Dobrodeev about Kommersant

Oleg Dobrodeev: Kommersant is one of those newspapers that needs to be read in full
General Director of the NTV television company OLEG DOBRODEEV shares his opinion on expanding the composition of Kommersant shareholders in an interview with special correspondent of the Publishing House NATALIA GEVORGYAN.

— Do you read Kommersant?
- This is where the day begins. Both because I am an information specialist, and because it gives the most complete picture of today's life. You know, the bulk of the publications that I read and that I like - Segodnya, AiF, Izvestia - are either aimed at a specific audience or are so universal that they can be read not in full, but selectively. From my point of view, Kommersant is one of those publications that today must be read almost in its entirety.
— What was your first reaction to the decision to expand the shareholders of Kommersant?
— This surprised me as a reader. Naturally, knowing and understanding what difficult processes take place in journalism, in the newspaper world, I was prepared. Nevertheless, the appearance of Vladimir Yakovlev’s interview on this topic in Tuesday’s issue came as a surprise to me.
— Are you afraid that the newspaper will become different?
- Unfortunately, we always have such an opportunity. And of course, such concerns exist.
— How did you feel about the proposed formula: ten to fifteen shareholders?
— It is precisely because I am not indifferent to Kommersant that I have questions about some of Vladimir Yakovlev’s thoughts. First: today Kommersant can afford to be independent only because I, Vladimir Yakovlev, have no personal interests in business and politics. From my point of view, even if a person does not have personal interests in business and politics, this does not mean the absence of personal likes and dislikes in the same business and politics. For me it’s fundamentally different. I believe that right now journalism has come to the very moment when it is easy to derive a formula: engagement is not an economic category. Any biased publication, information program, or journalism immediately becomes a loss-making publication, television, or journalism. For us this is a very specific category. We have gone through different periods in our lives. But it is obvious that when we managed to rise above the situation, when we were impartial, the ratings of our programs automatically increased. The cost of a minute of advertising in our programs directly depends on this. This is why the momentary benefits that fixing your mood, your attitude towards this or that event can provide, ultimately boomerang economically, that is, you will not be able to exist. And then you really turn into a pocket program or a pocket publication.
— So you think that independence and economic stability are directly related?
- Yes, these are interconnected things. An authoritative independent publication today, with proper management, can exist with dignity. Are there such publications? I don’t want to speak ill of my colleagues, but only two or three publications on the daily menu today do not cause irritation. I am convinced that well-structured management and editorial independence will ensure the success of the enterprise.
— Do you think that a dispersed composition of shareholders can ensure real independence?
- This is just another thought that I wanted to draw attention to. God willing, if so, if it can, but I'm not sure. I think it's difficult.
“But one owner, theoretically, can also come up with anything he wants, and the publication will obey his will.” Isn't there a risk to the publication's independence here?
- Maybe.
— And this risk, do you think, increases if there are ten or fifteen such owners?
— From my point of view, in today’s situation, a dispersed composition of shareholders is not a panacea for bias and dependence.
- Why? What does this depend on?
— From the composition of shareholders. The important thing to understand here is that those who invest money invest it in business. If they invest money in influence, it is very indirect. It is rather a matter of pride, if you will, that they are among the shareholders of such a publication. Otherwise, based on the examples I know, money is invested as a tool for short-term influence. And if this does not work out, then either the shareholders leave and the publications are destroyed, or other obscure things happen.
— But are you, as a reader and as a person present on the political scene, interested in an independent publication?
- Undoubtedly. The whole society is interested in him.
— Does Kommersant fall under this definition?
- Yes. And it would be nice if it remained that way.
— Do you believe that these ten or fifteen shareholders will be found?
— Just six months ago I would have answered that this is absolutely real. But now the economic situation is different.
— You have been working in this business for many years. Would you, theoretically at least, like to participate in Kommersant and become one of the shareholders? Is this publishing house attractive to you?
- Attractive.

Newspaper "Kommersant" No. 117 dated 07/02/1998, page 3

Authors:

Natalia Gevorkyan