Manipulation by Pro-Government Media, as if the Opposition Has “Different Message Boxes” Regarding the Briefing Text

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Opposition
107
VIEWS

On 13 November, the pro-government TV station Rustavi 2 and several news agencies (Newshub, Info 9) circulated a social media card that, according to them, showed differing statements made by representatives of opposition parties (Shushana Matsaberidze, Tengo Tevzadze, Nodar Chachanidze, Tamar Chergoleishvili). The quotes referred to a statement read out by citizens on Rustaveli Avenue on 13 November, in which a protest rally was announced for 28 November. When disseminating this information, the media outlets claimed that the respondents had made contradictory comments about the author of the text. On the social media card, the politicians are quoted as follows:

Shushana Matsaberidze, Droa:“Giga Lemonjava wrote the text this morning.”
Tengo Tevzadze, Ahali:“The text was written together with civil society organizations; members of political parties were also involved.”
Nodar Chachanidze, Ahali:“The text was not written in Brussels; I was also participating (in drafting the text).”
Tamar Chergoleishvili, Federalists:“The text circulated in numerous chat groups.”
Opposition

The claim by pro-government media that opposition representatives made conflicting statements about the authorship of the 13 November announcement is manipulative. In their statements, Tengo Tevzadze, Nodar Chachanidze, and Tamar Chergoleishvili all said that the text read on 13 November has been drafted jointly by civil society organizations and politicians. Shushana Matsaberidze and Tamar Chergoleishvili confirm that Giga Lemonjava, a member of the political party Droa, worked on the initial version of the text, which does not contradict what the other respondents said about the final version being produced through a collaborative process.

On 13 November, politicians, civil society activists, and family members of those detained during protests gathered on Rustaveli Avenue to read a joint statement. Shushana Matsaberidze of the Droa party wrote that the statement had been drafted by Giga Lemonjava. The same day, Tamar Chergoleishvili, leader of the Federalists party, published a video in which she is seen giving an interview to a Public Broadcaster journalist. Chergoleishvili explains that the text was drafted by politicians and civil society representatives and that it was shared with other groups to achieve consensus. She also noted that the text had been written by Giga Lemonjava: 

Tamar Chergoleishvili (0:45): “In fact, this is a text of the opposition and civil society representing the Georgian people, and this text circulated in numerous chats.

[…] Giga Lemonjava was writing it at night; he had to send it during the night but didn’t manage, and he apologized in the chat, saying he couldn’t send it because he had something to take care of, so he sent it in the morning.”

In its 6 p.m. news broadcast on 13 November, Rustavi 2 also aired interviews with members of the Ahali party, Nodar Chachanidze and Tengo Tevzadze, on the same topic. Both confirm that the statement’s text was drafted jointly and that they personally took part in the process. After pro-government television and news agencies claimed that the politicians had made mutually exclusive statements, Nodar Chachanidze published a post. In it, he noted that many people were involved in drafting the text and that its initial version was prepared by Giga Lemonjava. In the Rustavi 2 report, both politicians give statements with similar content and say that the text read at the briefing was prepared jointly by civil society organizations and political parties.

Tengo Tevzadze (5:10): “I know exactly where this text was written. It was written in a working format together with civil society organizations, where we – members of political parties – and civil society groups were involved. This is not the kind of text that needs to be written somewhere else. It reflects the voice of the Georgian people. Why would we need consultations elsewhere for this?”

Nodar Chachanidze (5:30): As if texts are written abroad, overseas. This is definitely not the case. I personally participated. I have never been to Brussels; I have not yet been to Belgium at all, so I certainly was not in the place where this text was supposedly written. I was not involved in any such consultations; of course, consultations take place. To call the cooperation of political parties and civil society organizations with the EU a betrayal, or to label it as something like that – this is shameful.”

Therefore, it is untrue that some opposition politicians were making mutually contradictory statements about the author of the text read on 13 November. In reality, they note that representatives of civil society and political parties took part in consultations to draft the joint statement and that the initial version was written by Giga Lemonjava.

  • What do we know about the text announcing the 28 November rally, and who circulated it first?

The news agency Prime Time published an English-language letter on 13 November at 15:00. The outlet wrote, “Prime Time has received a document from Brussels, sent to the local opposition by specific senior EU officials.” Prime Time and, later, other media outlets relying on its reporting wrote that opposition parties and civil society organizations were receiving “assignments” and statement texts from the European Union.

It is noteworthy that the letter contains neither an EU logo nor the sender’s name or date. It begins with the sentence: “If possible, please refrain from making radical changes to the text.” Politicians deny the information circulated by Prime Time. For example, Tamar Chergoleishvili says that before being read publicly, the statement had been shared across multiple chat groups and that “maybe in one of the chats they have a State Security Service agent hiding there, and he stole it from there, took it, translated it, and published it.”

Opposition

Archive: 1; 2;


The article has been written in the framework of Facebook’s fact-checking program. You can read more about the restrictions that Facebook may impose based on this article via this link. You can find information about appealing or editing our assessment via this link.

Read detailed instructions for editing the article.
Read detailed appeal instructions.

Topic: Politics
Violation: Manipulation
Source

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Add New Playlist