Table of Contents I. Introduction or why to research Azerbaijan

III.1.6 Role of editors in Azerbaijan
Azerbaijani editors consider that thee main role of editor in Azerbaijan is to control process of informing society about events happening at home and abroad. While editors of government newspapers see their main role in informing public of the good processes that happened under ruling of current regime oppositional editors seek information and construct agenda in a way that portrays how political elite destroys social well being. Editors of independent newspapers assign themselves a role of neutral judges giving their view point on processes criticizing government and
opposition. What is more interesting, that protagonism exists not only among editors and newspaper staffs but among readers belonging to different camps. It was mentioned earlier that editors from oppositional and governmental camps avoid going visiting events where they might find representatives of the other side. Though the research did not measure readership of the newspapers, based on personal experience before and during data collection period we might propose that the same gap exists between audiences of those two camps since Azeri society is divided itself over the same issues. Taking in regard this factor, it becomes understandable that newspapers posses low influence in the whole Azerbaijan society.

Partially that can also be derived from answers to question if editors consider themselves elite. Editors of independent, semi-independent and oppositional newspapers stated that they may agree with this statement only partially. Deputy managing editor S. of oppositional newspaper:

In some way I can say that they are [elite]. Among some they can be influential

as some one from the Presidential Apparatus and among some have no influence at all.

The only category that definitely defines editors as representatives of national elite are editors of governmental newspapers. A. deputy managing editor of governmental newspaper:

Of course, editors are elite. Even academics send their articles to our newspaper but editors have a right to edit them. This position requires broad education and large experience.

Another reason why editors are elite gives H. editor-in-chief of ruling party newspaper:

In Azerbaijan there are editors that gained high social status due to their works in the past. And elite accepts them as its members. And of course there are editors that elite rejects to deal with.

Thus we may come to conclusion that though editors may be highly influential among their audiences, they still can completely rejected by elites from opposing ideological camp. Taking this in regard it is understandable why editors of independent and semi-independent newspapers place themselves among elite conditionally since they cannot guarantee favor of the two opposing elites.

III.1.7 Summary
In this chapter we tried to cover stances that are shared by Azerbaijani editors on their professional specialization, its influence and role in Azerbaijani society. Analysis of interview answers showed that Azeri journalists copy social divide in Azerbaijan and define their roles along the crack lines. Each camp has its own auditory minimally connected with the other and editors enjoy influence of its members as well as are members of elites of the mentioned ideological camps. Editors of independent newspapers find themselves stranded between the lines of opposition and government newspapers taking fire of criticism from both. Thus, those editors tend to present low judgment of their influence though as they point out they are able to influence key political actors from time to time. In general however, printed press has low influence among citizens due to effect of political instrumentalization, deprofessionalization of its members and existence of extortion journalism.

III.2 Editor’s stances towards professional ethics
In chapter 1 we talked about journalistic ethics in theory, about its constituent parts as well as its meaning in Western and Soviet schools of journalism. It is time to look how Azeri editors understand journalistic ethics. In this chapter we will look if Azeri editors consider ethics important and ethical codes. In Summary section of this chapter we will try to establish types of editors in Azerbaijan on the basis of their stances towards journalistic ethics.

III.2.1 Journalism ethics
Majority [18 out of 20] of Azerbaijan editors state that they consider ethics important. Six of them think that adherence to professional ethics is vital for credibility of their newspaper.

Yet when asked what exactly they understand under professional ethics editors have difficulties to describe it. Problem receiving answer to this question occurred with editors of one oppositional newspaper that assumed defensive position and rejected to talk about it since didn’t want to disclose their stance on the subject. Deputy managing editor S. of oppositional newspaper has following understanding of professional ethics:

We try not to run against Azerbaijan mentality even if that occurs from time to time. That is my final and complete answer to this question.

Many editors as for example A.A. redirected researcher to look for answers in ethical code of Azerbaijan journalists.

It is deep [serious]question. Journalist ethics is when you write articles according

to ethical code. So, for example it includes not harming someone’s honor and

dignity, discrediting someone’s social influence and so on.

