Mediafiya. The inevitability of a boycott

De Gaulle’s thought is that Stalin did not die, but disappeared in the future, quite accurately reflects the process of reproduction of evil and certain types through generation. Types of not only political, but also, for example, journalistic. Moreover, good talents, alas, are unique and irrelevant, but this damned law of reproduction of types concerns exclusively the most vile representatives of the workshop, as if the black flakes of their souls burned in hell, having settled on the souls of our contemporaries and encourage them to perform new abominations.

Last week forced to recall the hero of the past and before last century Viktor Petrovich Burenin, a journalist, whose name in life became a household man. His contemporary journalist Vlas Doroshevich dedicated the feuilleton “Old Executioner” to Burenin, in which he described the amazing passion of Burenin to smear the mud of his brightest and most talented contemporaries, while resorting to the most vile tricks. The list of those whom Burenin regularly and with visible pleasure doused with sewage is impressive: Chekhov, Korolenko, Leonid Andreev, Bunin, Blok, Bryusov, Balmont. The sophisticated mockery of Burenin over a damping reels, according to contemporaries, brought the poet into the grave.

Today, Viktor Petrovich Burenin, in Russian journalism, has so many successors that it is to take a competition among them and establish a prize of his name in the form of a figurine depicting Burenin biting a dog, since it was in this image that Satirik Dmitry Minaev perpetuate his colleague:

A dog runs along Nevsky,

Behind her is Burenin, quiet and sweet ...

City, look, however,

So that he does not bite her!

I immediately want to offer not to include Dmitry Kiselev in the list of nominees. Firstly, because the competition with his participation will become too predictable. Secondly, the country's main propagandist is worthy to be a laureate of a higher prize, for example, the name of Joseph Goebbels. And thirdly, because taking into account the frankly Xenophobic materials in the last “news of the week”, the activities of D. Kiselev should be the object of attention not to mediacritic, but of law enforcement and judicial authorities.

Last week, applications for the award named after V.P. Burenin came from several candidates.

Candidates for the prize V.P. Burenin

The most significant applications were from two federal television channels, which were perhaps the two most vile material over the past few months.

On February 11, in the Vesti program on the country's main state television channel, the main plot was porn modeling with Viktor Shenderovich, shot by a hidden camera, after which his image became a victim of the perverted fantasy of the director and the editor and no less perverted comments from the “ours of the Nashist” blogger Christina Dantic.

This muck, which the VGTRK for taxpayers broadcasted throughout the country, became the culmination of a hysterical answer to the short note by Shenderovich to the “HP”, subsequently reprinted on the Echo of Moscow website. The note in which Shenderovich says quite banal and obvious (sorry, Victor Anatolyevich) things, namely, that the Sochi Olympiad and the success of Russian athletes work for Putin’s rating just as the success of German athletes worked for Hitler’s rating at the 1936 Berlin Olympics. The leader of the Duma “United Russia” Vasiliev immediately called Shenderovich a fascist, and then the contents rushed through the pipes and channels that I did not take it in his column - both due to its insufficiency, that is, my column, volume, and for hygienic reasons. I only repeat that Viktor Shenderovich in this note acted as a captain of evidence, because, indeed, in history there are only two Olympiads that can be called “personalized”, that is, those that are associated with the names of the heads of state - hosts of games. And this is Berlin 1936. and Sochi 2014. Hitler in 1936 Time magazine called the man of the year. Putin was awarded this title on the eve of the Olympics. For some reason, no one is indignant and is not surprised that in the plots of Russian television channels devoted to the opening of games and the competitions themselves, Putin is devoted more time than any of the athletes. No one stigmatizes the magazine "Expert", in which on the first lane of the cover of the number dedicated to the games, the inscription flaunts: "Putin's victory!"

