Comment by Georgi Lozanov:
There have been rumors for a long time that bTV is planning to remove Maria Tsantsarova because of the uncomfortable questions she asks. It was surprising that they decided to do it just when Bulgarian citizens are protesting against the dependencies of the "deep power", including in the media. And this could have passed for a rumor if bTV had not come out with a position that, with its fluidity, actually said "yes" to the simple question - will they remove Tsantsarova from the morning broadcast. The television was content to announce that it "is conducting a dialogue with Maria Tsantsarova and discussing opportunities for developing the program content with her active participation in the new year, which is standard practice". This is followed by a seemingly more specific sentence: "The claims that Maria Tsantsarova and Zlatimir Yochev have been released are false and categorically do not correspond to the truth", which only expanded the threat to Zlatimir Yochev. Without in the least denying that even if they are not currently released, this will not happen the next moment, from Monday, let's say.
What are the rulers afraid of
But the clearest indication of these intentions was given by the media spokesmen of the deep power themselves, who immediately set about bashing Tsantsarova with the same arguments - new and also rehashed, since it is not the first time that she has been in the crosshairs of censorship. The most popular argument, summarized without direct insults, is that Tsantsarova is not an objective mediator (she has a "fixation on people in power"), her approach is confrontational, and her style is biting ("she pours out such anger at the guests"). All of this should pass as a reproach for a retreat from the professional standards of journalism, but in fact it shows the realization of one of the most important of them - the critical function towards power, which few journalists have the talent and courage to observe on air. It requires that the representatives of power in the studio must necessarily be placed in a situation of media discomfort with questions that they do not want to answer, and that each subsequent one is asked in the "cracks" of the previous answer. Apparently, this is what the party leaders of the ruling party are afraid of, so they only use the merciful genre of the briefing as a form of public communication.
Here, alongside the representatives of power in our country, we must also include the pro-Russian Bulgarian nationalists, who are representatives of power in the Kremlin and whose political self-esteem is growing in parallel with the number of people killed in Ukraine because of the imperial ambitions of the Eurasian dictator. Tsantsarova understands this well (her conversation with the leader of "Vazrazhdane" is memorable), as well as that the object of the critical function of journalism is the ruling party, not the opposition, even though on local soil the exact opposite is happening - whoever sits down and stands up, exercises on the PP-DB. It seems that apart from the confrontation with them, DPS-NN, GERB-SDF and ITN have no other resource in their dialogue with society.
Solidarity between journalists and citizens
Criticism of the ruling party, which should prevent their bad practices, is a duty, not only of journalists and the opposition (it "conditionally" brings them closer), but also of citizens, as a radical form of its implementation is protests. In this sense, the appearance of Tsantsarova in the studio with a cup with an inscription in the spirit of the last protest ("Time for real change") was an expression of her understanding of the role-based solidarity between journalists and citizens. Moreover, in the approval of this protest (after the active participation of generation Z), a consensus was reached, as never before, that even included the ruling party, against which the protest was being protested. The citizens, for their part, "returned" Tsantsarova's gesture and went out, organized by AEZ, to protest in her defense in front of bTV. It was logical that PP-DB leaders would also be there, in line with the already mentioned triple solidarity: citizens-journalists-opposition.
A new support was provided by the list of names of journalists (half of BNT) that had flown in as if on order from the page of an unknown user on FB, who should be removed because they manipulate and serve. This appeal was quickly attributed to PP-DB, although none of them supported it, and Nikolay Denkov (PP) sharply criticized it - "calls for lynching and emptying of seats on the list are calls for dictatorship". But this was purposefully forgotten so that now, regarding Tsantsarova, it could be insisted that there is a "double standard" - you defended her, but not the journalists on the list. As if there could be a comparison between the dismissal of a journalist, which will overturn his professional fate, and a personal opinion in the chorus of haters on social networks, which does not threaten anyone in any way. The case with the list so conveniently precedes the case with Tsantsarova by only days, that one wonders if their connection is completely coincidental.
Who dictates on bTV?
The most devastating argument should be the one that one of the leaders of the ruling coalition in resignation gleefully spun: "BTV is a private company and can afford to hire and fire whoever it wants". But that's not the case. Media are companies for the production and distribution of information, and information, in addition to being a commodity, is also a human right that requires both care for private and public interest. Buying a media outlet is like buying a hospital - you can profit from it as much as the market allows, but you can't tell the doctor, even though you pay his salary, to treat the patient not with penicillin, but with quinine, because it's more profitable for you. In private media, you can profit from the work of journalists, but you can't make them violate the ethics of their profession and fire them when they disagree. True, the constitutional right to life, for which the doctor is responsible, is above the constitutional right to information, for which the journalist is responsible, but in the modern world, how you live depends on how informed you are.
Not to mention how incredible it sounds that bTV themselves decided to fire Tsantsarova, right after the protests and before the holidays, aware of the reputational and hence rating damage they will cause. Obviously, someone else is dictating to them, and who is capable of such ruthlessness and why is the remark of a commentator, an avowed supporter of the Borisov-Peevski tandem, suggesting: "On the other hand, Peevski had a blatant need to demonstrate strength with something. By attributing Tsantsarova's dismissal to him, his electorate received its confirmation that their leader is strong". The point is that if his electorate is educated and needs such demonstrations of strength, the leader is unlikely to wait for someone to attribute them to him. So it turns out that the protest against the deep state and against the dismissal of Tsantsarova is still the same protest.
But let's not rush... Monday will be Vidovden (on the bTV screen).