to see them. In my opinion, the change in content is taking place on ITV, which we have criticized a lot over time. If the scope of freedoms in that television is expanded, if the Law on Public Broadcasting is fully complied with, I think that the country will be able to get a good channel in the form of ITV. Because its ability has been expanded in terms of both creativity and management and expressing the content. There are processes in AZTV that attract attention. But, unfortunately, the anchor can not go deep. There are serious reasons for this. There is a tradition, there are certain trends, and if it does not get rid of them, the development of television can be problematic. Today, certain processes are taking place in ATV, Khazar, Space, CBC, and their work can be considered a step forward in terms of television journalism. But we still have a serious task to create a TV channel that will please all viewers in a broad sense.

- After the dismissal of Ali Hasanov, Vugar Safarli, as well as Nushiravan Maharramli, they said that there will be changes and freedoms in televisions and media policy. Can we see this freedom?

- It would be naive to see broad changes in the media, especially in the field of television and media policy, with the dismissal or renewal of some officials. True, those officials had negative influences. However, I would not put an equal sign between those people and between Ali Hasanov and others. Because Vugar Safarli and Nushiravan Maharramli were more executors. The conductor's baton was in Ali Hasanov's hands. He gave instructions and directed many issues independently. In this context, I do not expect any changes, freedom, and liberty in the media policy of Azerbaijan soon. Because the media is a mirror of society, a branch of the existing social system. If there are changes in the public sphere in the country, if reforms are carried out, and these reforms are deepened, if the fight against bribery and corruption becomes systemic rather than episodic, I think it will have an impact on the media. But in this case, we do not see the freedom of the media in the broadest sense. We are talking about media outlets affiliated with or under the auspices of government agencies, which have not yet undergone significant changes. In general, the parameters of media policy are not clear at the moment. There are very serious and open questions. Unless the answers to these questions are found, the outlines of the new media policy will not be visible. What is known is that many websites and channels related to certain officials are undergoing changes and innovations. Previous deformities are not visible. They try to approach certain standards. One of the steps taken by the Fund of State Support for Development of Mass Media (FSSDMM) and the National Television and Radio Council (NTRC) is to conduct an investigation into the previous policy and shortcomings and to make them public. The tightening of the rules, the imposition of sanctions, the presence of punitive measures such as the suspension of broadcasting, in any case, create a slightly different picture from the previous situation. From this point of view, now is the time to move from episodes to the system. Because those episodes express a certain condition, some intention. But it does not reveal media policy in the broadest sense. If we want to change the media policy, we must define a policy that is different from the policy pursued so far. No, if journalists are still blindfolded, looking at someone's hand, hoping for help from officials by carrying out their orders, this shameful situation will continue and can kill the hopes that have begun in media policy. A completely different policy must be pursued.

- There was an opinion that media policy in the country was formed by Ali Hasanov. But even after his dismissal, there is no special change. It turns out that even if people change, the policy in this country does not change?

- The media in Azerbaijan has been brought to such an ugly situation that, of course, there is the direct involvement of officials in this situation. Unfortunately, Azerbaijan lags far behind in the press freedom index. But there are points that it is ahead. We can reveal many things by comparison. For example, Azerbaijan cannot be compared with Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, or Tajikistan. We have made very serious progress compared to those countries. There are independent TV channels, at least formally. The most important thing is that despite certain blockages and restrictions, the Internet in Azerbaijan is generally free. There are steps that overshadow this freedom. The monopoly of providers, low speed, and high prices affect this. But at the same time, we are a few steps ahead of the countries I have mentioned. Compared to European countries, which have democratic, free media, we are literally lagging behind. The main dissatisfaction stems from this. Authoritarian countries and democracies usually have different media policies. Therefore, we need to know at what stage we are standing. We need to talk about appropriate media policy. In this sense, as a country in the transition stage, we could pursue a normal media policy. But, unfortunately, we have had a different media policy from Russia, Georgia, and even Armenia. Ali Hasanov also played a very serious and negative role in this issue. He chose the most primitive and most harmful way with the thought of an official. Although we imitate Russia in some policies, in this issue, Azerbaijan has pursued a policy incomparable to that country, which puts the media in the last place, destroys its moral basis, and destroys many moral principles. Good journalists were eliminated. At the expense of the state, many journalists have switched to paid, affordable, but untrustworthy media outlets. Many were targeted and eliminated, and many were not allowed to work. These are recent events. Therefore, I think that the policy in the country does not change with the change of people. Staff may be more modern-minded compared to his/her predecessor. His/Her speech and behavior may be different. But unless a policy that expresses the substance, in general, is defined, there will be serious problems in informing the public, corruption will be deeper, journalistic immorality will increase, and the number of those who turn the media into a tool of swearing and revenge will increase. Therefore, I think we are experiencing a serious stage. In that sense, we do not see the contours of politics. It is impossible to say anything definite about the new media policy. For now, we hear the sound of such old musical instruments. Although the performers have changed, the client and its style have not changed.

