This morning I met with a young American man who is in Mongolia doing a research project for a policy foundation he works for in the States. We discussed the July 1st riots, a small bit of Mongolian politics (which I only pay minimal attention to these days), and the current state of media freedoms in Mongolia. During our discussion I was reminded of a post I wrote in 2005 about Free and Fair Media. I drew a comparison of free and fair media using Natan Sharansky’s book, The Case for Democracy (a must read). My guest asked me, “In five years do you think the condition of Mongolian media will be significantly improved?” I thought about it for a moment and gave a resounding yes.

In the Sates conservatives complain about the liberal slants on the big three networks, CNN, and MSNBC. The left complains about the conservative slant on FOX News. In some ways there are similar things happening here. For instance, many people complain about the MPRP slant of TV9 and TV5. Others complain about the Democratic Party slant of C1 or NTV. In many ways, comparatively speaking, the Mongolian situation is similar to the U.S. Regardless of the bickering between sides it is a legitimate exercise of media freedom to slant stories however a station may wish. If MSNBC wants to slant left, that’s their right. If TV9 wants to slant toward the MPRP, that’s their right. The principles of press freedom are not violated. Such practices may not necessarily be good journalism, but that’s a different issue. Each station has a right to report the news from a perspective and in the manner it sees fit. That’s part of what press freedom is about. It’s also why Eagle TV tries to remain as neutral as humanly possible. That is also the the legitimate exercise of press freedom.

So many positive things have happened in Mongolia regarding freedom of speech and press. The state of media here today is much better than it was seven years ago when I moved to Mongolia. As I explained to my guest, there is no legal censorship or pressure on news organizations, but certainly there is some political and cultural pressure from time to time—though not nearly as bad as it was seven years ago. Significant strides in media freedom have been made. There are still some problems regarding transparency of operations and political ownership issues, but overall the improvement has been great. And I believe it will continue to improve as more and more Mongolian journalists exercise their legal rights and forge ahead to take risks covering the truly important stories.

As I already noted, the discussion I had today reminded me of a post I wrote in 2005 on this subject. You can catch that post by clicking here.

Just got an email this morning that Uptown Magazine, a very popular publication in Mongolia, recognized Eagle TV as the “best media” of the year. The award was given in recognition of this year’s anti-corruption campaign and our coverage of the July 1st riots.

When media is released to operate freely, instead of controlled, great things can happen.

Congrats to the staff of Eagle TV for a job well done.

Now that I’m back into full swing in the office I want to provide some perspective about the effects of the Mongolian riots.

During the four day Sate of Emergency I read many comments from Mongolians, and even had a few discussions on the issue: Is Mongolia’s Democracy Dead?

In short, not by a long shot.

You may have read blogs or comments online that the MPRP (that handily won last week’s election) was intending to use the State of Emergency to take control of the country or reduce freedoms, democracy, the press, and so on. One person I talked with asked if this was a prelude to a declaration of martial law.

From where I sit, these kinds of verbal machinations are—and I want to be diplomatic when I say this—a great big fat load of fantasy crap. Mongolia’s democracy is not dead. I don’t see any telltale signs that the MPRP is going to seize power, restrict freedoms, or declare martial law. Nor do I think they want to. Claims such as this are just, just, just…crap. That’s about as diplomatic as I can be.

The MPRP may not be the favorite party of a lot of people, but I don’t think we can look at their activities of the last four years and credibly say they intend to return Mongolia to the days of communism or forced one-party rule. A smattering of my reasoning…

• If the MPRP intended to restrict freedoms, then the State of Emergency would not have had a built-in four-day limit. It would have been open ended. As the days went by the government made clear that it fully intended to ensure the State of Emergency was lifted by the deadline. And of course, it was.
• If martial law was really an option, it would have happened right away.

As it stands, one of the chief complaints many people have about the government is that it reacted too slowly to the riot threat. Oppressive regimes don’t react slowly to threats, they usually react quickly and with overbearing demonstrations of force. That’s not what happened last week. Yes, five people were killed, including four who were shot. But that’s not an overbearing demonstration of force. Nor is tear gas. Nor are riot police. Nor are water cannons. The only overbearing demonstration of force that went on last week was that of the rioters who would not even allow emergency personnel to put out the fires!

