In society

Mediafiya. Living and dead

February 4, 2014 Igor Yakovenko

The main topics of the past week were Ukraine, Rain and the anticipation of the Olympics. All three topics are very lively, since we are talking about very interesting objects: Ukraine, and “rain”, and the Olympics, with all the incompleability of these phenomena, unites the presence of internal drama, the source of self -development - they are open systems with a high degree of uncertainty of the result. All this is life that makes these three topics extremely attractive for journalistic lighting.

The more monstrous the desire of federal television channels looks like to die, deprive of inner dynamics, and throw a propaganda deadly.

People of "rain" and people of stones

A lot has been written and made about the situation with the rain, including the author of these lines in a column entitled “Fog around Rain”. But since the topic is not only not closed, but is also overgrown with new faces, all new characters are included in its discussion, and the subject of discussion itself becomes one of the main information farmers of the week, I will have to return to this topic in this review.

A summary of the previous series. The situation with a survey on Rain has 5 aspects: sociological, historical, journalistic, ethical and political. Everything is clear with the sociological side. The design of the question: “Was it necessary to surrender Leningrad in order to save hundreds of thousands of lives?”, Obviously a curve, since any “matteral” issue, that is, includes two or more questions, is a curve. In this case, the question of the sufficiency of the surrender of Leningrad to save lives. One of the options for a more correct question could sound like this: “Was it necessary to conduct a total evacuation of residents and then pass Leningrad to avoid hundreds of thousands of hungry deaths?” But the curvature in the issue of “rain” is no more than in the vast majority of polls in the media and in many professional polls of public opinion.

The historical and journalistic aspects of this situation are extremely clear. The essence of the work of the historian is to try to reconstruct and understand the thoughts and actions of people of the past. One of the functions of journalism is to set acute problems. From the point of view of the historian, and from the point of view of the journalist, the question of the price of victory and the possibility of other options for the development of events is quite logical. Unless, of course, the story and journalism is not considered as sections of propaganda.

In the previous text about “rain”, I deliberately lowered the ethical and political aspects of the event, since it was a little strange and ashamed to prove that two to four and four and that there was no insulting anyone's feelings in the issue of “rain”, and politics, on the contrary, is present. However, all the past week, all the federal channels and all other media outlets discussed this topic in such a hysterical tonality that if you don’t know what’s the matter, you can decide that the rain journalists personally made their way to the Piskarevsky cemetery and desecrated all the graves there. Moreover, the mental attack was subjected not only to, and not so much by the journalists of the “rain” as their defenders.

Dmitry Kiselev in the “Vesti of the Week”, for example, said that writer Viktor Shenderovich proposed to pass 300 thousand Leningrad Jews to Hitler. Shenderovich’s attempts to explain himself on the blog on Echo and in “Hero” that he did not offer anything like Hitler, they looked unconvincing, if only because the total audience of these two worthy Internet resources corresponds to the audience of Russia-1 approximately like a mouse with an elephant.

The performance of the Kommersant journalist Andrei Norkin was especially vivid and revealing: “In my opinion, the rain television channel did something so vile and disgusting that it can only be compared with a crime.” Then, at the end of a rather long column, Norkin turned to the rain journalists with an appeal that sounded as a sentence: “If you are journalists, it seems to me that you should write a statement about leaving and take a break. For thought. Because each journalist should have one heightened feeling. It is now found not as often as we would like because it is very uncomfortable. This is a conscience. The one who does not allow sleeping at night. ” The end of the quote.

And in the middle of Norkin he talked a lot about patriotism, about the homeland, which must be protected, about spiritual Putin's scraps, which one cannot laugh at. In addition, he called on his colleagues-journalists to modesty, reproached Konstantin Eggert with Paphos abuse and cited Posner as an example with his mentor edification in relation to the destroyed journalists of the rain, which Pozner called for less arrogant and have less a sense of superiority towards others.

I still did not understand why Norkin can indulge in a patriotic pathos in his column, and Eggert is forbidden to allow the liberal pathos in his columns, and also what exactly the arrogance of the rain journalists are shown, who have been apologizing and laying more and more. I don’t understand, well, okay, this is not so important. More importantly, having carefully read Norkin, looking at Dmitry Kiselev and Solovyov, having familiarized himself with a mass of insulted texts in Komsomolskaya Pravda, Izvestia and the like, I never found a clear description of the crime itself, which is charged with “rain”. Where exactly is the very “great red line”, which, according to the presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov, so irrevocably crossed the rain?