Others used situations to describe what they understand under professional ethics. N. deputy managing editor of independent newspaper:

Well for example, this year information agencies disseminated information on an underage prostitute that had AIDS and infected almost 30 men. The information was presented with her full name, date of birth, address of residence, and etc. We informed about it as well however, we didn’t give out her name since investigation was yet to be started. We acted responsibly since we consider her not a criminal but a victim as well… Secondly, in our newspaper we never try to evaluate someone in our publications, we try to evade giving our opinions. For our opinions we have specific section. There yes we give it. We try to be neutral and give opinions from different experts. Then I work against journalists that take bribes and in Azerbaijan we have plenty of them.

Probably the most distinctive understanding of ethics and unwritten norms of behavior have representatives of old school of journalism. B.S. for example, a representative of the old school and editor-in-chief of government newspaper that relies on its internal unwritten rules, stresses that journalist ethics is first of all about being responsible and understanding own influence on community.

Journalist must be a moral man with clean hands. He cannot be biased. Bias is the first enemy of a journalist. If you write a biased article reader always will find that out and that will not end well. Journalist must have honor. Journalist must be able to step aside from what is going on[author note: keep autonomy]. All of that makes this profession one of the most demanding on responsibility and moral qualities of journalist. Journalist must constantly develop his/her knowledge, and one more time I would like to stress journalist must stand beyond events and people he is covering.

However, representative of post-Soviet journalism E. has directly opposite opinion.

Do you want me to answer cleverly or honestly? Journalism ethics is the most horrible concept for me. If a journalist is a moral man he is not a journalist. Tell me for example, what does collision of two trains mean to a moral man? It means tragedy and horror. On the contrary, for a normal journalist it means information, good quality information. For a normal man someone’s death is a loss, he cries. He has grief and what is it for us? It is good information. The more of them dies the better. What kind of ethics then we are daring to talk about? It is immoral to spread gossips and fibs but isn’t that the essence of political journalism that is based on: gossips, opinions, analysis, estimations? We have to differentiate ethics of truth from ethics of a moral man.

Thus selected editors with an exception of old-school journalists lack common understanding of journalistic ethics and morality that it installs. Editors can be divided in two camps. One camp is dominated by old Soviet school journalists who have a policy of not running stories that go beyond

certain lines of moral man’s ethics i.e. not covering for example tragedies in full details or using too explicit photos to cover material, not breaking boundaries of personal life even of celebrities [with an understandable exception of opposition members]. The other camp, unites journalists that came in this profession at the end of 80s or in other words in the period of decay and subsequent collapse of the Soviet Union and all its systems and subsystems. This camp selected as its policy – ethics of truth or it will be better to name it, everything goes as it is. Though, it is arguable since on many occasions representatives of this camp in a chase for sensation break the ethics of truth as well. Independent newspapers share both of those policies, balancing between the camps, combining both policies by paying more attention to outcomes of their actions and giving a considerable thought to neutrality and balance. Yet, in the course of the interview some editors confessed that there was at least one occasion when due to different reasons they failed to uphold ethical standards.¹⁰

III.2.2 Editors and ethical codes
In chapter I. we have talked about codes relevant in the context of Azerbaijan. In this chapter we will talk about perception of codes by the Editors. Selected editors were asked if they deem ethical codes necessary and if they know any codes of local and/or international media organizations. The answers make us to come to conclusion that only a fraction of editors has ever reviewed the subject. One out of that minority is editor-in-chief G. who works in semi-independent newspaper that has its own code of ethics and believes it to be very useful:

For now, in Azerbaijan yes. And it is necessary to cultivate it so with time it develops into a tradition and journalists at least know key rules by heart and apply them in their professional activity.

E.R. deputy managing editor in semi-independent newspaper that also has an internal ethics code stresses that self-regulatory documents are necessary for correct functioning of newspaper and its credibility in society.

If a newspaper has its own code it is respected among people and journalists obey stipulated norms. Those norms are clear and present what society requires [from journalists].

Majority of selected editors, however, ignores written ethical codes and relies on their knowledge and experience as well as unwritten laws of their newspapers. For instance E. – deputy managing editor of independent newspaper thinks that for Azerbaijan is too early to talk about obedience to codes of ethics:

Humankind has written many wonderful codes, Bible, Talmud, Bhavad gita, Koran, etc. We can add Capital [Marx] or Murakami to that list if you want to. And what!? Azerbaijani journalists have their code of ethics, at the same time Azerbaijan also has its Criminal Code. Does it stop crimes from happening? If you think that by writing a code that is full of do-s and don’t-s and tells us how to do and how not to, you will solve everything and we will live in the kingdom of heaven where wolves live in peace beside sheep, I really would like to believe in that. But it will never happen.

