Working Paper 47

Manipulating the Media

PETER T. LEESON AND CHRISTOPHER J. COYNE *
Abstract
How does government manipulate the media? This paper provides a detailed anatomy of state controlled media manipulation by looking at Romania's transitioning economy. Using evidence from original field work, we identify and examine the specific methods government uses to manipulate the media where it is not free from the state. Additionally, we consider how media manipulation affects economic performance via the process of policy reform and provide evidence for the impact of government controlled media on the public's perception of media credibility. Keywords: Economic reform, media, public choice, Romania.

* Peter T. Leeson is an assistant professor of economics at West Virginia University. Previously, he was a Mercatus Center Social Change Graduate Fellow and a PhD student in economics at George Mason University. Christopher J. Coyne is an assistant professor of economics at Hampton-Sydney College and a research fellow with the Mercatus Center Social Change project.

The ideas presented in this research are the authors' and do not represent official positions of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

Only a newspaper can put the same thought at the same time before a thousand readers (1835-1840: 517).
Alexis de Tocqueville

1 Introduction
Over one and a half centuries ago, Alexis de Tocqueville pointed to the importance of

1840: 517). Nearly 170 years later, economists are coming to the same conclusion. Information plays a critical role in informing individuals decisions. From tomorrows weather to whos running for President, this information is increasingly provided by mass media. In Tocquevilles day, mass media was limited to newspapers. Today, however, radio and even more importantly television may be added to the list. Because of the substantial role it plays in providing information that guides our decisions, media can be

two opposing camps: public interest theory and public choice theory. Public interest theory predicts that privately owned media outlets will underproduce information and

disseminate biased news that reflects the interests of its private owners. State owned media is seen as desirable in this view because it corrects these alleged failures. In contrast, public choice theory predicts exactly the opposite. State owned media outlets, it contends, will distort information to benefit incumbent politicos and be abused by rulers to prevent changes in the status quo that threaten their positions of privilege. Although the literature addressing the connection between media and economic outcomes is still small, recent empirical research that considers these competing claims

R KI

As Djankov et al (2003) point out, historically, theories of media fall into one of

either a blessing or a curse.

G
3

PA

PE

media in creating prosperity: newspapers, he wrote, maintain civilization (1835-

corroborates the public choice theory (Besley and Burgess 2002; Besley and Prat 2002; Djankov et al 2003). Where government owns the media, citizens are poorer, die

younger, have higher infant mortality rates, less access to sanitation, there is more corruption, and less developed capital markets (Djankov et al 2003). Where media is

choice theory of media is correct: Giving government ownership of media confounds attempts to create economic prosperity.

To complement this empirical work, a small but growing literature theoretically

is free, it improves governments responsiveness to voter wants (Coyne and Leeson 2004; Stromberg 2004; Besley and Burgess 2002; Besley and Prat 2002; Mueller 1992; Sen

voter awareness of important policy issues, but also provides them with accurate information about the behavior of political agents, enabling voters to monitor politicians who are thus made more accountable to the public. Again, Tocqueville seems to have anticipated the economists here. As he put it, A newspaper is not only able to suggest a common plan to many men; it provides them with the means of carrying out in common

the plans that they have thought of for themselves (1835-1840: 518). Missing from the recent literature that discusses media and economic outcomes is

a detailed case study that explores concretely how government dependent media structures influence economic development in transitioning countries. While the work cited above provides a general, theoretic rendering of the public choice theory of state
1

Van Belle et al (2004) examine the ability of an independent media to compel non-elected policy officials to serve the publics interest. Dyck and Zingales (2002) consider how a free media improves the accuracy of media provided information in the context of corporate governance.

R KI

G
4

1984, 1999).1 In democracies, the presence of independent media not only heightens

PA

addresses how media structures affect the adoption of policy reforms. Where the media

PE

privately owned, the opposite is true. This finding is powerful evidence that the public

controlled media, it leaves open an illustration of how specifically media dependence upon the state operates and how it is connected to policy reform. For instance, existing theory does not answer questions such as: What does state dependence actually look like? Is it limited strictly to media outlets, or does it extend to media related infrastructure as

manipulation take? Are privately owned media outlets free from state influence? If not, how can government influence these media? provided information affect economic reform? And how exactly does biased media

detailed anatomy of state controlled media manipulation in Romanias transition economy. We draw on extensive fieldwork conducted in Romania over the summer of

interviews with approximately 30 Romanian entrepreneurs and political agents in face-toface conversations. Subjects were requested to engage in semi-unstructured, directed discussions that included questions posed by the authors. These questions were not strictly uniform across subjects, but broadly addressed similar issues concerning Romanian economic reform, subjects perceptions/experiences regarding the credibility

of Romania media outlets including newspapers, radio and television, and their perceptions/experiences regarding the independence of these outlets. This approach had the obvious advantages of flexibility, high rate of response, the ability to control the succession of questions, and the ability to explore complex issues. Its main drawback was reduced comparability of answers due to non-standardized questions.

R KI

G
5

2003.

