BBC discussion in Slovakia

   As I am a frequent watcher of BBC television, I was witnessing the latest television broadcasting of BBC Question Time where the British National Party leader Nick Griffin was one of the guests in the panel. The attention was rather triggered by the protests on the BBC premises, so I was eagerly waiting for the programme to be aired. Nick Griffin, in my view, made a complete fool of himself, mostly because of his frequent contradictions and argumentation which were too shallow to be taken seriously, and thus taking him seriously as a politician was therefore out of the question.
   Whether the set-up of Question Time was ideal, is not exactly what I want to delve on, as I doubt whether Mr Griffin would be capable to withstand any critical BBC confrontation, regardless of whatever set-up, or a one-to-one discussion with another political figure. He may protest and complain to the BBC as much as he wants - as he did the next day - but the truth is, that exposure by media is the best way to publicly show what kind of politician we have, and it is rather his limited capability which is the obstacle to himself.
   There is however a more alarming issue, which made me a bit uncomfortable. Obviously, a Slovak newspaper reported on the aforementioned matter, with a link to YouTube, as the BBC in principle is not available in Slovakia. What is alarming, are the discussions that followed after the article. It can be understood that perhaps some British citizen feels a resentment against some neglected political issues, and therefore - as an act of protest - votes for a party, even if this party may have some controversial principles. But it is their own milieu, concerning their daily life. What shocked me immediately, was the extremist and racist tone of some of the Slovak comments, condemning the BBC (for attacking Mr Griffin), and having some ideas and impressions, which would perfectly fit among the rank and files of the BNP. 
   True is, that (and this is confirmed by some prominent Slovaks) this society is far from cosmopolitan; it has little experience with foreign cultures - and indeed because of this being latent xenophobic. This can explain their sophist argumentation on Britain's imigration issues. Perhaps 99% of them never were in Britain, that aside. What disturbs me, is the uneasiness of common people to see the valuable role of media in a democratic society. Unlike the Czech Republic or Britain, Slovakia has a 'public TV network' which is controlled by government (and yes, censorship is not uncommon). Therefore objective news is hard to find. Those who are objective, and critical, face court with financial compensations that bring them on the verge of ruin. 
   The most integer president candidate Iveta Radičová - who unfortunately didn't make it - once stated that Slovakia has remained a village. Education is grossly neglected, therefore teaching people from a young age ethical values and becoming critical remains just a wishful thinking. Society has a trend to be indifferent instead of alert and much wrong can thrive endlessly, since hardly anyone feels a responsibility of his role as a citizen towards his own society. 
  A critical and well balanced talkshow on Slovak television is non existent, journalists lack a solid and supportive background, and leading politicians behave as if communism never left. The few exceptions are, despite their good intentions, a weak minority who will hardly reach considerable influence. It was another show of what this society thinks and wants. The result will be felt in a few years time, far too late, when they realise how destructive their leaders were, and how their passive role gave them all the leeway to do so. BBC-type standards media would be highly desirable. Just a few see that fact, because the majority doesn't understand this at all.

MS

Political reality

As I lived most of my life abroad, I can say that I was fortunate enough to have a close experience with other environments, witnessing different political systems, closely watch various trends in journalism and compare notes with every day people how they perceived their own society around them. No matter how much one reads books or magazines, such experiences are worth more than one can fathom, and surely give a person a rich contribution to his own baggage.

While my background equally confronted me with totalitarian systems, the more I have a three-dimensional comparison to make with my day-to-day events. Readers of my articles know me for my highly critical opinion, and it is no secret, that either my professional interaction as well as personal observations in present day Slovakia are frequently - if not always - dealing with analysis of trends that are disturbing, to say the least.

Last Thursday, we were awaiting a discussion programme on Slovak television. Before elaborating on the contents of the said telecast, let me first explain the background: Journalist Štefan Hríb, with a brief career path with Radio Free Europe, has for some years moderated a discussion programme, covering all sorts of subjects from science, sports up to politics. He got a name for being highly articulate about certain issues, not afraid of criticising government. His critical tone caused his programme to be banned from Slovak state television, but was later on taken over by a commercial network.