Not believing in functionality of codes Azerbaijani editors heavily rely on traditions and mentality that create atmosphere of their newspapers. R. deputy managing editor of semi-independent newspaper says:

We don’t have necessity to have in front of us visual list of rules in a form of a code. We have unwritten rules and atmosphere of our newspaper itself influences new journalists so they comply with those unwritten rules. And they work normally without need in some visualization of rules.

G.G. – one of the youngest editors in the research population and deputy managing editor of well known independent newspaper says:

I heard about them [ethical codes], can’t say that I know them but I heard about them... Can’t say that I know them, may be only partially... I don’t know which newspaper has its own code. Perhaps they do have but I just have no information about it.

Y. deputy managing editor of another independent newspaper explains why he deems self-regulation in form of written codes unnecessary.

I know that many foreign media outlets have their own codes. For example I know that BBC has it and all of its staff must know and uphold that code. We here discussed that matter as well. Our newspaper is functioning since 1992 and has one special feature, our editor is here setting rules and we all work together since the beginning. Young men that come here they learn and get acquainted with values during their work with us.

At the same time in government sponsored or owned newspapers exists another reason not to accept their own codes of ethics. The reason is explained by T. deputy managing editor of government newspaper.

All newspapers should have codes. We accepted the Code of Azerbaijan Journalists. In our practice we have differences with that code but if we devise our own code it will not benefit us since it will not be too democratic. That is why we say that the Code [code of Azerbaijani journalists] is very democratic and we voted for it at the congress and accepted it in our work. But, for example, the code states that journalist cannot be forced to write about something he/she doesn’t want to write about. In our practice, however, sometimes we have to ask journalist: “Please, write about it for this time, we were asked from above.” Can we put this as a norm in our own codex? No, we cannot. That is why we are accepting the general code and don’t have our own.

Common trend among respondents who belong to newspapers that do not have their own code of ethics is an argument that when in 2003 Press Council of Azerbaijan adopted the code of ethics their newspaper has signed it and by making so the newspapers accepted principles stipulated in Code of Azerbaijani Journalists. F. secretary editor in independent newspaper says:

Few years ago Press Council adopted code of journalistic ethics. It exists in Azerbaijan and all outlets that have membership in the Council are considered to enforce it as their own code. Unfortunately, that was and still remains only on paper.

It is obvious that editors do not share common approach to the profession’s ethical norms with their perceptions varying from ideal moral man as a symbol of perfect journalist to anti-moralist that feels obliged to publish facts with no regard on their moral characteristics and even to make up facts to form public opinion¹¹. Between these extremes are positioned other editors.

As a result we may conclude that only few of selected editors have knowledge of ethic codes besides Ethical code of Azerbaijan Journalists, even less are acquainted with ethical standards of foreign media. The common trend however, is that only editors-in-chief have some knowledge about ethical codes. Our research did not include question on role of religion in editor’s life and we may not draw conclusions as did Weaver and Wilhoit in their research “American journalist” regarding influence of religion and family education on journalists. Nor can we allow ourselves the luxury of Souhradova with her research of Czech editors (Souhradova 2002) where on the basis of Fred Enderse’s interpretation she stated that editors are influenced by family education and
journalistic practice. Yet, on the basis of in-depth interviews that we have conducted with Azerbaijani editors we may propose that Azerbaijan journalists probably can be influenced by national mentality that incorporated many customs of Islamic society or in cases of old-school representatives by Soviet ideology and all were raised on basis of journalistic practice. Yet, with an ethical code being a thing in itself, an unnecessary accessory, new journalists learn ethical standards copying values and actions of their more experienced colleagues. And in cases of party newspapers with their high level of political instrumentalization it lowers ethical standards and in conjunction with low salaries leads to journalists’ proletarization and deprofessionalization leading to such extremes as extortionist journalism. This allows us to draw lines and compare patters of Azerbaijani version of deprofessionalization with the same process currently on its way among Czech journalists described by Volek (Volek 2008). Being in two different transformation phases as well as belonging to different political systems Czech Republic and Azerbaijan share the same process of deprofessionalization caused by almost identical reasons in a form of vast generation of young professionally untutored and thus easily manipulative journalists and face demise of the old caste possessing quality professional education. Yet, the process of proletarization in both countries differs in terms of factors causing it. While Azerbaijan answers classic definition of political instrumentalization of media formulated by Hallin and Mancini (2004) Czech journalists on the contrary are not affected by outside actors seeking political influence on them but by economic goals (Volek 2007).

