Being Put In Context

A little over a week ago, using the example of the story of Roman Badanin, I wrote about how the motives of the actions of journalists differ from the reasons of media managers, whom Demyan Kudryavtsev personified at that time. Today, the general director of the Kommersant publishing house submitted his resignation after the dismissal of the editor-in-chief of the Kommersant-Vlast magazine, Maxim Kovalsky. Whether this is a transition to the other side of the barricades or an admission of guilt for the fact that the “ Apple Puy ” material was published, we will find out after the meeting of Kommersant shareholders.

In the current context, the reason for dismissal will not be perceived as “a violation of the internal procedures and rules of the Kommersant Publishing House, the standards of professional journalism and the legislation of the Russian Federation.” And Mr. Kudryavtsev understands this very well, which is reflected in his restrained post . Now this looks like a conflict, one of the parties to which wants to prevent its media assets from becoming a threat to other, non-media assets, while the other defends its right to self-expression. Of course, the shareholders and top managers of Kommersant will receive the label of “persecutors of freedom.”

Although I personally don’t see anything unusual in this material. Turning any event into a joke and a reason for self-expression and banter, subjectivist, so-called. “reportage” presentation of material and ambiguous puns in headlines are the corporate style of Kommersant, or more precisely, of most of the “high-quality” Russian press. Remember the outrageous headline in the newspaper the day after the storming of Beslan - and you will understand what I mean. So management should have worried about editorial policy earlier. Now we have to “hit the tails.”

Not more than a year ago, on a much smaller scale, I experienced a similar conflict with the editors of another magazine where I was a publisher. This conflict leads to the collapse of the team and the degradation of the publication. And the reason is the same: “unbalanced jokes,” banter and an indomitable desire to express oneself. I want to declare as a publisher: when journalists bring reinforced concrete (well, at least just concrete) texture on a current topic, no matter who is there, the publisher will fight for the right to publish it in front of investors. Just using numbers. If he himself understands that this is someone’s personal opinion, exaggerations and jokes, he simply does not have enough confidence to defend the editorial board.

So no need for hysterics. The number, I’m sure, will become a bestseller (I haven’t been able to buy it yet). But from a creative point of view, other than a photograph with an obscene inscription, there is no value in this material, and the editor should have seen this. So draw your own conclusions, Demyan, and stay. It wasn't you who broke the rules, if anything.

We’ll discuss the motives of media investors separately.