We engaged in participant observation, which included in-depth personal

PA

This paper seeks to shed light on some of these questions. To do so, we present a

PE

well? What methods does government use to manipulate media? What forms does this

Interviews were conducted in three major geographic regions of the country Bucharest, Arad and Oltrepresenting both urban and rural perspectives in roughly equal proportions. availability. Political subjects were selected on the basis of relevance and

Thus those available political agents who seemed most likely to have

the Culture, Arts, and Mass Media Commission) received priority. Interviews with

entrepreneurs were selected primarily by reference from other subjects, though some were selected at random.2

2 Romanias Political and Economic Landscape at a Glance

To understand the relationship between media manipulation and economic reform in Romania it is important for the reader to briefly familiarize him or herself with

developing nation. Its population is around 22 million, making it one of the largest countries in Central Europe. This population is about equally divided between urban and rural areas, with slightly fewer inhabitants (about 3% fewer) in the latter (CIA World Factbook 2003).

rule in 1989, Romania continues to struggle economically and faces a long uphill journey before it reaches the level of comparatively successful reforming Eastern European economies like Estonia, Poland and the Czech Republic. Romanias per capita GDP languishes around $1850 and nearly 45% of its population lives below the poverty line

Subjects ranged in age from 29 to approximately 65 and included both males and females.

R KI

While it has progressed somewhat since the collapse of Ceausescus communist

Romanias current political and economic situation. Romania is a lower middle income,

G
6

PA

PE

insights related to the states relationship to Romanian media (for instance, the Deputy of

(World Bank 2003; CIA World Factbook 2003). Its growth rate has fluctuated somewhat since beginning its transition, reaching a low of 13% in 1992 and peaking in 1995 at about 7%. Current GDP growth is between 4 and 5%. Inflation has been a persistent problem in Romania, climbing to its height at over 250% in 1993. Though it has dropped

23% (CIA World Factbook 2003).

Some privatization has occurred since 1989, however the continuation of these efforts has stalled. Thus while the private sector has grown, the weight of large loss-

the work force, primarily in commerce and services (37.5%), agriculture and forestry (17.3%), industry (17.3%) and construction (3.4%). Public companies, however, still

the agricultural sector, despite some progress, the problem of property titles is not yet fully clarified. This and limited progress in privatizing agricultural companies hold back the consolidation of fragmented land holdings and the development of a viable land market.

has placed Romania in the category of Mostly Unfree every year since 1995 when it began scoring countries. Excessive regulation, bureaucracy, taxation, and rapidly

changing laws have created an impossible environment for entrepreneurs and continue to pose serious obstacles to business start-ups and growth (Aligica, Coyne, and Leeson 2003). Although this fact is widely recognized both inside and outside of Romania, little

R KI

The Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal Index of Economic Freedom (2004)

G
7

account for more than 40% of enterprise investment and 75% of all tangible assets. In

PA

making public enterprises remains high. In 2001, the private sector employed 62.8% of

PE

dramatically from this level, inflation remains a problem and in 2002 was approximately

has been done to improve the business climate. On the contrary, new legislation that deals with issues like regulation tends to exacerbate the problem rather than fixing it. Politically, Romania is a constitutional democracy and has a multiparty, bicameral parliamentary system. The Social Democratic Party forms a minority government and

Factbook 2003). Ion Iliescu, also a Social Democrat, is the current president. Political

corruption is rampant in Romania. In 2002, it was ranked the third most corrupt country in Europe after Russia and Albania (Transparency International 2003). In addition to

international community has agreed to consider Romanias accession to the European Union in 2007. Given Romanias failure to bring inflation under control, privatize

other problems), however, accession in 2007 seems unlikely.

3 The Institutional Structure of Romanian Media

While Article 30 of Romanias 1991 constitution guarantees the freedom of media, in practice this freedom is rarely to be found. On the contrary, Romanias media structure is

a portrait of state dependence.3 Before examining the methods that government uses to

manipulate the media in Section 4, we first sketch the landscape of Romanian medias institutional structure.
3

Free speech was of course ruthlessly suppressed in the Ceausescu era. The description of Romanian media provided here applies the period between the early 1990s and the present in which, nominally at least, the independence of Romanian mass media was guaranteed by the government. The emergence of particular attributes discussed here, of course, occurred in this period but at different times. The National Council of Broadcasting, for instance, came on the scene in 1992, while Rompres, the state-owned distribution network, on the other hand is a relic of Ceausescus rule.

R KI

N
8

significant portions of the economy or improve its environment of corruption (among

PA

addressing economic concerns, if Romania can clean up its political corruption, the

PE

holds about 46% of the seats in both the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies (CIA World

Romanian mass media may be broken into three major components: print media, television and radio. Print media is dominated by private newspapers/tabloids and there are presently over 1500 written periodicals in circulation throughout Romania (National Institute of Statistics 2001). Although there are no state-owned print media sources, it is

controlling the information that reaches the public (Media Sustainability Index 2002: 78). As we will discuss below, until earlier this year there existed only one newsprint mill in all of Romania, Letea SA Bacaua state-owned enterprise. Additionally, although a few

there effectively remains one distribution network for the entire nation, Rodipetalso a state-owned industry.

of television-owning households have access to cable television (with most of these households being in urban areas) (IMAS 2001). Romanian State Television, or TVR, is the most significant and pervasive mass media outlet in Romania. Indeed, it is the only Romanian television station that reaches nearly every home. The president and parliament appoint the directors of TVR. This discretion gives

government considerable control over the editorial direction of the station. Unlike its private counterparts, TVR is exempt from paying taxes on the equipment it purchases abroad (Gross 1996: 69). Particularly in rural regions, government-owned channels have significant control over the information available to citizens through television. There are two state-owned national channels that compose TVRRomania 1 and TVR2, two state-owned international channelsTVR International and TVR Cultural, and several

