Table of Contents I. Introduction or why to research Azerbaijan

III.2.4 Editors and Ethical Dilemmas
In theory chapter we have talked about editors and their important role in gatekeeping process. A question that interested us in this research was how selected editors make decisions in ethically dilemmatic situations. Our research proposed them a battery of six situation questions that placed them in certainly stipulated conditions where they had to make a decision. Our first question concerned conflict of interests when a journalist writes an article using his close relative as a primary source for his/her article. Deputies to managing editor K.G. and G.G. stated that if article’s primary source is a close relative it will be discarded while all editors answered that if an article is interesting and has value to the public they will or probably will allow it to be printed. However, precondition for publishing such an article is that facts listed in journalist’s article must be reliable and more sources should be added.
Deputy managing editor X.K. states:

Of course I will allow it to be printed. Relatives also have a right to use protection of the newspaper. We cannot close our doors in front of them. But of course the information should be objective and true.

B.S. editor-in-chief of government newspaper recalls:

Last year there were shortages of natural gas in households of Azerbaijan and news gas meters were installed. However, they malfunctioned and sometimes people were receiving bills of 100 manats. We collected those facts and wrote an article about the problem. The gas company Azerigaz accused us of giving false information. We received many letters to editor where citizens concerned that they have paid for the gas but did not receive it. Yet, when we published those letters the company was stating that letter’s author did not mention that his had dept to the company and that he paid only half of it. We had no means to check the information and that’s when I proposed my staff following – who has a problem with gas supply in his household bring here the facts and on that basis we will write an article. When we published it the company again raised against the article however we were able to prove that they are wrong. For example I paid for the whole month and had no gas for seven days. Did they intend to give me back that portion of my payment? That was a violation of our rights. That is why I do not reject such articles and consider them normal.

Second dilemmatic situation was set to test if editors will allow a journalist to write an article about oil industry if he previously worked in a PR department of an oil company and thus may possess certain level of biasness. All editors but deputy managing editor A. agree that if the journalist is competent in the field they will certainly allow him to write an article on the subject. Yet in order to make sure that he is not biased they will supervise his articles to make sure that he intentionally or unintentionally is not taking sides in the issue. Deputy managing editor K.G. considers acquisition of such journalist very beneficial:

I can hardly imagine such situation since in here [Azerbaijan] journalists more often run to work in oil companies rather than vice versa. Once they get a job there they never come back. However, if I imagine such situation yes, I’ll give him an opportunity but I will closely follow his way of presenting information. A man who worked in PR agency of oil company knows a lot about this sphere, has many connections and etc. and of course he can write good quality article. Yet, I will repeat myself we need to follow him so that he does not continue to make PR for that company of his.

Third situation was the last one to involve conflict of interest and offered editors a situation when they received and invitation from a company, organization or firm and have to decide if they will attend it. Many editors showed invitations that they received from different organizations and companies and said that they are always evaluate which invitation to accept. However, editors of governmental newspapers attend only certain events organized primarily by government organizations, companies providing advertisement and tend to decline invitations to gatherings, even organized by diplomatic missions where they might run into editors of oppositional newspapers. T. deputy managing editor of government newspaper:

If I accept 100 invitations usually 90-95 are discarded. They are invitations to events that do not answer to interests and policy of our newspaper and our auditory. We are governmental newspaper, tomorrow they may ask us why when they have signed up for 5000 copies of our newspaper we visit some events?

B.S. editor-in-chief of other government newspaper adds:

Ambassadors of diplomatic missions here organize every year gatherings to commemorate dates of their state’s independence. In the past I have visited such events for several times but then noticed that these events are visited by some random people that misbehave and make my participation impossible. That was making me very nervous. That is why I evade accepting such invitations.

With them agrees H.M. editor-in-chief of ruling party’s newspaper that attends exclusively gatherings and events organized by his party or official ceremonies.

Among editors of oppositional, independent and semi-independent newspaper exists wide range of policy towards this issue. Almost all editors said that they attend some events. Most active in attending gatherings, especially organized by diplomatic missions in Azerbaijan are editors of oppositional newspapers. When they are not able to go themselves they send their journalists or their deputies. Moreover, Azeri journalists may attend such gatherings on their own without consent of their superiors and not provide any information. Only six editors of independent newspapers and one semi-independent expressed that such person will be punished. Others leave it on journalist to decide if he must collect information from the event and bring it to his editor. This attitude may be summed up in the answer of deputy managing editor E. from independent newspaper where he jokingly says:

“For God’s sake, I will let him go [to the event] and let him write nothing. That’s his business. If he will want he will write if he doesn’t that’s his business. So what that he gets there a present? That is excellent! Perhaps he will bring one more to me. You think in the West they don’t accept presents? Don’t make my shoes laugh! When journalist is fed he is

loyal and when he is hungry he will criticize. So let him rather to be fed, accept invitation and get there a present, starting from a pen and ending with a trip to Cayman Islands or Tahiti. It is not the fact that he will be able to publish that however.