As for the mounted porn fuel, which in the representation of the leaders of the VGTRK, apparently, was supposed to become the revenge of Shnderovich, causing moral suffering to him and his relatives, it seems to me that the result of this masterpiece can be slightly different. I don’t know what modern Burenins should do, so that people who are at least a little care about their reputation realize that being on any of the federal propaganda channels-Russia-1, Russia-24, NTV, the first, TVC-is simply incompatible with this very reputation. Regardless of the quality in which you are there - as a journalist, expert or guest.

No, gentlemen, I do not urge anyone to anything, I have a purely research interest. I am interested in what exactly should become the frontier, after which Nikolai Svanidze, Irina Khakamada, Sergey Mitrokhin, Leonid Gozman, Yuri Pivovarov, Evgeny Yasin and others, very different in views, biographies, occupation people, united, nevertheless, concern for their reputation, understood that one could not appear on these channels, under these logos? Do you need the next time they show a film shot by a hidden camera from the bottom of the toilet of some oppositionist in order to show his genuine dirty gut? Would you like to try on the “journalistic” methods of the shoulder affairs of masters from television, to become an object of such a “journalistic investigation”?

The idea of ​​a boycott is in the air for the past few years, but today it is already beginning to acquire the outlines of the axiom. The already loyal of the loyal, the quietest of the quietest, compromised of the compromise, Nikolai Uskov writes at Snob that he was forced to leave the current show “The Right of Votz” on the TVC channel, because he can no longer participate in the propaganda performance, in which the leading Roman Babaan tried to turn public opinion in his twist and rudeness. The side of Russia's intervention in Ukrainian affairs and almost to the annexation of Crimea. And since the Uskov, being not only a snob, aesthet and a metrosexual, but also a professional medical historian, seeks to be a decent person in addition to “Beauty of Nails”, he found participation in this show impossible for himself.

The impulse to the demarcation and the cessation of the meaningless controversy between people who not only speak different languages, but also use other, incompatible forms of thought, came these days from the opposite camp, namely from the publicist of Izvestia Maxim Sokolov. Having pushed away from the last media scandals (“rain”, Shenderovich), Sokolov, of course, evaluates them with a sign opposite to the one that is given in this column. For him, “rain” and Shenderovich are the territory of absolute evil, and Yarovaya and Vasiliev are the warriors of the light speaking on the side of the good. But the conclusion regarding the need for the demarcation and meaninglessness of the discussion, the Columonist of Izvestia makes the same as the author of these lines. Maxim Sokolov states: “Demarkation occurred in public opinion ... People can no longer live together, other, alas, formalities ... I must admit that they (opposite sides - I.Ya. ) cannot gather either in food, nor in drink, nor in prayer ... You have our own wedding, we have our own wedding.” And then the Columonist Izvestia offers people from another camp “to settle their internal affairs”, and invites his supporters to engage in settling their internal affairs. And this is the case when, being with Maxim Sokolov in diametrically opposite value and ideological positions, I agree with him in this proposal.

Another candidate for the prize named after V.P. Burenina was the NTV channel last week, showing on February 15 in the program “New Russian Sensations” a magical plot with the speaking name: “Chikatilo on the Maidan”. Actually, having quoted the name of this “sensation”, this could be limited to this, since everything is already clear with the program, with its authors, and with the goals of Mr. Kulistikov, who placed this product on his channel. The Olympics pushed the Maidan from the perspective of the main news of the day. But, nevertheless, the temperature in hatred boilers and tension on the main anti -Ukrainian fronts must be maintained. Even in conditions when nothing is super -haired on the Maidan seems to be happening. But if there is no horror in real life, then it must be created by the power of his creative imagination. And Kulistikov’s team, as if competing with the masters of Hollywood, calls for the life of our Russian Freddie Kruger - Andrei Romanovich Chikatilo. And since the most terrible Russian maniac has been in hell for 20 years, the quick -witted lecturers decided to celebrate the anniversary of his execution, taking away the plot about his son, Yuri Chikatilo. And in order not to get up twice, they came up with a story about how the son of a maniac, who, being a recidivist, who has not gone very far from his dad, but, of course, devoid of his father’s fiction and scope, turns out to be horror (!) - a supporter of the anti -Russian choice of Ukraine, and in order to take revenge on the mosquitors for the execution of the father, is sent to the Maidan.