R KI

G
9

There are currently over 100 private television stations in Romania. About 55 %

PA

very small private distribution networks for print media have emerged in recent years,

PE

not uncommon for local political leaders to purchase local newspapers as means of

regional public television channels throughout the country. The most prominent of the regional government-owned channels are TVR Timisoara, TVR Cluj and TVR lasi. The state finances public television and radio through a compulsory television and radio tax. This tax preferentially treats government owned media, as citizens are more

which they must pay for additionally if they want access to non-government run media (Media Sustainability Index 2001: 180). The National Council of Broadcasting (CNA), a

state agency, has the exclusive right to determine entrance into the TV and radio

licenses throughout the country. Over the last decade, there have been approximately 1,800 requests made to the CNA for radio licenses; 301 frequencies have been granted

The state-owned Romanian Radio operates four national radio channelsNews, Culture, Youth and Music, one international channel, and approximately ten local/regional radio programs.

dominates the national radio scene. The president and parliament appoint Romanian Radios directors as they do for TVR.

for all three major forms of media. Mediafax, a private news agency, is the largest of these with most media outlets subscribing to at least one of its services. Rompres, the state-owned agency, is the second largest news agency in Romania and produces about half as many stories per day as its private counterpart (European Journalism Center 2002).

R KI

Finally, we should point out that there are two primary news agencies in Romania

G
10

(Media Sustainability Index 2002: 80).

As with television, state-owned Romanian Radio

PA

broadcasting industry.

CNA governs the distribution of TV and radio broadcasting

PE

likely to utilize state run media sources that they have already paid for, than private ones,

How Government Manipulates Mass Media

As the description above suggests, Romanian mass media is heavily dependent upon the state. This dependence begs the question, what methods does government use to Data collected through our fieldwork suggests four specific

manipulate the media?

control via financial pressure, and (4) indirect control via entry regulation. We consider each method of media manipulation in turn.

4.1

Direct Control via State Owned Media Outlets

As Grossman and Hart (1986) point out, ownership bestows control. Thus in the case of explicitly state owned media outlets, it is not difficult to imagine how government

beholden to the state for funding, state owned media outlets have a strong incentive to avoid being critical of the current government. Furthermore, as state owned enterprises,

these outlets are run exclusively by government appointed directors who determine both the stories that will be covered as well as the light in which these stories will be conveyed. Politicians in power thus choose directors and editors that will do their bidding, creating heavily biased news. Governments manipulation of media provided information in this case is obvious. TVR, for example, the preeminent source of Romanian news, is first and foremost recognized as a political tool of the ruling party rather than as a source of

R KI

and consequently do not rely upon consumer business to remain afloat. Since they are

influences media provided information. These outlets are financed entirely by the state

G
11

PA

PE

control via outlet ownership, (2) indirect control via infrastructure ownership, (3) indirect

avenues through which government manipulates media in this environment: (1) direct

credible information. It is widely acknowledged that TVR provided decidedly biased news coverage in the time surrounding the election of 1990 to politically manipulate the outcome. Since 1990, TVR has continued to manipulate information reaching the public. For instance, at the command of President Iliescu, TVR has canceled programs that

Closely related to direct state ownership of media outlets is the ownership of

outlets by incumbent politicians. A phenomenon called Berlusconisationwhereby political leaders purchase media outlets to use for their political purposeshas grown

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who is also a prominent media mogul, and refers to the endowment of media ownership and a political office in the same individual. Although

and operated for the purposes of profit, but instead to manipulate information reaching the outlets audience. In many instances, these outlets are not even self-sustaining but are instead cross subsidized by their owners other businesses that generate profits. Politicians find it worthwhile to keep these media sources operating despite the fact that they often generate monetary losses because of their ability to control information

reaching the public (Media Sustainability Index 2002: 82). Berlusconisation is most pervasive on the local scale in less urban areas where

local newspapers and radio stations are struggling financially. Counties in Romania such as Bacau, Gorj, Brasov, Constanta, Vrancea, and Neamt best exemplify this phenomenon (Media Monitoring Agency 2003). In Bacau, for example, the mayor owns three out of five local media outlets (Avadani 2002). In Constanta County, the mayor and county

R KI

G
12

in this case outlets are technically in the hands of private owners, they are not acquired

PA

substantially in Romania in recent years. This practice received its name from Italian

PE

feature members of the opposition (Gross 1996: 67).

prefect together have near complete ownership of media outlets. To make matters worse, Conpress, a media distribution agency for South-East Romania is owned by the mayors friend, creating another means for him to control local media (Media Monitoring Agency 2004: 18). Several local BBC affiliate stations were also recently purchased by local

areas (US Department of State 2004).

4.2 Indirect Control via State Owned Media Infrastructure

press is guaranteed only to those who own one. Lieblings remark is an insightful one because it highlights the importance of who owns the inputs used in media production. If media outlets are privately owned, but vital means of production and distribution are

strong.

method government uses to manipulate the media. For example, until earlier this year, there was only one newsprint mill in all of RomaniaLetea SA Bacaua state-owned

firm. The governments monopoly on newsprint gave it direct control over what private newspapers would be able to operate, and through this, indirect control over the content of paper-reported news. Letea was recently privatized; however, many citizens question the fairness of the process, as it ended up in the hands of a politically well-connected Social Democrat who shares the governing partys biases (Personal Interview, Mona Musca, Bucharest, May 26, 2003).