- About the last event that occupied the agenda of the country - the Yasamal incident, the TV channels operating in the country did not say a word. Although most of the country's population was aware of everything that happened through social networks and social media, Internet televisions. Don't TV executives and those who run them realize that their policy is not working and that they are losing prestige?

- In countries such as Russia, they say that when they raise the issue of why they do not cover any event in the media, they approach it from this perspective, saying that it happened and the society is aware of it. But they just read newspapers and watch TV channels to see how brave or cowardly an editor is. Or which media organization is as honest and true to the truth as possible. We have the same issue. The Yasamal incident is a very serious incident. This is an event directly related to the violation of human rights. The behavior of police officers who raid people's homes is a matter of serious concern. No one in this society is in favor of throwing rubbish and stones at the police car. I do not believe that any normal person would think about it. But at the same time, the citizens emotionally protest against any violence. This is their right. If this right violates the law or contains an element of hooliganism, adequate action can be taken regarding this. However, it is inadmissible to attack a building with a specially trained and trained Rapid Police Unite and to snatch people from their homes and beds, humiliate people and take them to the police station, videotape them and spread them on social networks. The police are a tool of power, not a means of power. The police should not take revenge on people and citizens. Because it is not an individual. It is a branch that represents power. Therefore, those who pursue this policy should pay attention to this subtlety. No one disputes the police's resistance to the offense or how it should prevent the crime. However, breaking into people's homes and taking a failed step as a punitive measure in this way, and then saying that the incident is legitimate, or provocation against the minister, or, conversely, violence, should be condemned, which shows that there are serious problems between structures and approaches. That is why the society reacted so sharply to this incident. But the fact that it is not covered on television is, of course, a serious matter. In other words, it is an indicator of the level of media freedom, liberty, and professionalism. At least it could be discussed with the participation of independent experts. Those who define this policy must understand that if the public is aware of what is going on in the light of the Internet, there is nothing but harm in the fact that television channels hiding it or dressing it up in other forms of propaganda. This needs to be seriously considered. Certain corrections must be made. Mistakes must be expressed. Admitting mistakes is not a sign of weakness, but a sign of greatness. It is necessary to understand this once and for all.

- By the way, the number of online media in the country is gradually increasing. This is very good in terms of informing people and competition on the one hand. On the other hand, the unprofessional and substandard activities of some of them create the opposite opinion in this area. How do you assess this trend?

- This is a trend in our country. The number of Internet media is growing. Most people get information from online media. We are talking about online media, which is occupied by professionals. Unfortunately, some people in our country now use Internet media to curse the government, and some to promote the activities of the government. Almost all of the country's leading parties have Internet television. Be it so. But how should it be, on what principles should it work? Does it follow standards when it acts as a media, as a mass media? Are professional requirements taken into account? These are serious issues. In general, I appreciate the trend of the development of Internet media. It must be. It must be to create alternative sources of information. One of the wrong policies at the time was to stifle critical media. They closed the Azadlig newspaper. What was the result? Its successors organized television abroad. While 4,000-5,000 people read the Azadlig newspaper here, 200,000-300,000 people watch Ganimat Zahid's program broadcast from abroad. It is needed to allow people to have their say. Let the media work freely, criticize, and point out shortcomings. One of the most serious issues for Internet media today is its lack of ethical commitment. If it operates as a mass media outlet, it must abide by the law and adhere to media ethics. Otherwise, there will be problems.

- What is needed in the country to restore freedom in the television space, as well as in the media?

- In order to restore media freedom, it is necessary to approach the issue with a new consciousness. The majority of the media, those journalists, websites, newspapers are now all waiting for instructions. With this thinking, with this mindset, with this approach, it is impossible to create new media or restore media freedom. No matter how much the media feeds, their eyes will still be on someone's hands. Therefore, it is necessary to create media with completely new people, who want to serve society for free, in the true sense of the word. That media should normally benefit from the advertising market. We will never be able to talk about media freedom without ensuring economic and political conditions. Free and independent media must be free from political influence and have an economic base to function normally. Without them, no matter how many fancy and attractive proposals we make, they will not come true. The media is a product of reality, a mirror of society. For this mirror to reflect well, it must be independent, free, free from political influence, and have an economic basis for its activities.