The political situation in Slovakia is - unfortunately - far from ideal. Twenty years after the so-called Velvet revolution of 1989, there is a high suspicion (and it can be easily demonstrated) that old structures from communist times are back. We are talking about infiltration of political figures into the courts and intimidation of judges, causing the judicial system to be completely incredible. Scandals, in which high ranking politicians are involved, which are costing society millions if not billions Euros, while at the same time urgent problems regarding pensions, health-care or even education, are visibly neglected. After some revealing broadcasts with judges and politicians, Mr Hríb insisted also to invite Prime Minister Fico, to come to his programme to give his points of view and to provide him also a fair chance to oppose perhaps some misunderstandings around his functioning.

It must be said, that the Prime Minister has a peculiar way of communicating to the press; when being asked critical questions, resorting to name-calling ("you journalists are idiots", "media is only writing lies and filth", "media is politicising problems, it's not your role to act like an opposition in Parliament"). Perhaps, Mr Fico still believes in the ideal situation, where media during communism should write pro-party statements. In addition, current moderators of political programmes have hardly the guts to ask real critical questions, which is appalling for someone who is used to e.g. Ted Koppel, Jeremy Paxman or Sir David Frost.

Admittedly, I was tremendously surprised to read an announcement the other day, that the Prime Minister accepted to come to the programme. Even to the extent, that I was convinced, that he would cancel at the very last moment (as is common). But he came. Now the question was, how long will he last, eventually to walk out on the show.

The atmosphere was clearly a bit nervous; Mr Fico elaborated on Slovakia's soccer victory the previous day (mind you, the only goal against Poland was their own), visibly stalling time and attempting to move away from political themes. Nevertheless Hríb stepped in and moved towards the relevant issues. Leaving overall details aside, there were a few things that could be noticed: The Prime Minister made a one-man show of it, babbling about propagandistic shallow and empty phrases, and had no intention to answer some critical points.

The reviews after (even during) the show were tremendous: Whether on Facebook or other forums, Hríb's programme was highly cristicised, for not being too strict. Having followed the programme till the end, I had a very, but indeed very awful feeling. And it took me several hours to recover from the blow. What in fact was the whole bottom line of this?

Firstly, I would like to start by stating that I do not fully understand the negative tone against moderator Hríb. When following Fico's media performances, it was clear from the onset, that any type of in-depth discussion is practically impossible. And it could be sensed, that Hríb had to balance a bit to keep the discussion going - the risk was realistically there, that if insulted, Fico would immediately leave. In fact, in my opinion Hríb should be actually saluted for this achievement. Those critics should try it for themselves, comparing themselves perhaps (and ridiculously) with just a Larry King.

Further to Mr Fico, I can truly add this: A Prime-Minister, who should be responsible for all his coalition-members' actions whilst denying any kind of responsibility ("that's their internal party's problem"); A Prime-Minister, with a laywer background, who publicly proclaimed before any court verdict the guilt of a young Slovak citizen, who sactions dodgy businesses and embezzlements, is not even by chance worthy to be a politician. A Prime-Minister who admits not reading newspapers and magazines, is out of touch with reality. A Prime-Minister, who things he is able to say that morale is not a political issue, that as long as the laws are kept (which in fact they are NOT) deserves nothing else but to be sacked immediately.

The saddest thing is, that despite his high-handed performance, like an autoritarian regent, his preferences are unbelievably high. The Slovak public seems to be indeed more interested in a free goulash, roll and a pint during elections, rather than realising, that with Fico the whole country is going totally bankrupt. Both economically but also even morally. Decency and ethics are foreign words - probably even banned due to the new Language Act. And this has lead to the fact that your pensions will soon be dried up, your health-care will crumble down soon. Not to think of other catastrophic scenarios. You can feast on your free goulash, but it will not save you from reality; the situation for which every Slovak will have to pay for in the future. The said TV programme has shown the real face of Fico. It has demonstrated, that Fico is an incompetent lawyer, is a ruthless, opportunistic and a coward spineless politician, still dreaming of the socialist era, and enjoying a cult that could equal Stalin or Kim Il Sung. In a West-European country, which in fact is a EU -partner, Fico would be a nobody. It is sad, that there is not a Slovak majority that wants to understand this. The only response is shrugging shoulders. What else could I think of this?...

MS