Europe in the Bulgarian media since 2007

At present Europe is constantly in the pages, websites, and broadcasts of Bulgarian media. This presence is so massive, that it would probably take a professional to follow and analyze it comprehensively. So what follows is a necessarily limited observation, based on several of the major electronic, press, and internet media in the country.

It has been 17 months since Bulgaria became a member of the EU. This was the result of a 17 year effort on the part of the Bulgarian state and society to fulfill the criteria and convince its European partners of the worthiness of the country to join. So all the enthusiasm and emotions related to the effort to join are still holding, and almost every issue is also considered from the point of view of the EU. Another aspect of this mood is that as a rule EU and Europe mean the same thing for the Bulgarian media – it seems that for them the European Commission, the European Council, the Council of Europe, and UEFA are basically the same place.

Given the amount of talk about and reference to the EU in Bulgarian media, it is difficult to categorize this presence in an abstract manner, but still a very important split is visible. This is the split between the “they” Europe and the “us” Europe manner of discussing any topic. The first means a way of presenting and analyzing issues. There is juxtaposition of “Bulgaria versus Europe”, in which they are somehow on opposing sides. The second is a way of presenting and analyzing issues, in which a common European point of view is utilized, and the Bulgarian position within this context is discussed in a general mood of “Bulgaria in Europe”.

Even the simplest look at any sample of Bulgarian media over the last months will show that the “BG vs. EU” discourse completely dominates the “BG in EU” in terms of both issues and manner of presenting them. This may very well be justified. There are many issues in which Bulgaria has still much to do to fulfill its membership duties, and European bodies are not shy about pointing them – hence the juxtaposition. For example, Bulgaria is not scoring significant successes in its fight against corruption and organized crime. As a response, the EU keeps the country under monitoring (and the monitoring reports are a constant source of discussion in the media), and even stopped most of the funding under the pre-accession and the structural funds, which rightfully caused a grandiose internal scandal. The EU most decisively pressed for the dismissal of the head of the Road Agency, when a severe conflict of interest was uncovered by the media, and even made its opinion known about the eventual resignation of the Minister of the Interior when it surfaced that he had unofficial meetings with people believed to be the heads of organized crime in one Bulgarian region. The European Commission decisively opposed the propositions of the Bulgarian government on protected areas under the “Nature 2000” programs, and severely cut the country’s carbon emission quota, causing much distress in the Bulgarian government, concerns in the Bulgarian business, and respective coverage in the media. Even UEFA refused to license the Bulgarian football champion to take part in next year’s Champions League for not meeting the formal criteria for such a license.
Interestingly, most often the media seem to side with Europe on these issues. In the views of Bulgaria media, Europe is setting a desirable standard and making effort to protect it, and the Bulgarian bodies are the ones trying to undermine them due to incompetence or opportune motives. Even in the football case, and even by the fans of the sanctioned club, it was recognized that UEFA was right to preserve the standard, and it was the club and the Bulgaria Football Union to blame for not being prepared to meet it. In the Bulgarian media, and quite possibly in Bulgarian society, it seems that Brussels is much more popular and trustworthy than the national capital.
However, slowly but surely issues in which the appropriate point of view is “BG in EU” are beginning to emerge. One such issue was the already mentioned “Nature 2000” program, which raised legitimate concerns about the extent to which European environmental standards should be maintained at the expense of opportunities for economic development in the poorer countries of Europe. The same type of concern was raised as a response of the cut in carbon quota – even though the Bulgarian business recognized that most of the blame should go to the quite incompetent Bulgarian environmental minister, it also expressed concerns about the way in which the EU is approaching the issue of carbon quota in general, as a matter of policy. Also, the media gave some coverage on the position of the Bulgarian government with respect to some aspects of the common EU energy policy, which joined 8 other countries to dissent on a proposal by the European Commission. Last but not least, the position of Bulgaria on a set of Russia-related energy projects, most notably the Southern Stream gas pipeline, was discussed in a European context in terms of the balance between national interests (in this case mostly of Greece and Italy to receive gas supplies, even if they come from Russia), and the pan-European interest of having gas supplies diversified away from Russia.

So, it may be said that Europe is constantly in the eye of Bulgarian media. Most often its presence is one of opposition to some Bulgarian body, its decisions, behavior or policies. But also sometimes Europe is being discussed in terms of common issues and concerns, of which Bulgaria is part of the general European discourse.
Georgy Ganev, Centre for Liberal Strategies, Bulgaria