R KI

Indeed, in Romania, state ownership of media related infrastructure is one indirect

monopolized in the hands of the state, governments control over the media remains

G
13

PA

The American journalist, A. J. Liebling, has been quoted as once saying: Freedom of the

PE

Romanian political rulers in an effort to manipulate media provided information in their

Similarly, the distribution network for printed media in Romania, Rodipet, is state-owned. Rodipet functions as one of governments strongest structural controls over the printed media industry. The state is able to use its monopoly position over

distribution in much the same way that it was able to use its former monopoly position

after a newspaper owner in Braila with strong connections to the mayor was appointed

general manager of Rodipet in his region, Rodipet stopped distributing two competing independent papers in the city (Media Sustainability Index 2002: 82). Similarly, in

terminated a newspapers distribution because it dared to discuss the mayor in a negative light (Media Monitoring Agency 2004: 18). Two notable private distribution networks

relatively politically unconnected to challenge the state-owned Rodipet in most places.

4.3 Indirect Control via Financial Pressure

There is great truth in the old adage that one should not bite the hand that feeds them. Where media is independent of government, this means avoiding the ire of its customers.

Where media outlets rely upon government to remain afloat, however, it means staying on the good side of those who wield political power. By creating an environment in

which most private media outlets depend financially upon the state, the Romanian government is able to indirectly control the media. Indeed, Mona Musca, Deputy of the

Culture, Arts, and Mass Media Commission inside the Romanian parliament, identifies

R KI

N
14

have emerged in Romania, Hyparion and NDC; however, they remain too small and

PA

Constanta, the local distribution agency, which is owned by the mayors friend,

PE

over newsprint to indirectly control what information reaches the public. For instance,

this as the most pervasive method of media manipulation (Personal Interview, Bucharest, May 26, 2003). Among other taxes, Romanian businesses are required to pay a 19% value-added tax, a 25% tax on corporate profits, and a 52% tax on their gross payroll. In addition to

conjunction with these others makes the profitability of operating in the media business extremely low (Media Sustainability Index 2001: 179).4 Romanias generally excessive tax environment creates a situation in which many media outlets cannot afford to stay in

private television station, currently owes close to $50 million in unpaid taxes (Freedom House 2003: 128). In fact, every national private television station in Romania is

illustrates some of this debt as recently acknowledged by the Romanian Ministry of Finance.

Pre-1997, media received preferential tax treatment. Media products had the lowest VAT in Romania.

R KI
15

significantly indebted to the government (Romanian Academic Society 2004). Table 1

PA

business without going in debt to government. ProTV, for instance, Romanias largest

PE

this, media outlets in particular are burdened by a 3-11% advertising tax, which in

Table 1. Private TV Station Debt to the Romanian Government PRIVATE TV STATION Ameron Television SRL Antena 1 SA Corporatia Pentru Cultura SI Arta Intact SA Media Pro International SA5 Rieni Drinks SA Scandic Distilleries SA Rosul Group SRL DEBT TO STATE (USD) 8,506,898 1,925,886 1,708,567 7,809,797

Source: Ministry of Public Finance, 2004.6

stories, to address issues from an angle that will favor those in power, or to give disproportionate airtime to the governing party. The Media Monitoring Agency, for example, monitored the top four Romanian television stations for one week in May 2002 and found that 78% of all political coverage was of ruling party leaders while only 22%

covered opposition leaders (2002: 26). In a similar study that looked at the period between June 27, 2003 and July 6, 2003, together, Romanian Prime Minister Adrian

Nastase and President Iliescu comprised a full 80% of all political appearances on prime time television news bulletins (Media Monitoring Agency 2004: 5).

5 6

It is worth noting that Media Pro owns Mediafax, the largest news agency in Romania. As reported by the Romanian Academic Society (2004).

R KI

The government uses this media debt to pressure outlets to not cover particular

G
16

PA

PE
1,540,018 1,438,380 548,216

Many private media outlets also rely heavily upon state-purchased advertisements to remain in business. Government uses this financial power to pressure media sources to bias reported information such that it favors the governing party. The State Ownership Fund (FPS) decides with which media outlets various state-owned enterprises will

wield this power to influence media sources in need of advertisement revenue. For instance, the FPS may agree to purchase advertisement space in a newspaper if the

newspaper agrees to favor the governing party in its coverage. As Musca stated, The

Interview, Bucharest, May 26, 2003).

While this fact is widely known, Romanian state agencies frequently hide

surfacing. As Valentin Ionescu, the former Romanian Minister of Privatization, put it: Government illegally withholds information that might reveal hidden relationships between itself and private outlets (Personal Interview, Bucharest, May 5, 2003). Such withholding is technically illegal under the Freedom of Information Act passed in late 2001. However, when the states interest is at stake, the act is typically not enforced.

uses to manipulate the media. Romanian political leaders take advantage of the excessive and ambiguous regulations that restrict the general businesses environment in their country. These regulations empower politicians to find real or imaginary financial and operational violations by media outlets that refuse to do their bidding. Alleged violations are then used to financially or operationally strangle unfriendly media sources via hefty

R KI

Regulation forms another important method of financial pressure that government

G
17

information from the public to prevent explicit evidence of these unseemly deals from

PA

government buys the obedience of private institutions with these contracts (Personal

PE

contract for advertisements. As a government institution, the FPS is able to effectively

fines, raising the cost of compliance so high as to prevent profitability, or outright foreclosure of outlets. Government can also use the threat of infraction to blackmail media sources into biasing news coverage. According to a 2003 survey coordinated by the Center for Independent Journalism that questioned 260 editors and journalists, 53%

coverage (Media Monitoring Agency 2004).