• As for seizing power, the MPRP doesn’t need to seize power—they already have power through legitimate elections. Nor have they tried to wield excessive power that violates Mongolia’s constitution.

There is some debate as to whether is was legal for President Enkhbayar to order all media shut down during the State of Emergency. Even Prime Minister Bayar admitted publicly on July 5th that there was no such legal requirement or allowance for such a move. But I’m not overly concerned with that issue. When buildings are burning and being ransacked and the government decides to take measures to protect life and property, I’m inclined to cooperate with their requests or orders. Cooperating with the order to stop broadcasting did not hurt democracy, or freedom of speech and press in the long term—not one bit. The propaganda that ran on State TV afterward was certainly bogus, but most people aren’t fooled by that kind of garbage. Besides that, after four days everything was back to normal. So how was freedom or democracy hurt or impeded?

Now, these comments of mine should not be taken to mean that I don’t think there wasn’t some corruption going on during the elections. I’m not in a position to make such an accusation, but it would be ignorant to assume that there were no attempts in certain areas to skew election results. Heck, we’ve seen this in the U.S. Remember the efforts in Florida to validate invalid ballots during the 2000 election? In fact, one of the reasons given last week by protesters for their actions was that as poll results were coming in early in the day, their parties were winning. But as more results came later in the day they started losing ground. They therefore accused the MPRP of corrupting the results.

Did they corrupt the results? I have no clue. But I have heard this complaint before—in 2004. John Kerry’s people said early in the day that exit polling gave them big leads. But by the end of the day Kerry had been crushed. Moral of the story? Early returns and incomplete exit polls are not a legitimate basis to protest an election!

I’ve already written about the direction that some MPs seem to want to take to legislate Eagle TV out of existence. There are some people of significance who hold us partly responsible for the riots simply because we provided live news coverage. But, let’s be honest, even if the parliament found a way to legislate Eagle TV off the air, it doesn’t automatically follow that freedom of speech or press in Mongolia would be completely dead. I don’t want to give Eagle TV too much credit, but let’s look at the facts.

Consider that Ulaanbaatar now has 12 terrestrial TV stations, plus many radio stations and numerous newspapers. While all of the stations except for Eagle TV are owned either by politicians or political interests, almost all of them have been influenced in one way or another by the work of Eagle TV. Live coverage of events, once an Eagle-only affair, is beginning to become normal. Live, uncensored viewer calls, once an Eagle-only affair, has been adopted by most stations in one form or another. In fact, once Eagle provides live coverage of a major event, the other stations usually feel compelled to contribute in some fashion. The influence of our values and practices is clearly felt across the industry, and in the halls of government.

Of course, it is my greatest hope that our work will continue unabated and unrestricted. There has been a great deal of growth in Mongolian journalism and freedom of press. But there is still a lot of work to be done and new ground to be broken. I want Eagle TV continue it’s role of leadership in this area. But if we are legislated out of existence, I seriously doubt the powers that be, no matter what side of the isle they may be on, would be able to put the genie back in the bottle. Mongolian media has grown beyond that, and will continue to grow. I hope we will continue to be part of that growth, and help it reach maturity, faster.

In conclusion, a sober look at the political situation may reveal corruption on various sides at various levels. It may reveal serious problems in election practices and the execution of law. It may also reveal persistent problems in journalism and the practice of free press. But the existence of these problems, in my view, indicates growth—and it’s growth for the better. Like it or not, the MPRP is part of that growth. The MPRP isn’t perfect. But neither are the Dems, or the other parties. Step back and take a dispassionate look and you will see that the MPRP has contributed some very positive things to the development of Mongolia’s democracy. To deny it is to dine on sour grapes.

EARLIER: I haven’t gotten much sleep since the station began phoning me reports that protests over Mongolia’s election results have turned violent. The MPRP HQ is under attack. Police have fired into the crowd. Protesters have become violent. There is bloodshed. Ambulances are on their way to address the injured. The MPRP building is on fire. Protesters are becoming more violent and blocking the access of emergency vehicles to the building and even pelting the fire engine with rocks. Army troops have been called to the scene. Eagle journalists estimate there could be as many as 20,000 protesters involved. If so, this would be the largest anti-government protest since Mongolia’s peaceful democratic revolution.

While watching the events online through Skype, one our employees exclaimed, “I’ve never seen such a thing in Mongolia before! This is so scary!”

Eagle is broadcasting the events live, but apparently no other stations are reporting the events live. State TV did for a while, but for reasons unknown to me they have ceased. Though we did receive a report that their microwave equipment was damaged in the protest.

We are scrambling extra resources to cover the events. Associated Press is resourcing Eagle TV video for international coverage.

We have received some minor pressure to stop the broadcasts, but are continuing.

It amazes me that out of 12 terrestrial competitors, and additional cable only TV stations in the capital city, that no one is covering these breaking events. Thousands are people are involved in the protests. The HQ of the ruling party has come under violent attack. These are unprecedented events in Mongolia.

Finally, other stations have started giving coverage.

UPDATE: An informant in the government has let us know that officials are discussing the forced shut down of Eagle TV for our coverage—even though other stations are also now covering the event.

UPDATE: We’ve received a number of threats against Eagle for the coverage, including threats against the building (set it on fire). Security is moving to protect the property against potential overnight threats.

UPDATE: Most of the protests have died out, but a few small fires are still burning. Party and government leaders called a joint press conference to call for calm, but also blamed one another’s parties for the day’s events. Holy cow, I just got word that protesters are regathering at the MPRP building again.

UPDATE: Our staff are trapped on the roof of the MPRP building. When they try to leave the premises, they are attacked and beaten. They have been unable to escape. We are trying to alert the crowds to allow our crew to leave.

COMMENT: It is alarming how many protests we received from government officials and the Mongolian CIA demanding the news coverage be shut down. There is clearly some discussion going on at high levels that part of this protest was fomented by Eagle TV.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Our policy on such coverage would be no different if it were MPRP protesters attacking the Democratic Party building. There is a great deal of pressure upon our management team to force our shut down. However, this would be a critical mistake for Mongolian democracy. Most stations did not provide coverage until long after Eagle TV began rolling live footage of the thousands in the street. Our competitor stations were calling our station manager to congratulate us on our coverage (including those who refused to do any coverage themselves). One competitor even provided dual coverage by running our video on their channel live. In addition, the world is now alerted to the situation in Mongolia. Video from AP, fed to CNN, BBC, and other outlets, was all Eagle TV video, with AP using Eagle TV as their base of operations for their coverage.

The attacks against Eagle TV are unjustified. Though today’s events are tragic, trying to cojole or force the shut down of media coverage through Eagle would be a major step backwards for this democracy. The move by certain officials and party members to pressure the shut down of coverage is a clear sign that even though Mongolia has “freedom of press” it is still fragile and suffers under the influence of those who desire to control all media for their own benefit. We therefore believe that the need for a completely independent channel such as Eagle TV is more critical than ever.

With dismay but not surprise I read the news about Venezuela’s dictator Hugo Chavez making a move to shut down the only independent TV station in his country, RCTV—one that routinely opposes Chavez’s communism and takes a stand for restored freedoms in that South American country. Thousands of protestors took to the streets in a remarkable demonstration for freedom of speech and press, demanding that Chavez restore the license status to the station instead of letting it expire. Even worse, over the weekend military forces swept in and seized the TV station’s equipment before the deadline expiration.

Rhetorical question: Why are military forces need to seize domestic broadcast equipment?

In RCTV’s place Chavez is placing a new station patterned after his brand of communism. It will be one more in the many stations already bowing the head to Chavez’s communist propaganda machine.

Venezuela is not the only communist or former communist country to have media woes with government authorities. Two years ago Ukraine’s State TV journalist bolted against the government and made their own decision to report news in a more fair and balanced way instead of only towing the government line. In Mongolia a small group of protesters lead a temporary take-over of State TV in 2003 demanding the station air more balanced reports about the nation’s political politics after a stunning defeat for the ruling party. When the protesters were breaking down the door to get in the lead anchor went on the air and said that a group of “drunk people” had attacked the station. That same year the Putin government in Russia eliminated the last vestige of independent TV reporting not controlled by the government.

Why is it that totalitarian and socialist regimes insist on controlling media and eliminating free and open debate on the airwaves? Just last week I sat with a Mongolian man who told me, “Mongolian’s don’t like to comment on news stories unless they know all the facts (I guess Mongolians have never heard of “gossip” or “speculation?”), but on your TV you encourage people to comment and discuss the news openly before all the facts might be in. That’s not a Mongolian trait (he claimed). We see that as orchestrated by foreign influence.” Of course such a claim is pure poppycock. Of the hundreds of phone calls we take a day virtually all of them are from Mongolians, screened and placed on the air by Mongolians, discussing Mongolian issues from a variety of Mongolian perspectives. The live calls are so popular that since Eagle TV introduced the practice (originally more than 4 years ago) almost every other station (Mongolian owned and controlled) has duplicated it in one form or another. So the issue isn’t so-called “foreign influence,” rather it is an issue of control.

Totalitarian and socialist regimes tend toward media and speech controls for three important reasons:

Power

Political ideologies that are not founded first upon the idea of human freedom usually ascribe to some form of “management” or “control” of their subjects. In such systems, like communism, the State is the supreme authority and the people attain their rights from the State, granted as a privilege. But free societies take a contrary and more philosophically correct view. They view the collective citizenry as that which gives government its power, and the government exercises that power on behalf of the people for whom it works. Free societies rightly view a government not sanctioned by its people as an illegitimate government.

Arrogance

This may not seem like a “political” analysis, but consider that the whole philosophy from which a totalitarian system springs always, always has at its root the idea that people must be managed or controlled, and that there is a small class who must wield that control for so-called benefit of its citizens. Those same people also decide what those benefits are. Totalitarian and socialist systems are systems that have an innate distrust of its people and thus tend to breed distrust by its own populace.

Indefensible Philosophy

Every totalitarian system ever produced is predicated upon a philosophical system that cannot stand on its own apart from the exercise of oppressive or repressive power. This is true in religious systems as well as political systems. The great political evils of the 20th century—Communism and Nazism—could not be philosophically defended through a free and open exchange of ideas. They failed to win the masses without coercion, control, and murder. Unless deceived or driven by fear, most people will not openly or willingly embrace a repressive ideology. The same is true of Islam of Islamic governments. Even the Islamic world’s freest nation, Turkey, has seen its government make moves to solidify Islam as the State religion while hundreds of thousands stand against the move in protest. Unless deceived or driven by fear, most people will not openly or willingly embrace a repressive ideology. Ironically, it is the arrogant lust for power that prevents the totalitarian from recognizing the indefensibleness of his philosophy. He’s like a guy who has had too much beer. He might feel full, but thinks he can hold down just one more.

A free people tend to support and encourage the free exchange of ideas. But totalitarian rulers and systems predicated upon philosophies of human control (like Communism, Nazism, and Islam), cannot stand in the open light of day when their ideas are debated. Not all free societies have the right ideas, nor are all free people matured in their political notions—that’s human nature. Our political understanding grows just as our understanding of nature grows. But if we start from a philosophy that honors a free market of ideas then we allow those mistakes and immaturities to be explored and improved upon. A political philosophy of repression eliminates the good ideas along with the bad, in favor of that which is even worse, as we are seeing in Venezuela.

I used to think the days of communism were dead. How wrong I was. Communism isn’t dead; it just wrapped itself in a Lite Beer can—same skanky taste, half the calories. Sure. But what does it really do for you other than make you drunk?

“All fear societies are based on a certain degree of brainwashing. State-controlled television, radio, and newspapers glorify the actions of the regime’s leaders and incite their populations against those it deems to be enemies.”

The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror, has given me extra insight into the condition of media in Mongolia – and our mission of Faith and Freedom.

