I. Introduction This master’s thesis represents study of female newspaper and magazine editors in Azerbaijan based on Western and Soviet definitions of journalism with explanation of local national features of this p

Question: Are you member of professional organization and if yes what are the benefits of the membership?

U.X.: Frankly speaking, I am not a member of the Union and I don’t see any benefit from becoming its member.

Question: Is existence of Journalists’ Union of Azerbaijan important for journalist?

U.X.: In some aspects yes

Not to be neglected is a stance voiced by N.M. or N.Y. where they deny Union’s authority and propose other professional organizations. Editor N.Y. goes even farther than N.M. by stating that among other things professional journalist organizations should engage politics:

In Azerbaijan it does not matter what kind of organization you create, or what do you name it - union, council, committee, etc. They have no capability to influence state authorities and I don’t see that it will gain that power unless there is a change in the political regime. That is why I greet existence of independent organizations that will allow united struggle against current state of being since I do not consider the Union to be an independent organization. It is on the payroll of the government. It is good that we have new independent organizations that need to be nurtured since they provide common base for unification and strengthen possibilities of united defense.

Editor T.B. is against professional organizations in the context of modern Azerbaijan since as she believes currently such organizations are a breeding ground for clientelism and serve narrow interests of some groups in the journalistic community.

You know I think that there is no necessity in such organization since they come together and build clans in order to divide later everything among themselves while denying others to join their organizations.

Nevertheless, even though majority of the selected female editors voices skepticism towards current state of professional organizations in Azerbaijan some still consider it to be a relevant professional institution with a right to exist. Editor N.M. notes that the Soviet past is not a problem for her and she praises any form of professional organization that will have as its objective unification of journalists in Azerbaijan:

You know, it doesn’t matter for me if you call it a Union or some other name. For me the paramount is the unity of journalists itself. Power is in unity and currently scattered journalists’ voices are not being heard. Journalists like all other people have their own problems but in comparison with others they also carry a heavy load of their mission, to be on the watch and bring to discussion problems of the society and assist their solution. That is why I consider that unity among journalists is very important.

This pull between longing for unity and a pressing need to have functioning organization resulted in the creation of the Press Council – professional journalist organization that was created in the second decade of Azerbaijan’s independence when in year 2002 representatives of largest newspapers in Azerbaijan met to discuss rising necessity to fill empty place once taken by the Union of Journalists. One year later delegates of the same newspapers⁴² signed Council’s platform and accepted its ethical code (Valiyev 2008).

M.H. who currently is a member of executive board at the Press Council represents one of the old-School journalists who seeing idleness of the Union decided to move on and create a new organization rather than continue with membership in the old one:

You know in the past we were members [of the Union] but not anymore. When the Press Council was organized we were among its organizers and members of the executive board. And we still are.

All of the following responses suggest that female journalists generally do not value professional organizations as institutions capable of enforcing professional standards and rather perceive them as bodies lobbying material subvention from the government or in case of opposition-inclined editors as means to extend political struggle against current political regime. Farther inquiry shows that another weak point of the organizations in Azerbaijan is their impeded capability to serve media community as a forum for discussions of ethical dilemmas. A.S. editor-in-chief of semi-independent newspaper:

In my opinion it is not right to implement once or twice a sporadic event dedicated to discussion of some topic. In order to educate journalists, especially ones that just arrived to the profession these events must have a permanent nature. There is a pressing need in implementation of such events either by the Press Council or by other compatible organizations.

Perhaps the only articulate discussion in Azerbaijan on journalistic ethics belongs to the Press Council - the institution that professed itself and invested substantial amount of effort to fight extortionist journalism. Editor-in-chief S.S. of semi-independent newspaper:

Recently, the Press Council staged some discussions on ethical norms. The reason for that is, as you know, recent struggle of the Press Council against extortionist journalism. As you know many such newspapers were banned. However, the initiative originated from complaints filed by ordinary citizens to the Press Council where they demanded to punish trespassers of their personal life, honor, and dignity. The Press Council was forced to act, and many of those newspapers stopped to exist. Yet, in our modern world, with developed media and internet, where news have to be very operative there is always a space for problems and that is why from time to time they organize some meetings where we participate and offer our piece of advise regarding certain issues.

M.X. editor-in-chief of SOCAR funded newspaper clarifies previous statement.

You know, the Press Council is constantly reviewing the issue of extortionist journalism. That is in essence discussion on journalism ethics. According to my observations every day they [the Press Council] issue warnings to someone. That is a large amount of work done. For example, it happened to me once that I received a call from an acquaintance who told me that some people came and told him that unless he pays them they will write bad things about him. How could this possibly fit in journalism ethics? It is extortion in true meaning of that word. And the Press Council monitors that and maintains black list of newspapers. Recently they have added three newspapers to that list.

Other selected editors divided either on those who stated that there are no relevant transparent discussions staged or those editors that said that discussions that are currently being held are not done on necessary level. The case illustration for the first group [5 editors] can be magazine editor N.Y.:

I have not heard anyone to discuss journalistic ethics here. May be there was something discussed but I have no information about that. I wish they have discussed the matter more often so one can remember about it.

Representative of the second group is also a magazine editor-in-chief U.A. This editor of Parliamentary magazine considers that current discussions have no proper effect due to political cleavage present in the journalistic community of Azerbaijan:

Nowadays, there is not enough attention paid to the subject. I do not see a relevant discussion happening in our society or to be correct there are discussions in Azerbaijani society as a whole but not in the journalistic community. Today we have two camps in journalism: pro-government and pro-oppositional. And each of those camps follows only their own interests. I do not observe some wholesome discussion on ethical norms with participation of all parties. The reasons of that as I said earlier are different interests and I doubt that currently any such discussion may yield any common decision.

Thus, prevailing amount of discussions on ways of solving ethical dilemmas is implemented “in the house” i.e. inside of an editorial office and rarely surpasses its boundaries. This kind of approach was hailed by S.A. and S.S. This is how S.S. describes the process in her newspaper:

Journalist brought a biased material and naturally we did not print it but made him to include into article an opposite side as well. At one hand, I don’t blame him. It is really hard to reach sources; they do not pick up phones or are being rude but nevertheless we always at the end of an article note that we are ready to give word to the opposite side. We had such cases and always tried to resolve them before sending newspaper to print house.

Yet, our research suggests that majority of female editors follow their male counterparts in terms of post factum confrontation with ethical dilemmas resulted by actions of their staff.

Editor T.B.:

In year 2000 I had a case when one of my journalists went to do a story without consulting me or being assigned to do a story. He went to some official in order to compile necessary information. Rudeness of the official and journalist’s disobedience to ethical standards caused a big scandal that I had to go and solve it at the spot. I consider such behavior unacceptable, as in any organization the person in charge should know where his /her employees are while doing their job.

Editor-in-chief of government-funded medical newspaper A.X. recalls that she had to solve ethical problem caused by a picture in one of articles in her newspaper: