The end of the game

Already in the process of writing this text, I received a letter from Kyiv from a novice journalist who was interested in why his colleagues on television channels and radio stations became so honest only after the second round of the president of Ukraine, in the midst of a crisis, against the background of continuing manifestations. Perhaps if journalists took a responsible position earlier, a few months before the election or at least after the first round, then there would be no such acute crisis?

Of course, you can smile indulgently by receiving such questions. In the end, we already experienced a similar catharsis of courage and honesty in the late 80s, and especially in August 1991, when even the editorial board of the newspaper "Pravda" apologized before us. But from this the problem does not become less sharp.

In the late 80s, we played a strange game with all that had not yet been established: we knew that they were lying to us, the journalists knew that they were lying, no one believed in a word of lies, including the authorities, for some reason convinced that we, unlike him, trust the information received. This illusory model was built in modern Ukraine - with the only difference being that the politically active population had much more sources of obtaining not just alternative - different information.

A person accustomed to critical thinking could hardly have been sitting for a long time not only to watch the news controlled by the group of Viktor Medvedchuk Channel 1+1, but also to watch the news belonging to the associate of Viktor Yushchenko Petro Poroshenko of the 5th channel - in both cases he faced the tendential information. As the famous Ukrainian journalist Sergei Rakhmanin, "This is not a channel of honest news, is exactly the 5th channel, is the opposition news channel."

But there were plenty of opportunities for other, no tendential news: the Internet, newspapers, radio stations - in our time you can’t control everything! It was from this that the atmosphere of public irritation arose, which you could not explain either with love for Viktor Yushchenko or "American money" for standing on the Maidan. People understand exactly that the authorities treat them, as idiots, - the broadcasting of unilateral information in the situation by the Ukrainian media by the Ukrainian media, when the receipt of genuine information is still possible and becomes a nutritious broth to form an atmosphere of irritation and alienation. People cease to believe the authorities so that this power does, because they understand that professional liars do not respect their own people.

Of course, if the journalists “saw” before the elections, if the information of an opposition nature was broadcast not only by the 5th channel and, in dosage, channels belonging to the president’s son -in -law Viktor Pinchuk, then such an atmosphere would not have arisen. Not to mention the fact that it was precisely for the pro -government media in Ukraine and Russia that an absurd mission was entrusted to convince society of the logic and importance of the latest election proposals of Viktor Yanukovych, related to Russia, and in the generosity of Vladimir Putin. This has created a special background: in a country where most of the population since Soviet times is convinced of the importance of patriotism, to prove to citizens that a deviation from fundamental values ​​in favor of a neighboring country is the highest good, convinces citizens that the government does not only deceive them, but communicates with them with special cynicism.

In my opinion, the beginning of the end of the election campaign of Viktor Yanukovych became his multiple of Russian and Ukrainian television channels with the editors of the Russian media, which proved that this business executive has not become a politician is hardly capable of critically approaching the slogans proposed to him. Instead of intercepting the rival’s slogans, Yanukovych began to work on the contrast - up to the condemnation of “nationalism” in Ivano -Frankivsk, also shown by the Russian and Ukrainian media. But if Yushchenko was positioned as a national leader, then Yanukovych, his own media, began to position as an anti -national leader - this was even understood by President Kuchma immediately disobedient from his own prime minister.

The opposition could be obscured, but instead, the pro -government media protruded it with the same energy as the opposition. The use of the President of the Russian Federation as a PR -agent of the Russian Federation as a PR -agent - if only because even very examined during his performance on Ukrainian television channels, Putin could not promise Ukrainians nothing significant. Think about yourself whether it is possible to consider a good deed for Ukrainians, for thirteen years crossing the border with Russia according to internal passports, the promise that even after January 1, 2005 they would travel on internal passports, while most of the audience did not even know that something would change? And is it possible to consider permission to live in Russia without registration for 90 days, when all the same state Ukrainian media have repeatedly explained to citizens that Russians could always live in Ukraine 90 days without registration, and Russia simply refuses to work with Ukraine on the basis of reciprocity - it was enough to listen to the edifying note of the Russian Foreign Ministry, which was read out in the Ukrainian news in the Ukrainian news in the arrival of Putin! Meanwhile, it was the success of the authorities that exhibited Putin's “permission” by pro -government media, while opposition was no less successfully scared Ukrainians with “hardening”: European Age cannot be seen.

After the second round of elections, the game suddenly ended. Not the game of politicians with society, but for now - the game of journalists. The broadcast is full of repentance and promises - I have no doubt that not so soon we will see the same repentance and promises in the Russian air of the New Age. The only thing I could answer my young colleague: not only cynical stupid politicians, but also false immoral journalists are guilty of creating an atmosphere of alienation and intolerance between society and power. The willingness of the latter adapts to any new conditions of professional activity, the lack of a personal and corporate moral imperative, unfortunately, do not exclude the possibility of a repetition of such situations again and again, as well as a repetition of new catharsis, remorse and snot in an unexpectedly honest air.