III.2.3 Union of Azerbaijan Journalists and its place among journalists
In Chapter I we talked about process of professionalization and its attributes. One of the attributes was a board that unites professionals and serves them as a council and discussion ground as well as mean to fine those who disobey professional standards and code of practice. Azerbaijan journalists lack that legitimate organizations since there are many organizations that claim to represent interests of journalists. For instance, B.H. an editor-in-chief of semi-independent newspaper says:

I was a member of the Free Journalists Union. But I want to say that there is a problem in Azerbaijan with those organizations. The problem is that in Azerbaijan most of the organizations exist just for the purpose of eating grants. They don’t do anything but wait for grants. Then in the best case they implement a monitoring of press and write this newspaper had violations of ethical codes and so on. Membership in such organizations doesn’t bring anything.
The accusation of “grant eating” is seconded by G. deputy managing editor of government newspaper who on the subject says following:

In Azerbaijan we have a problem that there are too many journalistic organizations and news agencies. Most of them exist only on paper and part of them is dedicated only for grant acquiring purposes.

Yet, it is possible to highlight two organizations that have weight in journalistic society of Azerbaijan: Union of Journalists of Azerbaijan and Press Council of Azerbaijan. Union of Journalists was conceived in early 40s of 20^th century and up to the last months of the Soviet Union served as professional union of journalists in Azerbaijan. The Union of Journalists of Azerbaijan is rather a well known organization but as many respondents agree is a remnant of old times. Almost all editors, including representatives of old-school have agreed that Union of Azerbaijani Journalists is not serving its purposes anymore and is a decaying organization. However, journalists have differences in evaluating its value. Thus some editors as for example A.A. deputy managing editor of oppositional newspaper says that there is no need in its future existence:

“I think it is something left over from the communist regime. So I think they are not important anymore. It doesn’t matter if they are or they are not [present]. Times, when everybody compulsory had to be its member have passed away long time ago.”

However, most of the selected editors even though criticize inertness of this organization consider its existence necessary. In that camp we can distinguish Soviet-school journalists who pay respect to this organization mainly due to their good memories associated with times when the Union served not only a roof organization but also provided financial support for journalists. T. deputy managing editor of government newspaper recalls:

During Soviet times the government provided the Union with certain concessions. For example buying a car, or furniture was connected with standing in lines. People were registered in region of their residence. So for example a journalist living in Nasimi district after registration had 5000^th place in line. Every year that region received 50 cars. So in 10 years he perhaps was going to receive one. Journalists’ Union was receiving 5 cars a year and had line of 20 people. In other words, the government understood that journalist needs to travel and provided him a car. Same thing was with apartments. They wrote it in the law that journalists were receiving additional 10square meters from the government. And the same thing was with spas and medical care. Now of course none of that exists.

Another faction is constituted by younger generation that came to journalism mainly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. For example, deputy managing editor of oppositional newspaper S. believes that the Union of Azerbaijani Journalists even though useless at the moment has right to exist:

Even though today it is useless may be in future there will be a progress in this direction too. In any case its existence is better than its absence.

The work on getting out the Union from the state of idleness it found itself since the collapse of the Soviet Union already has begun. G. shares his observations:

During some period of time the Union of Journalists behaved passively in journalistic issues though its chairman was a very dissent man. Now the Union acts much more actively. I think they are just starting to gain speed. Though membership at this moment does not give too much. But they are just starting up.

On the contrary, the Press Council is a much younger organization than the Union. The process of its creation can be traced to 2002 when representatives of major newspapers of Azerbaijan gathered to discuss necessity to create such organization. One year later delegates of the same newspapers¹² signed Council’s platform and accepted its ethical code.

