TV Gagauzia was fined 32,000 lei for political bias and disinformation during the electoral campaign
The regional public broadcaster Gagauziya Radio Televizionu (GRT) was fined 32,000 lei by the Audiovisual Council (CA) and sanctioned with a public warning, after the regulatory institution found serious deviations from the principles of fairness, balance and impartiality in the coverage of the parliamentary elections of September 28, 2025.
The decision was adopted at the CA meeting on October 10, along with the approval of the final monitoring report on the way TV stations covered the election campaign. The authority announced that it would inform the People's Assembly of Gagauzia – the founder of the Gagauziya Radio Televizionu company – about the identified violations.
According to the CA report, the Comrat-based television station displayed “political partisanship tendencies, lack of equidistance and neglect of the principles” provided for by the audiovisual legislation. The monitoring revealed that some shows, such as “De facto” and “Большая игра”, promoted Russian narratives and messages susceptible to disinformation, and in two editions of the show “De facto” “cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation and migrant status” were detected.
The monitoring report also found that although TV-Găgăuzia committed to broadcasting several electoral information programs – “De facto”, “Общественный интерес”, “Большая игра”, “Обсуждаем вместе”, “Interviul săptămânii”” and “Gagauziya gün gündän” – some of these did not address “aspects of the electoral process”. Instead, pro-Kremlin narratives and manipulative statements were promoted.
At the same time, two self-promotional spots were broadcast with the participation of journalist Irina Caraman, a candidate for the elections from the “Moldova Mare” Party, “a practice that is contrary to the provisions of the Code of Ethics of Journalists in the Republic of Moldova and professional ethical norms”.
The show "De facto" was also notable for the biased attitude of the moderators, who supplemented the opinions of the guests, asked leading questions and did not intervene in the face of unfounded accusations brought against state institutions. In several editions, the station favored the "Patriotic" electoral bloc and promoted a negative image of the Action and Solidarity Party, being accused of undertaking repressive, illegal actions and using "intimidation methods" in relation to some electoral competitors and the political opposition.
In some shows, the idea of a possible falsification of the elections was developed, particularly by using votes from the diaspora, and manipulative theories were repeated suggesting that the 2024 presidential elections were "falsified". Other editions presented the electoral process as one lacking equal conditions for competitors and citizens, and the CEC - "as a politically subordinate institution".
“The opposing point of view, as well as objective reasons for the respective decisions, were not presented in the broadcast,” the CA claims.
Although all 23 electoral contestants were mentioned in the news programs, their coverage was superficial and unbalanced, focusing only on presenting promises and the technical aspects of the vote.
Sanctions applied to GRT:
7,000 lei for broadcasting discriminatory content;
10,000 lei for discriminatory opinions and failure to comply with the legal duration of the spots;
15,000 lei for lack of fairness and impartiality;
a public warning for broadcasting spots without the mandatory mentions provided by law.
The Audiovisual Council recommended that the People's Assembly of Gagauzia take measures to prevent the involvement of TV-Gagauzia employees in political partisan activities.
"The CA recommends that the legislative body of the Gagauz Autonomy take all necessary measures so that the employees of the regional public provider, who have been entrusted with the task of implementing the declared editorial policies, do not use the station's platforms to promote - veiled or declared - political, commercial or other interests, consequently harming the image and credibility of the institution, in particular, as well as the press, in general", informs the authority responsible for the audiovisual.