Fourth and fifth questions presented to the selected editors tested situation with source usage and source protection in influential printed press of Azerbaijan. Editors of oppositional newspapers admit that anonymous sources are the most commonly used sources in articles that criticize authorities. The above mentioned editors do not see a problem caused by anonymous sources if the information they provide looks reliable to them. They justify it with an argument that by leaving the source anonymous they protect sources safety. R.A. editor-in-chief of oppositional newspaper:

In Azerbaijan there is a special attitude towards sources. People do not want to speak since if they provide information openly they will be annihilated. Their family members and relatives will be fired from their jobs, they loose their jobs, they have to withstand alienation. There are many cases like these in our practice. I’ll give you an example when we used anonymous source. We published an article that stated that an official in the Ministry of Taxes employed his close relative, family member in his resort. We checked the information and published their names and positions. It is against law of Azerbaijan Republic. That minister is still seeking information about source’s identity. They even offered to one of our journalists a bribe of 500 US dollars to reveal the source’s name.

On the other hand, editors of independent newspapers have serious objections towards such practice. Their stance is if the information is vital the source must be prepared to reveal information openly and if necessary to stand along the newspaper in protecting the truth. This demand may be explained by the wish of editors of independent newspapers to protect themselves and their newspapers from law suits and inevitable fines. E.S. editor-in-chief of independent newspaper:

For example, I receive a letter from staff of one of hospitals where they complain that their head physician is taking bribes, that he completely sold out all equipment belonging to this hospital, that he demands that they pay him and so on. Ok, I am already getting ready to send my reporter over there however in post-scriptum I read : Sorry, please understand us correctly but we cannot reveal our names since we are afraid of our primary physician. If they are a collective of people and want with my hands to remove that person from his post – I will not do that. I don’t respect such people. You are twenty people, gather and write one letter to the minister of health. If you do not have power to do that and come with your concern to media at least have bravery to sign your names. Such cases are common, and sometimes such letters are even sent intentionally.

Yet, if the source was found reliable and his story was published protection of his identity is priority to the most of the editors. Only two editors from government newspapers said that they will probably reveal source’s name if ordered by court. Others stated that even if ordered by court they will do their best to protect the source. The only situation when newspapers feel free to reveal identity without source’s consent is when the source by its actions may cause public harm.

E.R. deputy managing editor from independent newspaper Bizim Yol :

Never! We will never give up the source! Newspaper has to protect its sources! Sources must be protected!

Azerbaijani editors understand full importance of source protection and tie it directly to credibility of their newspapers among sources and among their readers. The last situation question given to editors offered them a situation where they had to illustrate their preference between public interest and state interest. The situation involved a reporter covering peace talks in Prague or Paris learning that Azerbaijan-Armenia peace talks came to an abrupt end and within few days Azerbaijan is going to declare reopening of war to end Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories. Learning the news reporter writes an exclusive article and sends it to his newspaper and editor of a daily newspaper must decide if he publishes it or not. The question revealed an interesting aspect – Karabakh issue unites otherwise protagonist editors of government and opposition newspapers. All of them with an exception of S. declared that it is a state issue and military secret and such news must go public only with consent of authorized institutes. While oppositional and governmental newspaper editors were united in their answer independent and semi-independent press split in three groups. One group like G.A greed with editors of opposition and government newspapers that state interest prevails over public interest:

“We will not publish it beforehand. No. It is military information. No.”

Second group comprised editors minded like N. who were willing to publish the information but only with comments from authorized institutes:

“We will ask the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to comment the information that we learned during the talks and etc. After receiving comments we will publish it.”

The third group, consisted of two editors that said that they will act according to circumstances. Secretary editor F. of independent newspaper:

“I don’t even know. It depends. Probably not. May be we will give a hint. But I don’t know. It is an awkward situation. I have difficulty to answer.”

The only editor who said that he will publish the story was a deputy managing editor S. who said the following:

“Naturally, we will publish it. We will publish it if we will be sure of its reliability.”
Thus, editors of selected most influential newspapers showed us that in matters of grave importance they prefer not to cross the state line in matters that test values of state interest vs. public interest.