Obviously, we are dealing with the psychology of hysterical self -circulation, which is described in the joke: “Husband to wife:“ You are my fish! ” “Wife:“ Ah, I am a fish, that is, a shark, that is, toothy and biting! So, in your opinion, I am a dog! Mom, he called me a bitch! " About the same scheme, a controlled hysteria is organized in the attached sixes that are able to “get to the bottom” to any word or act of a person in order to “present” him and get material or status benefit. And now the question of the price of victory by the method of controlled hysteria is turning into a proposal to Hitler to pass 300 thousand Leningrad Jews, and then to the idea to give Hitler the whole country without a fight. There is no one to catch the hand of television men, since the studios of federal television channels are not invited there for discussions and opponents.

A separate question about journalistic solidarity, the bar of which was asked by the chairman of the SDR Vsevolod Bogdanov. Answering a question about his attitude to the situation around the “rain”, he stated that he was “offended by such things” that journalists “insulted Leningraders”. And he explained that “one cannot cross the sacred”, and also that the “rain” journalists need to find a way to be forgiven.

The alternative version of journalistic solidarity these days was demonstrated by the 9th Channel of Israeli Television, which was a survey among the residents of Israel as a sign of solidarity with the “rain”: “Are Jews themselves in the Holocaust?” And, by the way, the fact that among the audience of the Israeli television channel was 9% answered positively to this truly provocative question did not cause the Israeli authorities to immediately close the television channel in the Israeli authorities.

All these words and actions are important for the formation of the institution of reputation, even if it has now broken in Russia. Once we fix it. Then it will be necessary to recall not only what Dmitry Kiselev said with Vladimir Solovyov, you won’t be cut down by any ax, but what Norkin and Bogdanov wrote and said. This is important, because in my eyes the betrayal of Leonid Parfyonov was forgotten, which in 2011-2012 suddenly began to be perceived as an icon of freedom of speech. Ksenia Larina showed an example of memory loss last week, saying in the program “Man from the TV” from 1.02. 2014 that the plot with the rain and the plot from the NTV 2001 unites the lack of journalistic solidarity. Like, people then, in 2001, went to some rallies, but on their own, and journalists and the SHR showed no solidarity.

At that time, I worked in the SDR and was the applicant, organizer and leading of both rallies. It was the SDRR that was the initiator of all special issues of the “common newspaper”, which was a symbol of the workshop solidarity both in the situation with Andrei Babitsky and in the memory of Anna Politkovskaya. As a sign of solidarity with NTV, there was also a special issue of the General Newspaper. Yes, that was not enough. Yes, little. But it was a intelligible and unambiguous position, in contrast to the position of today's leadership of the SDR.

The political aspect of the history with the rain was completely exposed in the program “Sunday evening” with Vladimir Solovyov dated 02.02.2014. I pay attention to the date because last week Soloviev spent three Sunday evenings. One, as expected, on Sunday, and the other two on weekdays. The fact is that for the period of the Solovyov Olympics, he temporarily passes to the bright side of being, that is, he will illuminate the Olympics, leaving us alone with the rain, Maidan and other abominations. And so that we do not catch any orange or rain infection, the population was subjected to triple enhanced vaccination last week.

So in the Sunday "Sunday evening" Vladimir Solovyov explained what this notorious "rain" is and why it must be stopped. It turns out that under the previous president this toxic “rain” was imposed on the operators, literally “pushed a finger”, in the figurative expression of Solovyov. Solovyev was supported by the editor -in -chief of Komsomolskaya Pravda Sungorkin, who confirmed that he saw how this happened, how this ideologically sharpened liberal channel pushed into cable networks, but now, when there was an opportunity, the operators are relieved of this misfortune.

Fierce hatred of liberalism and freedom is now, perhaps, the main trend and most important difference: “your own - alien” in journalism and politics. The fact that liberal is an enemy who needs to be destroyed does not need evidence. For example, Soloviev claims that "liberals hate everything healthy in society." Lawyer Henry Reznik, who, together with Irina Khakamada, together against seven obscurantists, tried to say something not even in defense of the “rain”, but simply something sane, so Henry Reznik tried to figure out what liberalism was, but was interrupted by Soloviev’s remark: “Do not use Wikipedia words!”

Recently, a new fashion has appeared on the sovereign television channels on direct personal insults of the faces of liberal political orientation. Moreover, mostly women. Which is understandable, since you can also run into the answer from men. Dmitry Kiselev The second broadcast in a row exercises in abominations to Ksenia Sobchak. This time he joked cutely about the number of abortions of the TV presenter and about her, supposedly, addiction to heavy drugs. I hope Maxim Vitorgan knows what exactly should be done when meeting with Kiselev, so I’ll manage without advice. Alexander Prokhanov on the air of Vladimir Solovyev offered Irina Khakamade as a consolation, the dose of cocaine. I understand why he did not try to offend Henry Reznik standing nearby, who also represented liberal values ​​in the studio. Henry Markovich is a large man, and also a former athlete, so Prokhanov in time realized that rudeness should be directed into a safer direction.