Likewise, ambiguous and constantly changing regulation creates a guise for politicos to inspect unfriendly media outlets to obtain sensitive financial and customer

County, for example, local Social Democratic Party leader and head of the Gorj County Council, Nicolae Mishie, used the Financial Guard (one of several national

newspapers in search of information regarding their finances, advertising and subscription contracts.

subscribers to terminate their business relations with these papers. Similar methods were applied in Neamt by parliamentarian Iulian Tocu, where Tele M TV had recently included several stories highlighting Tocus corruption. Using the information he

obtained in an inspection, Tocu was able cut Tele M TVs revenue sources and then used their faltering financial situation to purchase a majority interest in the station. In

Constanta County, a local newspaper, Jurnalul de Constanta was subjected to similar

treatment after publishing an article that discussed the corruption of the countys mayor, Radu Mazare. Mayor Mazare used the local regulatory body to inspect the paper

ostensibly to check its compliance with the advertising tax. The paper was fined by

R KI

This information was then used to pressure advertisers and

G
18

regulatory/inspecting bodies) and the Gorj Finance Department to raid the offices of local

PA

information that is then used to squeeze these outlets private sources of revenue. In Gorj

PE

had been politically pressured to block the publication of certain information in their

inspectors for failing to post a timetable on its door (Media Monitoring Agency 2004: 19). Threats by political agents to financially strangle uncooperative media outlets via audits, punitive taxation, or through pressuring their main subscribers have occurred in the cases of Europa FM, RCS TV, and Alpha TV as well (Media Monitoring Agency

4.4 Indirect Control via Entry Regulation

As Djankov et al (2002) have demonstrated, politicians benefit by regulating firms entry

acting as the gatekeeper to the media industry, government can keep out potential media providers who might be hostile towards their policies and throw out existing media producers who do not serve its ends. In this way, entry regulation gives government a

The Romanian government regulates media entry through licensure.

powerful method of indirectly manipulating mass media. The

National Council of Broadcasting (CNA), a council composed of eleven members appointed by the president, government, and parliament, makes licensing decisions for television and radio broadcasting. The CNA, which was established in 1992, has

monopoly power to grant or revoke an outlets permission to broadcast at any time. In addition, once an aspiring media broadcaster has been granted a license by the CNA, it must obtain operating authorization from the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, which constitutes another politically determined hurdle to entering the broadcasting industry. Through this power to determine what media outlets may and may not enter the media business, government is able to influence information

R KI

G
19

PA

into particular industries. In the case of the media industry this is particularly true. By

PE

2003; see also US Department of State 2004).

conveyed via broadcast media. For instance, Omega TV was recently shut down by the CNA after a guest appearing on one of its programs was critical of the Romanian government (Media Stability Index 2002: 76). The appointment procedure of CNA council members is also the subject of

According to former CNA councilors Radu Cosarca and Iolanda Staniloiu, The

appointment process is largely based on political nepotism and corruption that always leads to a pro-ruling party bias in media.7 For instance, government leaders

media outlets that might be critical of the ruling party.

could not last three days. Clearly, he understood the power of media in checking the abuses of political rulers. Furthermore, Napoleons remark suggests that a free media would have made a difference for Frances economy. If he were correct, an independent media would have forced him to change his policies or be thrown from power. This

policy difference would in turn have generated a markedly different French economy. As this line of reasoning indicates, media manipulation primarily affects

economic performance indirectly through its impact on which policies are adopted. What policies are adopted is in turn a function of the behavior of those in political power. In

Quotation taken from Gross (1996: 77).

R KI

Napoleon is said to have once declared: If I were to give liberty to the press, my power

G
20

How Media Manipulation Affects Economic Performance

PA

appoint their friends to the council, who in turn refuse to grant broadcasting licenses to

PE

political corruption, leading to control over the substance of media-provided programs.

transitioning countries like Romania, policy adoption refers specifically to economic reforms. Policies broadly tend to serve one of two interests: public interests or private ones. Policies that serve public interests are those that generally raise the long run living

benefit one small group at the expense of everyone else. Such policies are those typically considered growth enhancing and necessary for economic prosperity. They include, for instance, low inflation, low taxes, transparent regulation, stable rule of law, free trade,

Policies that serve private interests, in contrast, are those generally aimed at privileging a small class of individuals at the expense of the rest of society. In the

kind of policy because doing so serves their own interests. By concentrating benefits on special interest groups and dispersing the costs of these benefits on the rest of society, politicians can benefit themselves in terms of money and votes. Similarly, by expanding the size and scope of government activities through the introduction of additional regulations, political agents expand their power, increase the number of bureaucratic

positions they can offer to connections and friends, and in some cases preserve the rationale for their own positions of political power. Policies that serve private interests are those typically associated with catering to special interest groups. They include, for instance, tariffs, business regulations and state-granted monopoly status. They can also include policies like inflation that benefit incumbent politicians by creating a short run boost in economic activity but harm the economys longer-term growth.

R KI

G
21

absence of a mechanism that punishes them for doing so, politicians prefer to create this

PA

etc.

