Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/670480
14 FOR decades now, and under vari- ous guises – Xandir Malta, TVM, TVM2, etc. - Public Broadcasting Services has always been a major battlefield in Malta's ongoing war of attrition. In the 1980s the national station was targeted by a sustained boycott, over accusations of gross imbalance and political gatekeeping. Similar complaints have been sustained ever since (though taken to less dire ex- tremes). Owing to its Constitutional requirements of 'balance' and 'im- partiality', higher standards of politi- cal reporting are demanded of PBS than any other station. Nor does any other station have to contend with quite so many com- plaints to the Broadcasting Author- ity. Smash TV may make headlines when sanctioned by the BA over Emmy Bezzina's latest slur… but the national broadcaster is subject to a veritable avalanche of such com- plaints on an endless basis. PBS's current head of news, Reno Bugeja – also one of its most instantly recognisable faces, thanks to his pop- ular current affairs programme 'Dis- sett' – will later show me an entire boxfile stuffed with complaints over the last three years. At the moment, however, we are in his office discuss- ing the general state of broadcasting in Malta over the past 30 years. Bugeja has been there throughout: having started his career with PBS in the 1970s. Two things, it seems, have been consistent in all that time: its popularity with local audiences, as reconfirmed by the latest Broad- casting Authority survey published last Tuesday; and the often extraor- dinary political pressure piled on the national broadcaster over its Consti- tutional obligations. How much pressure is there, re- ally? Listen to the Opposition, you'd think that Joseph Muscat personally dictated the eight o'clock news to the caster. Listen to government, and you'd think PBS was doing the na- tion a disservice by not informing us all about its magnificent accomplish- ments. PBS itself (judging by its mission statement) considers itself to be au- tonomous, insofar as editorial policy is concerned. Even financially, 70% of its revenue is self-generated. But how truly 'free' is the national sta- tion, given the political restraints within which it operates? "What I can say hand on heart is that I don't have any interference from anybody," Bugeja begins. "At- tempts at conditioning happen all the time, yes, from government and opposition… and also from other entities. Everybody tries to get maxi- mum advantage ['kullhadd jigbed lejn xawwatu']. But I think the final judgment is given by the people. I am pleasantly surprised that one survey after another keeps confirming our credibility, and our audience share. The latest survey shows that we have not only retained our audience, but our evening news bulletin gained 10,000 new viewers. That's no joke: we had an unprecedented peak of 111,000 viewers… which is of great satisfaction to us." Certainly it bucks the international trend, where mainstream TV news audiences are shrinking steadily: because of social media, because of competition from online news por- tals, etc. "Even our news portal currently receives around 60 to 70,000 unique hits a day… you'd almost expect it to detract from our television rat- ings, but the opposite happened. It doesn't mean we're perfect, natu- rally… because I like to think that God egoistically kept perfection to himself. But we do the best we can. To have said everything, however: the matter of balance and impartial- ity, as you know, is highly subjective. It is extremely difficult to convince someone of your impartiality, if that someone just refuses to see it…" Indeed a lot of people don't see it, as can be attested by a constant stream of official complaints lodged with the Broadcasting Authority: mainly emanating from political parties. In recent years, these complaints have increasingly come to target not just PBS, but also Bugeja himself… "Let me speak from my own ex- perience: I have a record, I think, among local journalists and broad- casters. No one else has spent 40 uninterrupted years at PBS. I served not just under 'three kingdoms' [to quote Emilio Lombardi] – but under all kingdoms: Mintoff, Fenech Ada- mi, and so on. I've been assigned to cover everybody's campaign at one point or another: I have letters from all campaign managers – from Joe Saliba, for instance – thanking me for my work." He breaks into a chuckle. "So if they see me as a devil today, well, there was a time when I was an angel in their eyes…" But are all such complaints groundless? Let's take the latest ex- ample: Bugeja was accused of failure to report a Facebook comment by former prime minister Alfred Sant, calling on Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi to resign. The PN argued that a former prime minister calling for the resignation