My ability to read the latest western books is limited by living in Mongolia (where’s a Barnes and Noblebaatar when you need one?) but during a recent trip to the States I stocked up with a good year’s supply of reading material. Sharansky’s book was my last pick-up; at the Denver airport while suffering through an 8-hour delay. Thank God for airport delays! The Case For Democracy, is one of the most insightful books on political freedom I’ve read.

You may remember from an earlier commenterry that a recent analysis by Mongolia’s Press Institute and Globe International found that while there is sufficient media freedom for journalists to pursue their craft, there is, in practice, less freedom because of how ideological control of the media has developed over recent years. Keep in mind that Mongolia is a young democracy, without the foundation of Judeo-Christian traditions from which modern political freedom sprang (I explore this issue in my forthcoming book, Faith & Freedom: How the missionary principle facilitates political freedom). Like any nation going through a major political change, there are significant issues to grapple with and problems to overcome as the society experiments with new social concepts. Allow me to illustrate.

Yesterday a missionary friend in Mongolia said to me, “To Mongolians unity is often much higher in their priorities than truth because they have a communal society.” Brilliant! Coupled with Sharansky’s comments in his book about the differences between fear societies and free societies, I was beginning to gain greater insight into why, socially, Mongolia slipped so easily into communism. Sharansky notes, “A society is free if people have the right to express their views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm… A simple way to determine whether the right to dissent in a particular society is being upheld is to apply the town square test: Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it’s a fear society…fear societies never cross this threshold and are always unjust.”

What does this have to do with Eagle TV and state of Mongolian media? Very simply, while Mongolia has successfully transitioned from a fear society (under communism) to a free society (under democratic reform), much of its media still lags behind. Most journalists still cannot apply the town square test to their industry, or even many of their workplaces and come away saying they work in an atmosphere of complete media freedom.

The 2005 edition of Freedom of Information in Mongolia, published by Mongolia’s Press Institute, Pact Mongolia, and the U.S. Embassy, illustrates this well. It provides citation after citation of instances where Mongolian journalists were not permitted to write or produce stories on significant political or social issues. Many of those who took the risk lost their jobs, were interrogated by police, or suffered other injustices.

Even at the most free and independent media entity in the country – Eagle TV – we still see the problem of a fear society entrenched in the Mongolian media industry. During the recent Presidential elections I provided a specific set of instructions to our journalists that were designed to obey the existing laws on media and elections, while at the same time pushing the envelope – within the law – in order to gain new ground for press freedom. After the meeting was over one of our journalists came to me privately and said, “I don’t want to do this. I’m afraid.”

She wasn’t kidding, or making a mountain out of a mole hill. While there have been significant developments in media freedom during the last three years, 2003-2004 was still the period that more journalists were interrogated by authorities than any time previously. Udriin Sonin newspaper reported on April 17, 2004 that 400 journalists were interrogated, with 80 cases unresolved during that time (the Central Police Department and Judicial Authority take issue with that report). I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the reported increase happened during the period when the American-run Eagle TV was no longer on the air, serving as the standard-bearer for media freedom.

The point here is that even at the single most free, uncensored, creative media outlet in the country – Eagle TV – run by an American organization applying principles of western ethics, the fear society that still exists within the Mongolia media has not quite breathed its last. It is still able to stretch its leathery claws into our protective sphere – even if only a little.

I confess to a great deal of pride in what has been accomplished at Eagle TV. Our journalists don’t have an ideological overseer looking over their shoulder. No one on staff, or in management, has any authority to refuse airing a story on ideological grounds beyond the standard practices of fact-checking, proper sourcing, etc. It doesn’t mean things are perfect, and that our people don’t make mistakes. But it does mean that they are free to make mistakes in the exercise of their own judgment. And they are free to say no to the facilitators of the fear society within the media knowing that they will have the unquestionable backing of their fellow staff – and the boss. I believe it is this approach which best serves the growth of democratic ideals within the media – and help us set the stage for further efforts to advance freedom of conscience, and our faith in Jesus Christ.

“All fear societies are based on a certain degree of brainwashing. State-controlled television, radio, and newspapers glorify the actions of the regime’s leaders and incite their populations against those it deems to be enemies.”