B.S. who currently is a member of executive board of the Council and directly participated in the process of creation says:

Azerbaijani journalism has many problems. Among the problems probably the most important is financial. The second is political biasness, the third is problem with professionalism and the fourth is extortion journalism. All other problems can be included under those four. Those problems compose the major agenda of the Press Council. Of course, our major function now is to serve as a link between a reader and newspaper. Or for example when official and newspaper have a conflict we try to defuse that case before it gets to court by accepting a pacifying position. However, there are so many cases that we are not able to cover all of them. Besides, it happened many time… Our only instrument of influence is to reproach journalists but that often doesn’t have any effect on them.

K.G. deputy manager of semi-independent is an ordinary member of the Council and considers his membership beneficial since being a member he feels himself secure.

When a journalist is a member of the Council it gives him opportunity to solve disputes not in court but the Council as a judge. Then the Council gives its own press cards, ownership of which signifies that bearer is obeying rules of honesty so to speak. It means that he is not an extortion journalist or a bribe journalist. Then, during election period when we have demonstrations sanctioned and not, the Council in cooperation with the Ministry of Internal Affairs distributes blue vests to ensure safety of journalists.

However, many journalists do not seek membership in journalistic organizations. One of independents is G. editor-in-chief of semi-independent newspaper.

Some of my staff are members of the Union. Some are not. And I’ll tell you why they are not. If we speak frankly, in Azerbaijan professional unions have formal character. We have two organizations but both have formal character. They don’t do any serious work. They don’t raise questions when some journalist’s rights are violated. They are rather involved in implementation of grant activities.

E. editor-in-chief of an independent newspaper who recently was selected chairman of the Union and at the same time is member of advisory board of chairman of Press Council of Azerbaijan understands the role and says that his organization works on it:

In my opinion it [media organization] must be a home for journalists, a place where they can gather and freely discuss their problems. Thus for example if I have a friend architect we may discuss something in general but when I need to discuss professional issues I cannot discuss it with him. Yes he understands, he reads newspapers but he doesn’t now how news are produced. Then there is another side. Azerbaijan journalism has big problems. There is great need in discussing them.

Yet though the intentions are good and praiseworthy journalistic organizations currently due to different reasons not fulfill their main purpose – do not provide discussion flours among editors to discuss and find solutions of ethical dilemmas. E. deputy manager of independent newspaper:

Question: In your opinion, do cases containing ethical dilemmas receive

necessary attention among members of the journalist community?

Answer: We [newspaper staff] discuss them [ethical dilemmas] every day,

every hour, every minute.

Question: Are those dilemmas discussed among journalist community on a

necessary level? Do you think the discussions miss something?

Answer: Missing in those discussions are the discussions themselves.
A.A deputy managing editor of oppositional newspaper clarifies previous statement.

There are discussions but not on necessary level. Sometimes after some article is published there is an exchange of ideas, a discussion among colleagues about staying within boundaries of law, staying in the frame of ethics. But I personally, for the period that I work did not witness any serious discussion.

Y. deputy manager of independent newspaper states that he does not attend such discussions since it is prerogative of his boss and on the other hand adds that discussions do not have necessary effect since many journalists believe that they are worthless due to their ineffectiveness.

Those discussions have no effect. When 10-15 newspapers decide to accept results of those discussions that changes nothing. As I told you in Azerbaijan there are published hundreds of newspapers and majority of them don’t accept those results.

F. deputy managing editor of independent newspaper adds:

The Union, The Press Council get editor-in-chief of newspapers and run discussions but those discussions are not constant and besides to my pity at the end of those discussions everyone stays with his own opinion. There are almost no results from them.

Thus, majority of discussions on how to solve ethical dilemmas are conducted inside of the newspaper office and rarely conducted among colleagues from different newspapers. Answers of the selected editors propose that editors usually are confronted with a dilemma post-factum, and have to resolve conflict situations that are caused by previous actions of their subordinates.

Editor-in-chief E.S. of independent newspaper:

I had a case once, when reporters who wrote an article not only evaluated actions of one person, I have to say that those actions were in fact disgusting, but also wrote opinion about that man himself. In that case, though my guts were against it, I gave that man opportunity to speak up in our newspaper. Of course then, that man besmirched my name. So in that case I didn’t punish my journalists for writing that, it was understandable that they wrote it out of emotions. But, on the other hand it was not professional.

