Bulgaria — EU’s Media Black Sheep
Back in 2006, Bulgaria and France had something important in common. Both countries were ranked 35 in the annual Reporters Without Borders (RSF) media freedom index in a list of 169 evaluated states. Over the course of the next 14 years, Bulgaria’s free speech and free media indexes plummeted. Since 2018 Bulgaria has been in 111 place.
How did the numbers change over the years? The World Press Freedom Index (WPFI) ranks the degree of freedom that journalists, news organizations, and Internet users have. It does not deal with the quality of journalism, nor does it look at human rights violations. The ranking is based on pluralism, legislative framework, media independence, environment and self-censorship, transparency, and infrastructure.
It took a little over a decade for Bulgaria’s media freedom to deteriorate drastically.
How did the deterioration begin? In a report from 2018, the Union of Publishers in Bulgaria points out that Delyan Peevski’s New Bulgarian Media Group (NBMG) controls around 80 percent of the distribution market for printed media, and their respective online editions. These numbers also include more than 1,000 kiosks in about 130 Bulgarian cities.
Peevski is an important political figure in Bulgaria and also owns numerous online media outlets, including the TV channels TV7 and Kanal 3. His public appearances are rare, and he hasn’t been seen in the media since his last appearance on April 19, 2017.
Peevski began building his media empire in 2007. He acquired the daily Monitor, the tabloid Telegraph, and the weekly Politika. The media outlets were facing financial predicaments and were purchased by NBMG, owned by Peevski’s mother, Irena Krasteva. According to the Union of Publishers in Bulgaria, the money came from loans from the Corporate Commercial Bank (CCB). The Union also states that initially Peevski did not act like the owner of the media outlets. It was not until 2014, when he addressed the newspapers as his own and his mother gave him 50 percent of the ownership. Over the next couple of years, Peevski continued buying out media outlets, including the National Distribution Agency.
In 2009, Peevski became a member of parliament as part of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms’ (MRF) list. Four years later, in 2013, the National Assembly elected him for the head of the State Agency for National Security (SANS). This appointment led to protests across the country that lasted more than 400 days.
How does the media business model work in Bulgaria? Irina Nedeva, president of the Bulgarian branch of the Association of European Journalists (AEJ), said that the reason behind the plummeting of the country in various international press freedom indexes was that 15 years ago Bulgaria was trying to meet certain democratic criteria that the EU had set. Back then Bulgaria was still trying to join the EU. During the negotiations, the measures the country took to improve the state of the media gave good results. However, after Bulgaria officially joined the union in 2007, the enthusiasm for free media started fading away.
“The situation with the media gradually started deteriorating because by old customs and inertia from previous time periods, Bulgarian media outlets were being used as a tool in political disputes. The political disputes turned into economic battles. All this culminated in what we today, unfortunately, define as numerous successful attempts to control a huge chunk of the media in Bulgaria. Many private media outlets are owned by conglomerates consisting of people holding state positions and people owning private businesses. The media’s role is no longer what it is supposed to be. Those people use the media outlets as tools of oppression,” Nedeva said.
From 2010 to 2013 foreign investors began leaving the Bulgarian media market. In 2010, the German Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung (WAZ) exited the market by selling the largest publishing group in Bulgaria, including 24 Chasa and Trud. More sales followed, including newspapers, radio stations, and magazines — and the sale of the two biggest private nationwide television channels — bTV and Nova TV.
The withdrawal of foreign investors from the media market in Bulgaria signaled danger for media freedom. It also allowed political figures to acquire ownership of media outlets and use them as tools to influence the public opinion, oppress political enemies, and pursue private agendas.
How did Bulgaria become the black sheep of the EU? The smeared borders between what is ethical and unethical when it comes to media ownership, political influence, private economic interest, and government corruption have resulted in terrible conditions for exercising free journalism in Bulgaria.
In its latest report on Bulgaria’s progress under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism from October 2019, the European Commission raised serious concerns about these issues. The same year Transparency International ranked Bulgaria as the most corrupt country in the EU. Nelly Ognyanova, a media law expert, said in an interview for OBC Transeuropa that media ownership concentration and lack of ownership transparency are the two major obstacles to media freedom and pluralism in Bulgaria.
Despite the reports, the white papers, and the alarms, the overall media situation in Bulgaria does not seem to be improving.
There is no clarity when it comes to how media channels are financed. Current laws do not forbid politicians to own outlets. The money from advertising is insufficient for media outlets to support themselves, and they often rely on state money. This makes them vulnerable to games of influence and those with deep pockets. In the past 15 years, media, finances, and politics in Bulgaria have become inextricably intertwined.
One of the most serious problems, according to numerous European media outlets and EU reports, is that the government continues to allocate EU funds to media outlets with zero transparency. The recipients of the funds are often encouraged to go soft on the government. There are many online media outlets, such as PIK, that are evidently pro-governmental. Additionally, oppression from judicial officers is often aimed at independent media outlets such as Bivol and the Economedia group.
What does it mean to fight for media freedom? Seven years after the protests in 2013, which were sparked by Peevski’s appointment, Bulgaria is once again torn by political and public division. People are in the streets. While the reasons behind protesting are more tightly connected to political decisions, there were several recent occasions involving police violence and intimidation towards journalists.
On Sept. 2 Dimiter Kenarov, a freelance journalist whose articles have appeared in the Esquire, The Atlantic and The International New York Times, was apprehended and allegedly kicked in the head by police officers. On the same day, police officers used force against Nikolay Doychinov, a photojournalist for Agence France-Presse. Another similar situation included members of a bTV news crew who needed medical attention after being pepper sprayed.
On Sept. 14, the police summoned Martin Georgiev, a reporter from newspaper Sega, for questioning about inquiries and pictures he had sent to the Ministry of Interior in regard to police violence during the protests. He was questioned without a lawyer. The International Press Institute (IPI) condemned this form of interrogation and intimidation techniques.
And now what? The protests demanding transparent and democratic government are inextricably bound with the current media state of affairs. As long as democracy in Bulgaria is under siege, there will be issues in the media sector.
In a recent interview on Conflict Zone, Tim Sebastian, a television journalist and novelist, asked the Bulgarian minister of labour and social policy, Denitsa Sacheva, a series of questions about the government’s performance, recent decisions and policies. Many of the questions remained unanswered. Those that were answered by Sacheva were in stark contrast with what Dunja Mijatović, the current Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, said in her statement on Sept. 3. Mijatović called on the Bulgarian government to react promptly and pay close attention to incidents of hate speech, including by high-level politicians; threats and violations of the human rights of children, women, and LGBTI people. She also asked the authorities to enhance the legal protection against discrimination, hate crimes, and to thoroughly investigate and prosecute such crimes. She also asked for the improvement of journalists’ professional protection and working conditions.
In addition, in October 2020, the justice committee of the European Parliament issued a resolution regarding Bulgaria’s rule-of-law failings. The resolution marked a shift in the EU’s tone toward Bulgaria’s Prime Minister Boyko Borisov. This time Borisov, his ruling party, GERB, and abuses of EU funds were directly challenged. Thirty five MEPs from the Civil Liberties and Justice Committee (LIBE) approved the resolution. “Tax payers money is used for the enrichment of circles associated with the ruling party,” the resolution stated. This resolution is not legally binding but is one of the first political moves that exert pressure on the EU to take a closer look at how its funds are allocated.
“Mapping corruption shows clearly that member states with structural deficiencies on rule of law are those most prone to resort to corrupt practices when managing EU budget and funds,” Juan Fernando López Aguilar, the LIBE Committee chairman, said in a statement after the resolution has been voted. “That has to come to an end.”