The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror, has given me extra insight into the condition of media in Mongolia – and our mission of Faith and Freedom.

My ability to read the latest western books is limited by living in Mongolia (where’s a Barnes and Noblebaatar when you need one?) but during a recent trip to the States I stocked up with a good year’s supply of reading material. Sharansky’s book was my last pick-up; at the Denver airport while suffering through an 8-hour delay. Thank God for airport delays! The Case For Democracy, is one of the most insightful books on political freedom I’ve read.

You may remember from an earlier commenterry that a recent analysis by Mongolia’s Press Institute and Globe International found that while there is sufficient media freedom for journalists to pursue their craft, there is, in practice, less freedom because of how ideological control of the media has developed over recent years. Keep in mind that Mongolia is a young democracy, without the foundation of Judeo-Christian traditions from which modern political freedom sprang (I explore this issue in my forthcoming book, Faith & Freedom: How the missionary principle facilitates political freedom). Like any nation going through a major political change, there are significant issues to grapple with and problems to overcome as the society experiments with new social concepts. Allow me to illustrate.

Yesterday a missionary friend in Mongolia said to me, “To Mongolians unity is often much higher in their priorities than truth because they have a communal society.” Brilliant! Coupled with Sharansky’s comments in his book about the differences between fear societies and free societies, I was beginning to gain greater insight into why, socially, Mongolia slipped so easily into communism. Sharansky notes, “A society is free if people have the right to express their views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm… A simple way to determine whether the right to dissent in a particular society is being upheld is to apply the town square test: Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it’s a fear society…fear societies never cross this threshold and are always unjust.”

What does this have to do with Eagle TV and state of Mongolian media? Very simply, while Mongolia has successfully transitioned from a fear society (under communism) to a free society (under democratic reform), much of its media still lags behind. Most journalists still cannot apply the town square test to their industry, or even many of their workplaces and come away saying they work in an atmosphere of complete media freedom.

The 2005 edition of Freedom of Information in Mongolia, published by Mongolia’s Press Institute, Pact Mongolia, and the U.S. Embassy, illustrates this well. It provides citation after citation of instances where Mongolian journalists were not permitted to write or produce stories on significant political or social issues. Many of those who took the risk lost their jobs, were interrogated by police, or suffered other injustices.

Even at the most free and independent media entity in the country – Eagle TV – we still see the problem of a fear society entrenched in the Mongolian media industry. During the recent Presidential elections I provided a specific set of instructions to our journalists that were designed to obey the existing laws on media and elections, while at the same time pushing the envelope – within the law – in order to gain new ground for press freedom. After the meeting was over one of our journalists came to me privately and said, “I don’t want to do this. I’m afraid.”

She wasn’t kidding, or making a mountain out of a mole hill. While there have been significant developments in media freedom during the last three years, 2003-2004 was still the period that more journalists were interrogated by authorities than any time previously. Udriin Sonin newspaper reported on April 17, 2004 that 400 journalists were interrogated, with 80 cases unresolved during that time (the Central Police Department and Judicial Authority take issue with that report). I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the reported increase happened during the period when the American-run Eagle TV was no longer on the air, serving as the standard-bearer for media freedom.

The point here is that even at the single most free, uncensored, creative media outlet in the country – Eagle TV – run by an American organization applying principles of western ethics, the fear society that still exists within the Mongolia media has not quite breathed its last. It is still able to stretch its leathery claws into our protective sphere – even if only a little.

I confess to a great deal of pride in what has been accomplished at Eagle TV. Our journalists don’t have an ideological overseer looking over their shoulder. No one on staff, or in management, has any authority to refuse airing a story on ideological grounds beyond the standard practices of fact-checking, proper sourcing, etc. It doesn’t mean things are perfect, and that our people don’t make mistakes. But it does mean that they are free to make mistakes in the exercise of their own judgment. And they are free to say no to the facilitators of the fear society within the media knowing that they will have the unquestionable backing of their fellow staff – and the boss. I believe it is this approach which best serves the growth of democratic ideals within the media – and help us set the stage for further efforts to advance freedom of conscience, and our faith in Jesus Christ.