: Ladies' intercessors

The fate of a public policy, and especially the deputy from United Russia, has become very difficult in the last couple of years. He, the deputy, has to literally be responsible for himself, the policy of the presidential administration, party colleagues and, in general, for almost everything that happens in the country, including low pensions and housing and communal services tariffs. And the public every time wants to wound it.

The day before, Andrei Isaev, a unentive fight, entered into unequal information battle. He stood up for his colleagues in the faction Irina Yarovy, Ekaterina Lakhova and Olga Batalina. The “Moscow Komsomolets” recently, de facto called these ladies “political prostitutes”, accusing him of very varying glances depending on the political situation.

The author of MK remembered all of them by the hesitation with the party line regarding the ban on the banner of the Americans to adopt Russian orphans (in the State Duma this initiative was called the "Law of Dima Yakovlev"). Well, their other throwing, such as the transition of Yarova from Yabloko to the EP, and Lakhova from the “women of Russia” there. The author accused Batalin of how she with fervor defended the American adoption six months before she began to condemn the equally violently (her still caused ulcerative opposition bloggers).

Isaev stood up for his colleagues: he called MK with a “yellow newspaper” on Twitter, and he promised the author that he would “answer for the text”. And finally, he called for the publication of the editor-in-chief of the newspaper Pavel Gusev on the air of Vladimir Solovyov on the Tok Show “Duel”. The colleagues in the faction who accused the MK of abuse of freedom of speech and demanded an apology from Gusev. “The publication in one of the oldest newspapers of the article, which has crossed all the conceivable limits of cynicism, biases and just ordinary rudeness, caused the fair indignation of society,” the statement of the entire faction of United Russia in the State Duma said immediately.

“According to the deputies,“ the editor -in -chief of the publication who has made such actions cannot be in professional associations of journalists, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation. ” “And even more so, he cannot head the Union of Moscow Journalists and the Commission of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation on communications, information policy and freedom of speech in the media, without discrediting them to their membership,” - from there. The head of the faction, Vladimir Vasiliev, motivated the need to say that "the three women were in a printed, so cynical, boorish form are offended."

The mythical “society”, which so sharply arose “fair indignation”, let him remain on the conscience of the deputies themselves. But the reaction of the United Russia is generally indicative. Franz Klintsevich, for example, stated that "Russian journalism was degraded, not a fact, not an analysis, but whipping phrases, catchy headlines on the verge of licentiousness, rudeness, and non -blessing."

“The Moscow Komsomolets newspaper, who is replete with advertising of the services of prostitutes, dared to name well-known women politicians in the same word. This is a violation of the right to a good name, such statements go beyond the scope of freedom of speech. And freedom of speech is not a kind of abstract concept, ”is already the author of the Law on rallies Alexander Sidyakin. And so on: the reaction of the United Russia is violent.

The reasons for such “tenderness” and love in relation to their women can be assumed several. Firstly, United Russia was really offended. Still, not every day they are called "political prostitutes." Historically, the accusation is all the more insulting that many of them managed to learn the history of the Communist Party in universities and other political information, and therefore they are aware that Vladimir Lenin called Zinoviev and Kamenev and Renegate Kautsky (though Zinoviev and Kamenev, he called this only in the film “Lenin in October” of 1937 - the work of predominantly propaganda and on The truth is not pulling). In addition, Olga Batalin is a confidant of the deputy head of the presidential administration Vyacheslav Volodin, that is, a person among the United Russia, to put it mildly, authoritative.

Hysteria around the publication of MK, I must say, came very in the stream. The State Duma exactly on the same day adopted in third reading a law that establishes responsibility for the media for the use of obscene expressions. One of the authors of the bill, Sergei Zheleznyak, motivated its adoption by the fact that the State Duma is “numerous appeals of citizens about the use of non -normative vocabulary in the media”. To the question “List by namely” deputies may now well talk about the Bacchanalia in the media and any other about “degradation”. Then you can also make any amendments additionally, seriously tightening control over domestic media. So that not only the mat is not, but also accusing the politician of political shortsightedness it would be difficult.

Finally, not without the help of the executive branch of the campaign to deprive various deputies of immunity and even mandates, increases the sense of nervousness and uncertainty in their own future even among the most proven and politically correct party members. And any word against the deputy threatens him in a certain situation with the most unpleasant consequences, up to the loss of political status.

It’s not that the status of the deputy was high to this day (after all, it is clear that real issues are not resolved in the State Duma), but in the current situation, any accusation becomes a potential information mine of slow action.

It is another matter that the word "deputy" is now equivalent to almost a swear expression. And if Isaev still reaches the Slovyovsky “fight”, then it is not a fact that he will be able to defeat “small creatures from the yellow newspaper”.