Coverage of Kyrgyz Turmoil Singled Out

Experts say IWPR’s reporting on the change of government in Kyrgyzstan in April, which was preceded by mass protests against President Kurmanbek Bakiev, reflected the unique role it plays by combining the standards of international journalism with an insider knowledge of local politics.

The analysis that is a feature of IWPR reports was much sought-after in a fast-moving chain of events in which there was no shortage of straight news reporting but much less reflection on what it all meant.

More than 80 people died when Bakiev’s forces opened fire on protesters attempting to take over the government building in Bishkek. IWPR covered the most important key developments from the protests to the departure of Bakiev and subsequent outbreaks of unrest.

Reporters covering these chaotic events for IWPR said it was a challenging experience – as well as the physical risks and gaps in internet access, it was hard to obtain accurate facts. Ainagul Abdrakhmanova said it became almost impossible to check information because the Bakiev government was imploding and many opposition leaders were under arrest.

Sheradil Baktygulov, a Bishkek-based expert on public administration, says IWPR’s reporting stood out from the crowd.

“IWPR has its own unique style, which differs from media in Kyrgyzstan in a good way by presenting [different] views without inserting its own opinions,” he said. “The weakness of local sources is their one-sided, emotional reporting, whereas IWPR reports contain a wide range of views and different angles on the same event.”

Other western media employ similar standards of balance and objectivity, but IWPR has the advantage of being embedded in the country, knowing the situation from the inside, and talking to local experts, said Baktygulov. This came to the fore in its reporting on the political turbulence in April.

Baktygulov said IWPR’s insights were used by analysts working at research institutions and drafting briefing papers and reports for decision-makers in Kyrgyzstan.

Yelena Voronina, director of NGO network for protection of rights and promotion of interests of children, described IWPR reports as “ a model of real journalism”.

Although there was a lot of information around at the time, it was difficult to make sense of it, and to judge how much of it was accurate and fair. She turned to IWPR as a source of “trustworthy and balanced information”.

Political analyst Elmira Nogoibaeva said inherent weaknesses such as lack of balance came to the fore during the crisis, as media outlets struggled to predict how things were likely to develop, and what direction they should take.

“The state media were waiting to see who they’d be working for,” she said, adding that opposition-oriented media were also disorientated.

In this vacuum, many turned to media outlets based in Russia, but these clearly have their own slant on Kyrgyzstan.

Nogoibaeva said IWPR’s stories over this period of unrest earned “high marks” for explaining things and engaging the reader’s interest. She singled out pieces on the search for Bakiev-era government funds, the problems caused by Kazakstan and Uzbekistan closing their borders, and a comment looking at the implications of the change of regime.