Journalist - Bread "Specialist"

On the micta of Andrei Babitsky, every journalist who dared to work on that - Chechen - side could be. It is "daring." To go to the rear of the Chechen militants (after repeated abductions of journalists), you need special courage. Firstly, a journalist for a foreign radio company doubly attracts people who do business to abduct people. Secondly, in contrast to the previous Chechen war, Russian society was almost unanimously configured by Antitchensky. This positionality also appeared among many Russian journalists. (Hence such an ambiguous reaction of colleague journalists to the story of Babitsky.) Many Russian newspapers, after the events in Dagestan, flatly refused to print interviews with Basayev, Huttab. Like, why give the strip to the "enemies of the people"? They can be understood. But at the same time, they were interested (not for printing) about what is happening on the other side. However, journalism should be objective - when covering the conflict, both sides must be heard. Such a rule. Andrei is the only Russian journalists who covered the current Chechen war immediately after the entry of Russian troops into Chechnya. He covered mainly only on the side from where no information was received. Only the Udugov site worked. But Udugov was no longer believed. Believe Babitsky. Because he never gave a reason to doubt the veracity of his information. Andrey’s trouble is that he broke through the information blockade organized by Putin and Co. - He reported that the losses of Russian troops in Chechnya are much greater than it is transmitted by official reports. This, in principle, knew everyone (guessed), but Babitsky documented this. Naturally, this could not please the military, presidential candidate. And the fact that during the search they found accreditation signed by Basayev is not a reason for the accusation of "aiding terrorists"! Such accreditation would be given to all journalists who arrived at the militants. Or the journalists themselves would ask such a paper. In that war, when I came to Chechnya as a journalist "AiF", I myself had such an accreditation, designed in Chechen Press. Accreditation facilitates the work of a journalist - gives the right to move along their "" territory. Otherwise, there will be problems. During the first business trip to Chechnya (August 1994), due to the lack of this notorious accreditation, I got to the Department of State Security of Chechnya - as a "Russian spy". But the presence of this accreditation does not always save: among Chechens there are too many "patients with spy -omania." In 1996, I again ended up with Chechen gesniks. Even despite the fact that I had the accreditation of Chechen Press with me! They checked my journalistic certificate and passport. And then, when they brought to their department, they pulled a white folder out of the safe. She was carefully viewed (it turns out that there were all my articles written about Chechnya) and only after that, finally making sure that I was a journalist, let go. Similar accreditation is now prescribed by Yastrzhembsky, assistant to the acting President of Russia. And before him he wrote out the Russian information center. If Babitsky had a “Russian” accreditation, then where is the guarantee that the Chechen gesniki (many of whom are shell -shocked) would not have accepted him for the “Russian spy”?! And then would Ritz give him his accreditation in January - early February - at a time when there was still strict filtration of information coming from Chechnya?

On the micta of Andrei Babitsky, every journalist who dared to work on that - Chechen - side could be. It is "daring." To go to the rear of the Chechen militants (after repeated abductions of journalists), you need special courage.

Firstly, a journalist for a foreign radio company doubly attracts people who do business to abduct people. Secondly, in contrast to the previous Chechen war, Russian society was almost unanimously configured by Antitchensky. This positionality also appeared among many Russian journalists.

(Hence such an ambiguous reaction of colleagues-journalists to the story of Babitsky.)

After the events in Dagestan, many Russian newspapers flatly refused to print an interview with Basayev, Hattab. Like, why give the strip to the "enemies of the people"? They can be understood. But at the same time, they were interested (not for printing) about what is happening on the other side. However, journalism should be objective - when covering the conflict, both sides must be heard. Such a rule.

Andrei is the only Russian journalists who covered the current Chechen war immediately after the entry of Russian troops into Chechnya. He covered mainly only on the side from where no information was received. Only the Udugov site worked. But Udugov was no longer believed. Believe Babitsky. Because he never gave a reason to doubt the veracity of his information.

Andrey’s trouble is that he broke through the information blockade organized by Putin and Co. - He reported that the losses of Russian troops in Chechnya are much greater than it is transmitted by official reports. This, in principle, knew everyone (guessed), but Babitsky documented this. Naturally, this could not please the military, presidential candidate.

And the fact that during the search they found accreditation signed by Basayev is not a reason for the accusation of "aiding terrorists"! Such accreditation would be given to all journalists who arrived at the militants. Or the journalists themselves would ask such a paper. In that war, when I came to Chechnya as a journalist "AiF", I myself had such an accreditation, designed in Chechen Press. Accreditation facilitates the work of a journalist - gives the right to move along their "" territory.

Otherwise, there will be problems. During the first business trip to Chechnya (August 1994), due to the lack of this notorious accreditation, I got to the Department of State Security of Chechnya - as a "Russian spy". But the presence of this accreditation does not always save: among Chechens there are too many "patients with spy -omania."

In 1996, I again ended up with Chechen gesniks. Even despite the fact that I had the accreditation of Chechen Press with me! They checked my journalistic certificate and passport. And then, when they brought to their department, they pulled a white folder out of the safe. She was carefully viewed (it turns out that there were all my articles written about Chechnya) and only after that, finally making sure that I was a journalist, let go.

Similar accreditation is now prescribed by Yastrzhembsky, assistant to the acting President of Russia. And before him he wrote out the Russian information center.

If Babitsky had a “Russian” accreditation, then where is the guarantee that the Chechen gesniki (many of whom are shell -shocked) would not have accepted him for the “Russian spy”?! And then would Ritz give him his accreditation in January - early February - at a time when there was still strict filtration of information coming from Chechnya?