PE

standard of a countrys entire range of inhabitants, or at least do not disproportionately

As has been pointed out by others, independent media provided information increases the transparency of the policy-making process, and accurately reveals to voters which politicians support public-oriented policies and which support private-oriented ones. By correctly informing citizens about politicians activities, an independent media

politicians at low cost (Coyne and Leeson 2004; Besley and Prat 2002; Besley and

Burgess 2002). This creates an incentive for politicians to adopt policies that serve public rather than private interests, as they are aware that if they do not, voters will find

provides voters with credible information about the behavior of politicians that enables them to monitor these agents. On the basis of this information, voters are able to punish

Where the media is manipulated by the state, however, this mechanism breaks down. The breakdown occurs by affecting the dissemination of credible information. State manipulated media tends to take two specific forms: (1) information withholding, in which the state prevents media outlets from disseminating unfavorable news, and (2) misinformation, in which the state uses its control to bias news in a way that favors

incumbent politicos, or to fabricate untruthful news that will favor these actors. If voters do not receive relevant information about the policy behavior of politicians, or receive information about this behavior that is false, then the monitoring capacity of media is compromised and the information it provides cannot be used as the basis for voter punishment. This means two negative things for policy. On the one hand, politicians who refuse to pursue policies in the publics interest will not be effectively weeded out

R KI

G
22

politicians who serve private interests and reward those who serve public ones.

PA

out and punish them accordingly at election time.

PE

In short, an independent media

makes these activities common knowledge and enables voters to effectively monitor

via the election process.

Furthermore, if political agents know this, they have an

additional incentive to indulge in the creation of policy that serves private rather than public ends. Note that both of these effects are true whether voters realize the media is not

they use bad/incomplete information to inform their decisions and so politicians who

cater to special interests may not be punished. In the event that they do realize this, voters are left to make decisions without any media provided information at all, as they

voting. Without credible media provided information about the behavior of politicians to guide their voting decisions, voters cannot punish politicians who pursue private-oriented

policy making and in turn economic performance.

5.1 Manipulated Medias Credibility Crisis

Mass medias dependence upon government in Romania has ruined its capacity to positively influence economic reform by destroying the credibility of media provided

information. Citizens simply do not trust their media. Romanians are interested in both the domestic and international, social, political and economic events that affect their lives.8 Most receive daily information from television, newspapers and radio.

Nonetheless, nearly all the subjects we spoke with were highly disappointed with the quality and reliability of the information available to them (Personal Interviews, May 19,
8

With a single exception (Personal Interview, Petru Oancea, Buteni, June 15, 2003), every individual we interviewed expressed an active interest in being informed about politico-economic happenings both inside Romania and outside of it.

R KI

N
23

policies. Thus medias perceived credibility is crucial to its ability to positively influence

PA

know that they cannot trust this information and so do not take it into account when

PE

effectively disseminating information or not. In the event that voters do not know this,

2003 June 17, 2003). Several subjects we interviewed generally considered private media sources more reliable than public sources. However, because government

indirectly controls private outlets via the methods discussed above, citizens call into question the reliability of private outlets as well. For instance, because Romanians know

to media outlets prepared to do the states bidding, they generally discount the credibility of these media sources despite the fact that they are privately owned. Citizens are also likely to know the owners of major media outlets as well as their own local outlets

and operate media sources, citizens know that they cannot believe much of the information these sources provide.

are aware that government uses financial pressure to manipulate these sources. For instance, several subjects we spoke with were aware of the political pressure that government applies to private media outlets that owe back taxes, like ProTV (Personal Interview, Viorel and Stelian Dobre, Visina Noua, June 2, 2003). For these reasons, citizens consider both public and private media sources highly politically dependent

(Personal Interviews: Ionel Dobrita, Visina Noua, June 1, 2003; Mioara Radulscu, Visina

Noua, June 4, 2003; Aurel Dinga, Buteni, June 13, 2003). A recent national survey of Romanian citizens corroborates our findings in the field (South Eastern Europe Democracy Support: 2002). According to this survey, only 26% of Romanians believe that Romanian mass media is independent.

R KI

G
24

Similarly, citizens discount information from private media sources because they

PA

(Media Sustainability Index 2001: 185). Thus when local politicians, for example, own

PE

that government abuses the television and radio licensing procedure to permit entry only

As Roxana Iordache, a former journalist at Romania Liberaone of Romanias most prominent private newspapersput it, all newspapers lie.9 Because citizens know this, they steeply discount media-provided information. Our subjects, therefore, were for the most part highly informed, but by their own estimations were highly

17, 2003).

Former Romania Libera journalist Tia Serbanescu characterizes this situation as Romanias fight against false news.10 The personal experience of two of our subjects

Mariana, Visina Noua, June 4, 2003). In the village of Visina Noua, a local woman and the village priest started a small Neolithic-inspired pottery workshop for local children to

sale at travel art exhibitions to sustain itself.

Near election time in 2002, the mayor of the commune comprised of Visina Noua and the neighboring village, Visina Vadastra, started a similar pottery facility in Visina Vadastra where he lives. The mayor did this so that it would appear as though he were helping his community and boost his reelection support. His facility produced no pottery.

However, to have the desired effect, he needed to show evidence of having produced

something. To do this, he compelled the local newspaper to take pictures of the facilities and pottery in Visina Noua and to publish a story passing the pottery, facilities and the idea of the workshop off as his own.

10

Quote contained in Gross (1996: 116). Quote contained in Gross (1996: 116).