Moreover, when it comes to solving ethical dilemmas they rely on themselves, some of them rely on colleagues. None of them, even editors of newspapers having their own internal codes said that in case of hesitation he consulted an ethical code. An important place in solving ethically dilemmatic situations plays interaction of editors within newspaper when less experienced asks for advice from more experienced one. On the basis of interview answers we are able to conclude that editors of Azerbaijan usually have to solve ethical dilemmas concerning such problems as breaking boundaries of someone’s private life, information acquisition and its publication.

III.2.5 Chapter Summary

Editors of the most influential newspapers in Azerbaijan can be divided in two major groups. One group are journalists that received specific journalistic education in the Soviet Union. They are represented exclusively in government owned newspapers and worked their as they did in Soviet times with their objectivity being in the best traditions of the Soviet school. The only thing changed for them is the change from ultimate loyalty towards Marxism-Leninism to loyalty towards ruling political regime. The second group congregates editors of independent, semi-independent and politically affiliated press. Editors of this category represent different fields of education however, with hegemony of political education. Most of the editors here came in this profession as a result of coincidental events or due to pragmatic reasons. While editors of the first group have specific understanding of journalistic ethics and their mission to enlighten, educate and inform public of good happening in the republic editors from the second group lack that consensus. Ethical codes play minimal role in educating young generations of journalists that arrive in newspapers. Their main source of ethical behavior, is not their education but Azerbaijani mentality, their own moral, culture and policy of their newspaper and habits of their experienced colleagues that they use as raw models. Thus, in politically instrumentilized oppositional and ruling party’s newspapers we may observe process of deprofessionalization and proletarization described by Hallin and Mancini (2004) in their Mediterranean type as well as Volek (2007) on the case of Czech journalists. Above mentioned processes are especially severe in Azerbaijani oppositional newspapers where along with lack of ethical normative knowledge journalists are faced with constant financial as well as political pressures and criminal prosecution. Azerbaijani journalistic arena is overpopulated by journalistic organizations that function more as social and political clubs than as regulatory bodies. Press Council and the Union of Azerbaijani Journalists were able to acquire relative respect and credibility among journalists from both political camps yet their gathering are attended mainly by editors-in-chief excluding other members of journalistic community from direct participation in debates.

In regard to objectivity we may witness clear existence of only one concept: Soviet concept of objectivity produced by editors of old-school working in government newspapers with long soviet tradition. Reporting of independent newspapers answers Westerstahl’s concept of objectivity though have their own weak points especially in relevance due intellectuality of their editors and sometimes truth due to usage of information agencies that in Azerbaijani reality make often mistakes. Semi-independents on the other hand along with illnesses of independents have problems with neutrality since are affected by opinions of their politically or economically affiliated owners.

Oppositional and pro-government newspapers fault both dimensions of Westerstahl’s objectivity concept and thus cannot be considered objective.

IV. Types of editors

In two previous chapters we reviewed answers of selected editors that allowed us to create a picture of educational requirements necessary for join this profession in Azerbaijan as well as let them to describe their attitudes to their profession and their motivation as a core of their jobs. This allows us to align selected editors under certain types of professionals that exist in this profession in Azerbaijan. Taking in regard the situation where journalists do not share one approach to the profession it seems fruitful to use typology proposed by Yuskevits in her study of Russian journalists and divide selected editors in five types described in chapter I. However, our research cannot support Yuskevitch’s typology due to lack of necessary supporting data. Yet, typology proposed by Souhradova (2002)in her research of Czech editors is not satisfactory either since it reflects Czech reality where exists one professional organization and no severe political instrumentalization. Thus we have to propose our own typology that can frame editors working in the selected daily newspapers of Azerbaijan taking in regard divide in the community.

Table 8. Types of Editors

TYPES	CHARACTERISTICS	RESPONDENTS
IDEALIST PRACTITIONER	Politically independent, has own position and style, lacks specific training in journalism but has inborn talent and orients on practice and experience, respects neutrality and balance, deems professional organization necessary though stresses that currently they are not respected, tends to cooperate with them, has general understanding of professional ethics though occasionally may deviate from some norms	Editors-in-chief: 2 Deputies to managing editors: 6 Secretary editor: 1 Newspapers: Exo, Zerkalo, Gun Seher, Express, 525ci Gazette, Kaspij
PRAGMATIC PRACTITIONER	Politically instrumentilized or biased or working in newspapers owned by one of political actors, mixes opinion with facts if necessary/ordered to achieve political goals, possesses technique and talent, lacks specific education in journalism and considers it unnecessary, respects professional organization conditionally depending on political situation, covers issues with interest in the matter, deems ethics necessary but can easily discard it if necessary, allows texts with unbalanced opinions, is devoted to oppositional line	Editors-in-chief: 4 Deputies to managing editor: 3 Newspapers: Yeni Musavat, Azadliq, Yeni Azerbaycan, Bizim Yol
OLD-SCHOOL PROFESSIONAL	Old, usually talented, communicative, has specific education based on Soviet journalism school. Has extensive practice and experience in Soviet media. Understands objectivity as correctness to policy of ruling elite. Respects and obeys central journalistic organization, knows and understands ethical norms however will deviate if ordered.	Editors-in-chief: 1 Deputies to managing editor: 3 Newspapers: Azerbaycan, Xalq

