In three years, CivilNet, a project of the Civilitas Foundation, has managed to secure its unique place in Armenia’s media industry, offering audiences a new, more measured, and diverse model of news reporting.

Civiltas Foundation Executive Director Salpi Ghazarian is convinced that internet TV is freer than traditional media for experiments and tests. And since young people are more capable of experiments, they are the ones who comprise the channel’s core.

In Ghazarian’s opinion, the more media platforms there are addressing an educated and broad audience, the sooner a society that is demanding and aware of its rights will be shaped. 

There aren’t as many internet TV platforms in Armenia as was to be expected. What are the challenges at this stage? Also, what sort of future [awaits]?

I think, in speaking about Armenia’s new media, we need to go back a little, otherwise the conversation will sound strange. Our context differs greatly from the rest of the world, where, to a certain extent, a credible, traditional, transparent, accountable, comprehensive, more or less objective, and more or less fair news media has taken root.

In many countries, the press has contributed to not only informing individuals, but also forming society. I’m certain that the press and the education system are the most important driving forces, which, after all, shape society. 

When that exists, there simply has to be a migration to the Internet, online media, the provision of rapid information, citizen journalism, and to begin working in a new style and new rhythm in and with the existing context.

Here, in Armenia, all this is missing. It was missing in the Soviet era and also during the two decades of Armenia’s independence. Of course, in the initial years of independence, there was a very interesting, brilliant press, which even we in the diaspora envied. But that brilliance has been lost for such a long time that we don’t even remember it now. That’s why when we speak of the media’s problems, future, challenges, and new opportunities, there’s a need to distinguish the history of media inside and outside the country. 

Internet television and the media in general is the mirror in which we must see ourselves. But our [Armenia’s] media no longer performs that role. We might laugh, recalling, for instance, that instead of broadcasting the protests in 1988, Soviet television was broadcasting Mozart’s Requiem. 

But it seems now too we’re not doing anything that differs greatly from that. Don’t you agree that our television has never reflected our everyday life? That’s why we expect from the Internet all those characteristics I previously mentioned (credible, transparent, objective, and so on).

A question arises: but where is the resource to achieve all of that? Replacing the TV tower and paper with a computer cable and monitor does not mean that the person behind it disappeared. Without that person, the work won’t progress. 

We [in Armenia] today de facto have many online news outlets where one republishes content from the other (adding or removing a couple of words). And supposedly, this creates a new media. 

Internet television cannot work like this for one simple reason: it deals with images and you have to have content to show. It won’t work to sit in a small room with 3 or 4 people and, cutting and pasting the information in a cloud of cigarette smoke, offer a type of new media. Whether you like it or not, you have to try to create a sincere, honest, homegrown mirror.

“Replacing the TV tower and paper with a computer cable and monitor does not mean that the person behind it disappeared”

Everyone searches for himself in television, but our traditional television has never given us that opportunity. 

Perhaps it can’t even, since for years, TV stations were accustomed to being in the “pocket” of state propaganda.

Yes, but no one grabbed them and literally stuffed them in that pocket. We witnessed so many new and interesting ways of manipulation over the years that one could be amazed. In no way is that television my mirror.

Two or three years ago we hoped that due to the accessibility of television equipment and the lowering of costs in the entire sector, a few new TV stations would be created about and for the people, but that didn’t happen.

Was the lowering of costs supposed to the onset of independence?

Yes and it still can be. A few [TV outlets] (including us) are trying to do that.

Is traditional television the competitor of Internet television?

If the format of Internet television and the message and idea it offers was in the style of [traditional] television, then yes, its competitor is television. And in that case, Internet television’s positions are not advantageous. But if its content and style are different, then television cannot be its competitor. 

Of course, it’s not good when there are no competitors because then you shape your market, which is difficult to do alone. Imagine: there’s only one store on the street selling stunning shoes, while somewhere else there are 7 of the same shops side by side. 

The market has proven that in the second case the business makes better progress, since the shop whose goods are considered better in the competition wins. 

It’s noticeable that the pillars of CivilNet are young journalists; that is, those who have neither the recollection of nor work experience in the Soviet era. Is this approach based on principle?

It’s always easier to teach from zero than try to undo what’s already established. Of course, there were some good things in the previous system, but you can’t tell someone keep this but get rid of that.

And then going from traditional (I don’t want to say “old”) media to new media, journalists, whether they like it or not, bring with them their past experience, style, ways, expectations. For example, they know that an article has to be long and the voice contain Catholicos-like undulations.

There’s an interesting Soviet assumption that everyone reads everything every day and is informed of all the news. For example, [local news media] writes: “After the well-known incidents…” But, I’m sorry, the reader might not know about that incident because, say, he was asleep that day. Or in the article the phrase “let me note” may be added, not taking into consideration the fact that the article itself is a “note”.