of a Labour minister was 'newsworthy'. Isn't there some truth to that statement? "On top of the Constitutional values of balance and impartial- ity, I added another value: consist- ency. What does it mean? It means I have set criteria and standards that I always abide by, in all cases. They may sometimes limit or restrict the operational space of how you work as a journalist, it is true. But I believe that consistency is an important in- gredient that takes us closer to bal- ance and impartiality. To answer you about Sant's Facebook comment: I never quote Facebook, regardless of whether what is said is 'for' or 'against' something. Sant writes a lot of opinion pieces; he sends many press releases. In the case of press releases, we carry them or not de- pending on their news value. In this case, he didn't send any. Consistency demands that I do not carry contro- versial Facebook comments." He reminds me that a few days before his comment about Mizzi, Alfred Sant had written an opinion piece criticising Jason Azzopardi. "I didn't report that either. Had I re- ported it… they would be right: I'd be guilty of selectivity. But this wasn't the case." Complaints about 'selectivity' or 'bias' are not, however, the only source of possible pressure. The real concern arises out of the ownership model of the national broadcaster. There may be limited structures in place to keep PBS at an arm's length from the government, but the sta- tion still benefits from a state sub- sidy. There is an old saying that 'he who pays the piper, calls the tune'… Bugeja however insists that there is no direct interference from the government either. "As you can im- agine, I get sent all sorts of articles, press releases and interviews from the government. Recently I was sent the prime minister's interview with The Economist, for instance. I didn't report it. I imagine they didn't take pleasure in my decision: it was an interview in a world renowned pa- per, and contained many comments that could be taken as 'favourable' towards the government. But then, I don't report comments in foreign papers – or local ones, for that mat- ter – which are critical of the govern- ment, either. That's what I mean by consistency. To illustrate it with a proverb: in pottery, you can place the first handle '[widna'] anywhere you like on the jug. But with the second handle, you have no choice. Once you decide on the criteria, you have to stick with them in all cases…" Could this also be one of the rea- sons why TVM news remains so popular among audiences? Is it pos- sibly a reflection of a growing sense of detachment from politics? "Perhaps, but I think the appeal has more to do with the variety of our news. We can't fill up a half- hour news bulletin just with politics. Naturally, politicians think they are important, and try to dominate eve- rything… it's my constant struggle. But we try to vary the subject matter – culture, human stories, informa- tion… that, I think, is the secret…" But in the present political climate – which has been dominated by the Panama Papers – couldn't that be in- terpreted as an excuse to tone down coverage of what is ultimately a very turbulent crisis for the present gov- ernment? This in fact forms the bulk of much of the PN's recent criticism: it's as though PBS is trying to keep up the pretence of normality, at a time when things are far from normal… "PBS has not shied away from the Panama controversy. It gave abso- lute coverage to all soundbites from the prime minister, the opposition leader... and there was also, to be frank, a repetitive element about it all. If you watch the BBC, for in- stance – which has a global reputa- tion and following – they had the controversy surrounding David Cameron. But it hasn't dragged on for eight weeks, like ours has… if it did, the BBC would stop giving it prominent coverage after around three days. It doesn't mean there isn't any scandal; it's just that they keep things in proportion. In Malta, we have a habit of exaggerating eve- rything: to take things out of context, to keep beating the same drums over and over again…" Even when giving due coverage to Panamagate, however, Bugeja still came in for some sharp criticism. His recent interview with Konrad Mizzi on Dissett was the source of yet another Opposition complaint: this time, that the programme was 'one-sided' (as there was only Mizzi himself expressing his views). "It was an interview programme, of the kind I have been doing since 2008. All my interviews have always been one on one. It's never been a problem before: I interviewed Aus- Interview By Raphael Vassallo maltatoday, SUNDAY, 24 APRIL 2016 Attacks on my credibility are taking place… But let's be honest, it has always been the norm for the opposition to target the national broadcaster's credibility, whoever is in opposition ATTACKS Consistency is the key