The Impact of Conflict on Armenia’s Media

Journalists, civil society representatives and lawmakers gathered in Yerevan to discuss the challenges that journalism faces in the region’s fragile security environment.   

The conference, organised by IWPR in the framework of the project Amply, Verify, Engage: Information for Democratisation and Good Governance in Eurasia (AVE), delved into how Armenia’s hurdles in recent years have profoundly impacted its media landscape, particularly freedom of speech, gender sensitivity and financial independence.

“Challenges to media freedom and freedom of speech are not unique to Armenia, which shares similarities with other countries. It encompasses misinformation, a lack of media literacy, and, naturally, politicised challenges,” said Gegham Vardanyan, editor-in-chief of the Media Initiative Centre. 

War and other security issues have intensified pressure on local media. In 2020, as Armenia was battling the Covid-19 pandemic, the 44-day Second Nagorny Karabakh war claimed thousands of lives, displaced tens of thousands, and left the country in shock. Since then, volatility along the border with Azerbaijan, the prolonged blockade of the Lachin corridor and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have added further uncertainty. 

“The direct impact of the Nagorny Karabakh conflict is the insufficient provision of official information to the public. This creates an information vacuum, which allows manipulation and misinformation to spread. Consequently, this gap has been filled with inaccurate and misleading information,” stated Lilit Hovhannisyan, project manager of the Public Journalism Club.

Participants noted an increasing perception among the general public that security and democracy were incompatible, resulting in de facto censorship that has allowed further manipulation and control.

This approach finds fertile soil particularly in conflict-affected areas. One participant reported a journalist from Karabakh as saying “if forced to choose between democracy and security, I will choose security”.

In this environment, distrust towards journalists is on the rise, including at the governmental level, with instances of officials labelling journalists “killers” and “verbal prostitutes”: the latter in particular, is mostly associated with women, who remain vulnerable to abuse.

“In 2022, over 20 cases of physical violence against journalists were reported, and these incidents occurred at various public events,” stated Women’s Support Centre’s Zaruhi Hovhannisyan. “Women journalists in particular are subjected to a sexist approach… [those] covering gender issues become a target of online harassment… It is crucial for journalistic organisations to be highly attentive and responsive to these issues. The inadequate response to instances of sexism is concerning, as there is a lack of meaningful actions being taken to address such manifestations.”

“Security is a major concern and it poses concrete challenges to media freedom and access to information,” said Knarik Mkrtchyan, IWPR BREN project local coordinator in Armenia. “A polarised political landscape and widespread disinformation add pressure to journalists. It is of utmost importance for authorities to guarantee a plurality of voices [and] protect reporters from abuse, in particular against women reporters.”

Gendered disinformation has added a complex layer.

“Even individuals in the audience who may have more freedom to express their views, particularly men, hesitated to engage in conversations on these topics out of fear of being associated with the LGBT community,” said Vardanyan. Participants agreed that media literacy programmes, for both journalists and audience groups, were crucial to increase knowledge and awareness and address hate speech.

The polarisation of the media landscape mirrors deep-rooted divisions in the country.

“Certain media outlets are affiliated with former authorities, others with the current [ones], and only a handful strive to maintain their independence. As a result, many journalists prioritise defending political interests rather than serving the public interest,” said Hovhannisyan,

Participants highlighted that media outlet’s financial independence was a cornerstone for unbiased, fact-based information.

“Making funding flexible and unrestricted is one of the best options,” Hovhannisyan suggested. “We aim to promote the principles of feminist philanthropy and participatory grant-making in Armenia and advance unrestricted funding, [a solution] that may also work for the media.”