What I’m saying is that in every instance the context must be recalled and to avoid templates and ready-made formulas. That’s a sign of respecting your audience. 

CivilNet prefers to work with educated, trilingual youth. Having or not having experience is not significant; a journalism education is also not mandatory. 

Television and generally different media outlets are driven by ratings. Is this tool measuring the number of viewers or visitors a priority for you?

“We never remove a piece that’s been published — this decision is our defense. If there are complaints, we respond, saying that not editing pieces is our principle — otherwise, even our neighbors’ aunts will call us and will want to change something”

Of course we look at the ratings, but that’s not the only indicator [we look at]. Ratings lead to very interesting conclusions when you study what programs are watched at what time. Activity and movement, of course, happens during the evening times, while during the day the image is more static. 

Measurements are important for us because our audience is not only [in] Armenia. Perhaps you think that [people] in the US watch us a lot, but that’s not so. A big percentage of our audience is in Russia — then also in Europe and the US. We even have viewers in Djibouti and Belize, which was quite surprising.

Of course, we try to analyze the fluctuations in views, but since there are many unknown in those measurement formulas, it’s hard to clearly understand what’s key.

Viewership depends on various factors. Sometimes it was the successful headline or the editing of a video [that led to a high number of views]. It’s possible that the way the news was presented was felicitous or drastic. There are times when a story having a modest number of views begins to interest thousands of people only some time later. 

We also try to understand to what extent we are all dependent on Facebook.

Sometimes, indeed, there’s the impression that there’s one news outlet in Armenia and that’s Facebook.

Yes, and it’s really a pity that searching in that [social] network is very difficult — it’s nearly impossible. Of course, news outlets feel that regret, while it’s great for Facebook.

Our [Armenian] society is overly politicized. Can we presume that the success of television is somewhat due to it being outside of (perhaps above) politics? CivilNet does small projects about art and life, and it seems it is with these that it becomes attractive for the audience.

We understand that the most important is the visual, and not everything can be considered a reportage. It’s desirable to allow people to speak and think freely, show immediate reaction, and even live in the scene. 

And then you have to be convinced that the audience is not stupid. Great programs can be prepared using only statistical data and avoiding the participation of those 50 obvious speakers and [public or political] figures who constantly appear on television.

Of course, we’re grateful to all our guests, but we also recognize that always hearing the same messages from the same people — those messages lose their power; they become weak. And the viewer, seeing the same person, immediately guesses what he or she is going to say. 

How do you try to ensure a balance of information when all the media owners know each other and have a certain dependence?

For example, we never remove a piece that’s been published — this decision is our defense. If there are complaints, we respond, saying that not editing pieces is our principle — otherwise, even our neighbors’ aunts will call us and will want to change something. 

And to those who disagree we say, welcome, with great pleasure we will report also your opinion or your — more complete — perspective. 

Obviously, we don’t deliberately make an omission. Our broadcasts are not closed to any [political or public] figure. It’s not like we make only one branch the subject of our stories while removing or hiding the others.  

Trust me, we spend a lot of time trying to present those parties that (we know in advance) will reject us. We respect our audience and we’re confident that the audience will draw its own conclusion. 

There are [public, political] figures who, surprised, ask us, why are you inviting us to CivilNet if you know our political position? In any case, we’re doing our job, and the rest is for the politicians to decide. 

Hard-hitting topics raised by the media often are belittled, devalued, watered down, and made to disappear. Why does that happen?

In our [Armenia’s] media sector, topics are quickly lost. For example, everyone spoke about the We Won’t Pay 150 Dram movement, but shortly after, they became silent. Meanwhile this topic refers to not only transportation, but also the underlying issues of everyday comfort and the formation of society. But the media stopped talking about the underlying [issues]. It will probably wait until January when the issue of raising the public transportation fare will arise again, and only afterwards will it react. 

We forget the core of the issue; we move along the surface, with flags and flowers…

In your opinion, what will happen with our [Armenian] press in the near future?

The news media now has a certain amount of freedom, but it doesn’t have resources. I don’t want to say that the Internet is not controlled, but in any case, it’s free. And in order to use that freedom correctly, the level of education must be raised: knowledge of languages, the study of practices in different countries, and so on. Then it will be possible to have more prepared audiences and professionals. 

Perhaps we have to begin from school.

Definitely from school. If, for example, if we had the funds we would have a news program for kids. That’s a big job that needs to be done, comparing and analyzing our and the outside world’s experience, shortcomings, and successes. 

Interview conducted by Nune Hakhverdyan.

This article was updated slightly on Nov. 26 at 6:25 pm local time to reflect a more accurate translation from the original (ex. “broadcasting license” was changed to “paper” and “news digest” was changed to “video”).