Decision

25 January 2019

Case N180

Nino Vezdeni vs. Tamar Bochorishvili

Head of Council: Giorgi Mgeladze

Members of Council: Lika Zakashvili, Tamuna Uchidze, Gela Mtivlishvili, Maia Mamulashvili, Nino Jafiashvili, Giorgi Suladze, Maia Merkviladze, Tea Zibzibadze

Applicant: Nino Vezdeni
Respondent: Tamar Bochorishvili

Descriptive Part

Nino Vezdeni applied to Georgian Charter of the Journalistic Ethics. She thought that the photo published on the magazine “Reitingi” Facebook page violated Charter’s first, 5th and 10th principles. Respondent  journalist was identified to be an editor of online platform Reitingi, Tamar Bochorishvili.
Factual evidences:

1. Facebook page POSTV recorded a survey “How many times have you had sex in a night?” 
2. Applicant participated in this survey. From 0:45 minutes she answers the question by: “never, not once”. Applicant said that the question was very confusing and the response was made in this awkward moment. 
3. On 0:16 minute, another respondent answers, that he had sex 13 times a night.
4. Reitingi Facebook page shared photo of Nino Vezdeni with the quote: “I have had sex 13 times a night; it was a new record for me”. 
5. After several hours of the photo being posted, applicant contacted Reitingi. They corrected the material and then deleted it.

Hearing specifications: the decision was made by council members stating their positions online. According to the Charter rules: “Council members can use distant electronic communication means to state their opinions/get involved in Council’s work [social networks, emails, online video or audio calls]”.

Motivational Part

According to the first principle of Charter, a journalist has to respect truth and the society’s right to get correct information. Because of the situation described in the description part, the audience was left with the impression that Nino Vezdeni had sex 13 times a night, which was not correct. Council position is proved by tens of comments on the material, where people also thought that it was Nino Vezdeni, who has had sex 13 times in one night. Therefore, it is clear that incorrect information was shared and the first principle of the Charter was violated.

According to the 5th principle of the Charter, The media is liable to correct substantially incorrect information which misleads society. According to the 5th point of the description part, Council dedicated special time to discussing this situation. Council had not proven a violation of the 5th principle in any of its previous decisions, because the responding media corrected or deleted the inaccurate information. At this point, Council mentions that the correction/deletion of the information does not necessarily mean that the ethical action was taken. It is important to analyze the situation, the damage that the person got by the incorrect information being shared and the adequacy of the response from Media Company. In this case, the inacurrate information, that Nino Vezdeni had sex 13 times a night, had been shared at the most popular social network Facebook for hours. This was accompanied by tens of comments and shares and most of the users believed that the quote was hers. Most of the comments were derogatory and humiliating, which caused Nino Vezdeni severe stress.

Using a photo with the quote from another person, which is followed by the discreditation of this person, is a severe irresponsibility. Therefore, correction and deletion of the material cannot be considered as adequate response from the media. A journalist should have used the same Facebook page and stated clearly, that she made a mistake, describe that mistake and made the situation clear for the audience. It is also worth mentioning, that because of the social networks’ nature, sharing incorrect information once makes it harder for you to correct this information with the same audience. Therefore, Charter Council stated, that the 5th principle of the Charter was also violated.

According to the 10th principle of the Charter, a journalist should respect privacy of people and should not violate it unless there is a special public interest. Because the applicant participated in the survey and did not protest it, Council decided that the 10th principle was not violated.

Resolution Part

According to everything said above:

1. Tamar Bochorishvili violated Charter principles 1 and 5.
2. Tamar Bochorishvili did not violate Charter principle 10.