R KI

G
25

take part in. The pottery workshop is non-profit and produces Neolithic-style artwork for

PA

in particular illustrates this fight (Personal Interview, Ion Dospinoiu and Stoean

PE

informed with half-truths and outright lies (Personal Interview, Pavel Terpe, Arad, June

The newspaper complied with the mayors demands because it feared the financial pressure the mayor could apply if it did not. For instance, the mayor could trump up charges of tax and regulation non-compliance, squelching the papers chances of survival.11 These sorts of methods have been used by local politicians both in Visina

When the woman and priest who started the facility in Visina Noua confronted

the newspaper about the story, the editor informed them that issue is political and that they were to drop it immediately. Individuals in the commune from both villages were

glorifying the mayor for reelection purposes. Frequent occurrences like this leave little doubt in Romanians minds about the credibility of their media. They also help explain

Our story above illustrates political pressure at the rural level. But the same problems persist in upscale urban areas as well. The subjects we spoke to about media in Romanias major urban centerBucharestfelt the same mistrust of Romanian media as the subjects we spoke to in rural areas. And both groups of subjects identified

government as the culprit for unreliable information.

the unreliability of Bucharest newspapers.

R KI

For instance, Razuan Beschea, an entrepreneur in Bucharest we spoke with, noted Specifically, Beschea says that the

newspapers publish fallacious stories about EU funds given to the Romanian government to administer to small and medium-sized business start-ups in need of assistance

11

It is interesting to note that nearly every entrepreneur we spoke to pointed out this problem with his or her own business. The bewildering array of new and always changing taxes and regulations enable government officials to find something they can fine the owner for at any establishment at any time. Thus it is critical to remain on the good side of inspectors.

G
26

why citizens widely discount media-provided information.

PA

well aware that the story was fallacious, aimed at hurting the Visina Noua facility and

PE

Noua and in other small villages inside Romania.

(Personal Interview, Bucharest, May 22, 2003). Beschea states that he has come to discount most everything regarding reform efforts that he reads in the newspaper because of false reports regarding the distribution of these funds. Newspapers, he maintains, frequently publish stories on new small businesses

anyone who has actually received this assistance. It is difficult to believe that within such a close-knit community of start-up entrepreneurs in his region, no one would know anyone receiving such aid if it were actually being distributed.

stories.

Of particular interest is one subjects report of fallacious media coverage

regarding the criminal activities of a local bureaucrat near Arad (Personal Interview,

caught illegally cutting timber from public grounds to be sold abroadalso a criminal offense. The officials activities were reported shortly thereafter in the county newspaper along with statements that the official was being imprisoned for his offense. Several months later, Birau says, the forestry official was promoted to chief of police in his town. Unreliable reporting like this, especially when it directly involves corrupt political

agents, leads Birau and others to disregard much of the information conveyed through mass media. A survey conducted by the United States Information Agency (1993) broadly confirms the views of our subjects concerning media reliability. Only 31% of respondents indicated a fair amount or greater confidence in the Romanian press and only 45% of respondents had comparable confidence in Romanian television.

R KI

G
27

Pavel Birau, Buteni, June 14, 2003). According to Birau, a forestry official was recently

PA

Other subjects confirmed Bescheas claims concerning the reliability of news

PE

receiving this aid. However, he says that neither he, nor anyone he knows, is aware of

As Romanian journalism scholar Nicolae Manolescu put it: The credibility crisis is evident. People have become accustomed with the lies told by journalists and no longer pay attention to them.12 As we noted above, the problems created by this

credibility crisis are severe indeed. Without reliable information about the activities of

interested policy. For instance, several subjects we spoke with indicated that despite their

best efforts, they could not make informed political decisions at election time based on information they received from mass media. Instead, they said they are forced to

Stelian Dobre, Visina Noua, June 2, 2003; Palica Mitru, Visina Noua, June 3, 2003). The inability of Romanian voters to make informed political decisions as a result

public. Unable to use media to effectively monitor politicians behavior, voters remain relatively powerless to punish political agents who serve private rather than public interests through policy reforms. Knowing this, political agents pursue policies that serve private ends. Thus instead of simplifying business regulations to reduce their number and opaqueness, or accelerating privatization efforts, for instance, regulations grow and

privatization efforts are stalled. Although politicians, bureaucrats, and a small number of existing businesses benefit from this, the vast majority of Romanian society and entrepreneurs interested in starting up new firms are harmed.

12

Quoted in Gross (1996: 129).

R KI

G
28

of medias dependence upon the state has left politicians largely unaccountable to the

PA

evaluate political candidates more or less arbitrarily (Personal Interviews: Viorel and

PE

politicians, Romanians are unequipped to punish those who refuse to pursue public

6 Conclusion
Our analysis leads to three conclusions. First, indirect control of media is just as

important, if not more so, than direct state ownership in determining governments ability to manipulate media provided information. Indeed, three of the four methods of state

Thus the presence of private media outlets is far from sufficient to establish media independence. Even where media infrastructure is privately owned, if government can financially pressure media outlets and infrastructure owners in the ways described above, or can restrict entry into these industries, its ability to manipulate media provided information remains strong.