For a long time I have no questions for Solovyov and other sovereign-patriotic faces of Russian TV and more and more complaints about those liberal boys and beating girls who, coming to these sovereign-patriotic ethers, create, these broadcasts, the illusion of objectivity.

There is another, purely human, almost physiological observation over the process of turning a person into a sovereign and a professional patriot. At one time, Viktor Shenderovich very accurately caught this moment of mutation with Oleg Dobroduev, who suddenly became meaningful and pathos when he made an internal decision to betray the old NTV. Reading the text of Norkin, I saw how literally at the cellular level this mutation turns a person into a stone idol or into a bronze sculpture. Always, when a journalist suddenly becomes a statesman and begins to publicly and with pathos about his love for his homeland and about state interests, this means that he ceases to be a journalist and his only goal, strictly according to the Deputy Minister Volin, is the purchase of good cars, good clothes and a trip to decent countries.

Journalistic special forces

Last week there was another event that marks some qualitative changes in the journalistic environment. On January 31, the Extraordinary Accident program on the NTV channel showed the plot of the capture and pogrom of the office of the consumer protection of rights. This office was used as a place to collect things for participants in the Kyiv Maidan, which was announced the day before by members of the Committee of Solidarity with the Maidan. The pogroms, some of whom were in masks, depicted the Cossacks and with a characteristic thieves' pluck waved their hands at the persons of the employees of the captured office, threw furniture, put on the employees on their heads with plastic bags, rummaged in office documents and openly threatened with reprisal.

All this was shot by NTV journalists, who arrived along with the pogromers. Given the fact that it was NTV journalists on the eve of the conference of the Committee of Solidarity with the Maidan that the office status, which should serve as a place of gathering of things for participants in the Maidan, could be confidently assuming that the journalists not only covered the pogrom, but at least participated in his organization.

The article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 213 Part two (“hooliganism based on hatred, committed by prior conspiracy”) before the legal sentence comes into force, should somehow manifest itself, if not next to the NTV logo, then next to the “Emergency accident” logo. Since NTV designers are unlikely to receive a task for the development of this layout, I believe that representatives of civil society and human rights activists should do this, and always, when NTV journalists appear at their events, them, these NTV journalists, must be supplied with badges: “Article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation 213, part 2”. This can be one of the factors for the formation of adequate self-awareness and assimilation of professional norms among representatives of the 4th Anti-Ukrainian Information Front. Yes, and representatives of the other three anti -Ukrainian fronts too.

If the personal case of the “rain” on federal channels was discussed with some imitating signs of a different point of view, then in the question of the Maidan, as in the main issue of the Kremlin agenda, no pluralism and deviations from the general line allowed itself. From Ukraine - only deputies of the Party of Regions, or Communists, or political scientists of the same orientation; From Russia - a discussion in the maximum range from Sergei Markov to Vyacheslav Nikonov. And even when, one hundred percent, pro-high and pro-Russian political scientist Mikhail Pogrebinsky, realizing that Solovyov and Markov will remain in Moscow, and he, Torbinsky, to go to Ukraine, tried to timidly notice that it was impossible to resettle Ukrainians with nationalist views and we should somehow learn to live in the same country, Solovyov strictly reminded him strictly about Nuremberg. And when the stubborn political scientist Pogrebinsky tried to say that in the sentences of the Nuremberg Tribunal nothing was said about Ukrainian nationalists, Soloviev immediately turned on the technology of guided hysteria according to the Mamaonmainzucal method. In this case, the technology is similar: "The Maidanovets, then the Bandera, means the SS, which means Nuremberg." And point. The fact that each “means” in this equation exactly means nothing, does not matter.

In the religion of Putinism, the main thing is not logic, but faith. Putin said that the reason for the tragedy in the 263 school, where the schoolboy took hostages and killed two people, was the lack of artistic taste and poor repertoire of Moscow theaters among adolescents. So, so that such a nightmare is no more, it is necessary to close all sorts of alternative “rains”, the Moscow Art Theater and at the head of all the media and all theaters to put trusted personnel. Preferably from his native department. And most importantly - to believe, believe and believe again, and not to think and not ask questions all sorts of provocative.


Photo by ITAR-TASS