V. Conclusion

V.1. Reality of Azerbaijani journalism
The purpose of this research was to draw attention to the key positions in the largest Azeri nationwide newspapers - editors-in-chief and their deputies and scrutinize their ethical and value orientations in order to answer the main question of this research: What types of editors in regard to professional standards exist in twelve largest Azeri nationwide daily newspapers? In the course of the research we focused on stances of the abovementioned professionals concerning professional ethics and ethical self-regulation in media as well as covered the question of how do those key actors solve ethically problematic situations and evaluate their own influence in Azeri society. Another point of interest was scrutiny of ethical norms that exist today in Azerbaijan and may serve as guidelines to journalists and editors in solving ethical dilemmas.

The results of this study suggest that Azerbaijani journalistic society is divided in four major camps: oppositional, governmental, independent and semi-independent. Yet it is possible to add here a fifth group that does not interact with the four previous ones, extortion journalists. The ideological divide between journalists keeps them apart from creating unified journalistic organization that will be respected by all members of the journalistic community. Currently Azerbaijan has multiple professional organizations that are ill-respected among journalists since each camps keeps adherence to its own organization. As it became obvious from this research many editors entered this profession without receiving special training in journalism or communication theories. Yet, the most important fact which keeps them from being professionals in Western definition of this concept is their different stances on how to fulfill their jobs and lack of consensus on professional standards. Thus, we may propose that Azeri journalists only conditionally meet criteria of professionalization described by Hallin and Mancini (2004).

Using Soviet concept of professional journalism however, we may find that among editors of prominent Azeri daily newspapers can be found highly professional journalists that received journalistic education, are disciplined and respect their organization and have common identity. Those professionals congregate almost exclusively in government newspapers. Their way of informing society has changed only slightly, mainly from adherence to ideals of Marxism-Leninism to loyalty to political regime while newspapers they work for changed only their titles leaving their traditions and habits in tact. This group traditionally considers that their role is somewhat missionary in regard to the society where they believe their mission is to educate, improve culture and inform people in a way that benefits them and makes them better. Nevertheless high levels of political instrumentalization lead to the situation when even these journalists pressurized by political elite have to produce biased reporting in order to crush opposition’s credibility and reputation.

In such situation ethics for representatives of two enemy camps is rather an ideal that everyone knows that exists but no one is eager to accept due to their political reasons. An exception to this are independent newspapers followed by semi-independents that are forced to install adherence to professional ethics since they cannot afford to jeopardize their small profits from sales and advertisement by fines and law suits caused by biasness of their reporters. The editors of these newspapers are the flagship in efforts to move forward the process of consolidation of Azerbaijani journalism and creation of common professional standards.

Currently however the journalism in Azerbaijan suffers from the process of deprofessionalization and proletarization of its journalists. Many journalists in Azerbaijan have an income of less than $100 per month¹³. That on the other hand discourages talented people with education in mass communication to work full time as professional journalists and leads to lowering of entry standards in this sphere so less educated and thus more willing to work for small salary may enter the job. Yet even those individuals that agree to work for small salaries are facing constant ideological and financial pressures by political actors who own their newspapers and are not shielded from harassment. That leads them to leave even minimal standards of journalistic profession causing this sector of journalistic community to show distinct features of deprofessionalization and proletarization. Though inflicted by slightly different causes the situation answers to explanation given by Czech scholar Volek in his research of Czech journalists: “…process of deprofessionalization is directly connected with the lowering of professional standards and criteria to enter journalistic community or in other words continuous resignation on elementary professional standards”. [Volek, 2006]

The same processes can be held responsible for existence of quasi-journalistic community that sees extortion and envelope journalism as an appropriate way to earn money for living.

The situation is worsened by the fact that Azerbaijani journalistic community has no unified politically impartial professional organization that has considerable legitimacy and respect among journalists and is able to push forward adherence to professional standards and professional ethics as their guideline making professional ethics a thing in itself, alien body in organism of Azerbaijani journalists.