Second, the general regulatory/tax environment of a country is critical to

ambiguous and ever changing, those in power can use the guise of regulatory infractions to financially and/or operationally choke media outlets and infrastructure owners who refuse to bias reporting or remain silent on issues that reflect poorly on those in power. Additionally, an onerous and ambiguous regulatory environment empowers politicians to

blackmail media outlets to do their bidding with the threat of infraction or by obtaining sensitive information the government can use to cut off an outlets main sources of revenue. Similarly, if taxation is sufficiently high, government can drive media sources into state debt and then use this as leverage to control the content of media reporting. Finally, the publics perception about medias credibility is crucial to medias ability affect positive economic reform. Where media is dependent upon government,

R KI

governments ability to manipulate the media. Where regulations are costly, numerous,

G
29

PA

PE

regulationare indirect in nature and consistent with privately owned media outlets.

media manipulation considered herefinancial pressure, infrastructure control, and entry

media provided information is not perceived as credible in the minds of voters. Knowing that information is incomplete and inaccurate, voters discount this information and are largely unable to make political decisions that correspond to politicians pursuit of public or privately interested policy. In other words, voters are unable to effectively monitor

be forced to change or be rooted out and replaced with those who pursue publicly interested policy. Furthermore, with the knowledge that voters cannot rely upon media provided information to monitor them, self-interested politicians are encouraged to make

Economic performance in turn suffers.

Although an independent media is not sufficient to create prosperity, our analysis,

medias dependence upon the state must consider both the direct and indirect channels that government uses to manipulate mass media. Unfortunately, taking the media out of governments hands brings to the surface an entire new set of public choice problems. Given its strong interest in maintaining control over media, we should not expect to see governments in countries like Romania voluntarily relinquish this control without a fight.

The benefits to those in power of retaining the ability to manipulate media provided information is simply too great. This does not mean, however, that improving the climate of media independence through policy is impossible. It merely means that this task is a very difficult one. For this reason and because media independence now appears so important for economic performance, the issue of how to reform mass media in transitioning countries is a critical area of future research.

R KI

G
30

which corroborates the work of others, suggests that it is necessary. Efforts to minimize

PA

policies that benefit a small segment of society at the expense of everyone else.

PE

political agents. As a result, politicians who pursue privately interested policy may not

References
Aligica, Paul, Christopher Coyne and Peter Leeson. Lessons from the Investors Roadmap: Implementation Challenges and An Exploratory Assessment of the Major Barriers to Rural Entrepreneurship from a New Institutional Economic Perspective, USAID Forum Series: The Role of Institutions in Promoting Economic Growth, 2003.

Besley, Timothy and Robin Burgess. The Political Economy of Government Responsiveness: Theory and Evidence from India, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 2002: 1415-1452.

CIA World Factbook, 2003. [Link]

Djankov, Simeon, Caralee McLiesh, Tatiana Nenova, and Andrei Shleifer. Who Owns the Media?, Journal of Law and Economics, 46, 2003: 341-382.

Dyck, Alexander and Luigi Zingales. The Corporate Governance Role of the Media, University of Chicago, 2002, mimeo.

European Journalism Center. [Link] 2002. Freedom House. Freedom of the Press 2003: A Global Survey of Media Independence. Karin Deutsch Karlekar ed. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2003. Gross, Peter. Mass Media in Revolution and National Development: The Romanian Laboratory. Ames, Iowa: Iowa University Press, 1996. Grossman, Sanford and Oliver Hart. The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of 31

R KI

Djankov, Simeon, Rafael La Porta, Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes, and Andrei Shleifer. The Regulation of Entry, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 2002: 1-38.

de Tocqueville, Alexis. Democracy in America. New York: Harper Perennial, 1988 [1835-1840].

Coyne, Christopher and Peter Leeson. Read All About It! Understanding the Role of Media in Economic Development, Kyklos, 57, 2004: 21-44.

PA

Besley, Timothy and Andrea Prat. Handcuffs for the Grabbing Hand? Media Capture and Government Accountability, London School of Economics, Mimeo, 2002.

PE

Avadani, Ioana. Press Freedom is a Costly Issue, Transitions, 2002. Available at: [Link]

Vertical and Lateral Integration, Journal of Political Economy, 94, 1986: 691719. Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal. Index of Economic Freedom. Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation, 2004. Marketing and Polling Institute IMAS. Poll, 2001.

Media Sustainability Index. Washington, D.C.: IREX, 2002.

Romanian Academic Society. Policy Warning and Forecast Report: Romania in 2004, 2004. Available at: [Link]

Sen, Amartya. Poverty and Famines. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984. ____________. Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc., 1999. South Eastern Europe Democracy Support. South Eastern Europe Public Agenda Survey, International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2002. Stromberg, David. Radios Impact on Public Spending, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119, 2004: 189-221. Transparency International. Global Corruption Report, 2003. Available at: [Link] pdf

R KI

National Institute of Statistics. Romanian Statistical Yearbook, 2001. Available at: [Link]

Mullainathan, Sendhil and Andrei Shleifer. The Market for News, NBER Working Paper, 2003.

G
32

Mueller, John. Democracy and Ralphs Pretty Good Grocery: Elections, Equality, and the Minimal Human Being, American Journal of Political Science, 36, 1992: 983-1003.

PA

____________. Press Freedom in Romania: Report on 2003, 2004. Available at: [Link]

PE

____________. Freedom of the Media in Romania, 2003. Available at: [Link] 2003%[Link]

Media Monitoring Agency. A Report on the Freedom of Speech in Romania, Media Monitoring Agency-Academia Catavencu, 2002.

United States Department of State. 2003 Human Rights Report for Romania, 2004. Available at: [Link] United States Information Agency. 1993. Summary of survey results reported in Gross (1996: 127). Van Belle, Douglas, Jean-Sebastien Rioux and David Potter. Media, Bureaucracies, and Foreign Aid: A Comparative Analysis of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, France and Japan. New York: Palgrave/St. Martin, 2004.

R KI
33

PA

PE

World Bank. [Link], 2003.