But he’s right!

Listen, but he really is right! Everyone (I mean all democratic and liberal-minded people) was incredibly outraged by Putin’s words about the late Anna Politkovskaya: “Politkovskaya’s political influence within the country was insignificant, and she was more visible in human rights circles and in media circles in the West. In this regard, I think that for the current authorities in general and for the Chechen authorities in particular, the murder of Politkovskaya caused much more damage than her publications.”

Probably, on the day of the funeral of a woman who was shot at point-blank range with four shots, some other words, more polite and sympathetic, were expected from the main man of the country. But these polite and sympathetic words would turn out to be insincere and false. So are they needed at all? The President was reproached for his three-day silence, but what did you actually want to hear from him?

And he took it and said what he thought. Putin did not like Politkovskaya and, most likely, even considered her his enemy, the enemy of his cause. That’s why I spoke about her like that. It was unpleasant for those who respected Anna to hear this, but still tell me, what is he wrong about?

Politkovskaya was the bravest, most furious of our journalists, and I was amazed every time, because I knew for sure: I couldn’t do that. And the vast majority know the same about themselves. But the whole point is that even the bravest journalist in Russia really has no influence on political life, on society!

I am sure that most of my fellow citizens heard this name for the first time only now, from the news. Her articles, a hundred times revealing and truthful, were read by a measly fraction of a percent, and how many of them were those who considered her an accomplice of bandits, a paid agent, a crazy woman, and the like.

There were many very worthy people at Politkovskaya's funeral. Previously they would have said “representatives of the best part of our society.” And it seems to me that, unfortunately, almost all of this best part was there. Where are the protest rallies, where are the rallies, where are the pickets, where is the public position? You turn on your own “Echo”, read “Hedgehog”, “Novaya Gazeta”, several other not very large publications and websites - that’s, in fact, everyone who could come to the rallies and picket. 200 indignant citizens is not a little and not a lot, that’s all!

The Union of Journalists called for tying ribbons on cars on the day of the funeral, turning off the lights at the appointed hour and placing candles in the windows. And this call was a mistake! Have you seen a lot of cars with ribbons? How to distinguish mourning windows from simply dark ones? And the candles of remembrance - from a candlelight dinner? Several dozen people in a huge city - who will notice?

It is useless to appeal to society! Society has changed. And the role of journalism in it has changed. There will never again be crowds of hundreds of thousands at the coffin as on the day of farewell to Listyev. Society does not need journalism as a public conscience. As a collector of gossip and piquant photographs, that’s another matter. The Union of Journalists could call on newspapers to come out with a black stripe on this day, TV channels to interrupt their broadcasts for a minute before the main news release, and radio stations to be silent for the same minute. This is not a loss for society. But for journalism, Politkovskaya’s death is both a loss and a warning. So as not to meddle where it is not necessary. Could journalists show respect for the profession and express solidarity? One candle in a million windows can’t be missed, and a black newspaper strip can’t be missed. It is impossible not to notice its absence. And then we would know which of us is which.

So, of course, Putin is right. His truth was inappropriate and evil, just like him. But he said out loud what is, and what it would be so difficult for us to admit ourselves.