Editor-in-chief of oppositional newspaper R.A. also had to solve problems caused by his journalist’s article:

I remember few years ago I had a case when our newspaper published article about small kids that ran away from an orphan house. In the news article along with the news were given their names and pictures. I warned my staff for doing that.

The most common problem among journalists of Azerbaijan however, is sourcing. It is usual thing when a journalist due to lack of time, unavailability of source or intentionally uses unchecked source, makes one up or salts facts with is his guesses. When such cases are discovered newspapers of Azerbaijan have different policies to punish journalist. The strictest policies regarding this matter have independent newspapers. For instance deputy manager G.G. explains:

We had such situations not once. When we discovered that information written was not based on actual information, we subsequently applied wide range of disciplinary and administrative punishments up to firing the journalist.

His newspaper colleague N., second deputy managing editor comments:

We had such situation. We seized working with him. A man who intentionally twists facts does not belong here.

Yet, only these two editors have expressed such explicitly negative stance towards factuality failure problem. Other editors preferred to state that they had no such problems what so ever, such cases are rare and responsible are being punished while others tried to find excuse for journalist’s failure. X.K. deputy managing editor of semi-independent newspaper that adopted its own ethical code says:

In our newspaper such cases are very rare. We usually check information or use wire news and they check their sources. But of course if we find such case we warn the author and explain to him that such thing cannot be repeated. And then, if necessary we bring our apologies to readers or to those who were hurt by that article. But I repeat, until now happened very rarely in our newspaper.

Most liberal in this matter are oppositional newspapers. Thus for example editor-in-chief R.A. says:

There are many such cases. They were, they are and they will be. We are working with hot news and publish the newspaper every day. And besides, today in Azerbaijan it is really hard to acquire information from the first hands. Of course that hurts us, and by not buying our newspaper next time, readers punish us for this. That is why we have a system of fines. For such article author does not receive payment but in addition gets a fine. Thus, we punish, false…incorrect information.

A.A. deputy managing editor of oppositional newspaper has personal experience concerning this issue:

Personally I was drawn into court for such issue. It happened when I worked as an ordinary correspondent. I wrote an article about one well-known official who’s name I will not mention. I implemented investigation in order to find out what that ordinary bureaucrat owns. I investigated and found many villas, houses that belonged to him. And I was drawn to court on the basis of defamation lawsuit. I had big problems and was not able to prove that I am right. Yes, officially all estates were written on names of his relatives yet the fact is that really they belonged to him. However, I couldn’t prove it and court fined me for damaging his honor and dignity.

Cases of incorrect or twisted information are not completely excluded even from practice of government newspapers. Though editors-in-chief of government or government affiliated newspapers denied that they have problems but at least one of deputies to managing editor of governmental newspaper A. accepted that sometimes such cases happen.

Yes, there were such cases and we punished guilty journalist to make sure that he does not repeat it. First of all it depends on material. There are some articles that have to go at once. Factuality is sole responsibility of the author. He bears responsibility since editor who sits in his cabinet cannot check that. So, if he made a mistake he must be punished, it is one of conditions of our work contract.

To summarize this section we acknowledge that while analyzing answers of editors we came to conclusion that Azerbaijani journalistic society is extremely polarized and this fact constitutes major problem for journalistic organizations to gain weight and evidently to cooperate in enforcing professional standards among journalists. Two organizations that we have covered in this section represent only topple of vast number of media organizations that thrive in Azerbaijan nowadays. This can be explained by the same reason we described earlier in the text. Due to high political polarization journalists belonging to different political camps are not willing to cooperate and prefer to establish their own organizations that serve as clubs for like-minded journalists. Press Council and the Union of Azerbaijani Journalists were able to acquire relative respect and credibility among journalists from both political camps. Yet, currently their meetings carry interest mainly to editors-in-chief while other representatives of journalistic community learn what is going at those meetings by proxy and thus are excluded from discussions. This weightless authority to enforce professional standards leaves Azerbaijani journalistic community wide open to process of deprofessionalization as well as does not stop process of proletarization caused by excessive political and financial pressures influencing journalists.