The NTV film crew carefully puts the younger Chikatilo on the train in the direction of Kyiv, and before that it takes off, as the maniac’s son is “hiding”, “changing cars and appearance”, “moves stealthily” - and all this is under the watchful supervision of several NTV cameras, which relentlessly accompany him on the train, in Kyiv and directly on the Maidan. Turning to face the television operator, Yuri Chikatilo shouts: “Glory to Ukraine!”, On the camera demonstrates his unity with the inhabitants of the Maidan, who, of course, imagine who, in front of them, being normal people, shake his hand to the recidivist, answer his questions, treat him with a smoke.

Perhaps some part of the NTV audience, after watching this masterpiece, will strengthen in his hatred of the Maidan and will be ready to support Russian power intervention in Ukrainian events. I do not think that this plot has significantly increased this category of citizens in Russia and even more so in Ukraine. It was obvious for the unbiased viewer that in this plot, the recidivist Yuri Andreyevich Chikatilo, who, of course, was in no way responsible for the crimes of his father, but only for his own, was actually a freelance employee of the NTV, participating in a film film called Chikatilo on the Maidan. What, in fact, can be congratulated by V.M. Kulistikova and the entire creative team of NTV.

I can’t choose who is more worthy of the bonus named after V.P. Burenina is Oleg Borisovich Dobrodeev, who mounted Porn, missed through the dancer, for trampling into the mud of his former colleague, or Vladimir Mikhailovich Kulistikov, who shot a film film with the participation of his son Maniac and actually included a recidivist’s film crew to discredit the Maidan. I would award both, for they are worthy.

Daltonism epidemic

Now let's try to leave Goebbels and Burenin’s domestic followers, that is, the territory of lies and propaganda and, following the rational advice of Maxim Sokolov, try to “settle things” in their journalistic house, that is, where they are engaged in information, not propaganda and express their opinions, and do not translate the opinions of “uncle”.

And here we need a different tools, thinner, black and white analysis does not work here, but it is necessary to use the entire color scheme, and distinguish shades of colors. This skill is to distinguish between colors, their shades-last week somehow at once and at the same time lost several talented publicists.

Oleg Kashin published an essay in the “Free Press” entitled “Banana Question”. He rhetorically asks: “What is the difference between a person who pretends that he is mortally offended by a photograph with a banana, from a person who pretends that he is mortally offended by a“ rain ”survey?” The correct answer on the kashin: no different. And then the verdict: “A hypocrite with a blockade and a hypocrite with a banana, these are just two hypocrites, two bastards who are either out of habit, or at work, trade in their emotions, imitate feelings that cannot be imitated.” Kashin explains: "A joke about a banana according to the most moderate standards of the Russian blogosphere is a normal joke." The end of the quote.

Kashin is right, this is a common joke. The same as usual as the swastika, drawn on the walls of houses in Russian cities. As familiar as endless anti -Semitic attacks in the Russian blogosphere. As for the “rain” survey, hundreds of experts with a microscope studied this ill-fated question, and no one was able to find there not only insults of the memory of the victims of the blockade or justification of fascism, but also a hint of something like that. In the case of a “ordinary joke” about a banana - as, by the way, with a swastika, which is also like an ordinary cross with dashes - if ordinary social intuition does not work, which allows you to distinguish the permissible from the unacceptable, you can resort to simple semiotic analysis, using, sorry for the culmination, the famous triangle Frege: the sign is a thing (denotation) - meaning (Designate). An oblong yellow curved oval - a sign, a tropical fruit is a thing (denotate), and the meaning of a banana extended to a black person is read unequivocally: "You, a black monkey, do you want a banana?" Such, I apologize for the expression, the uncomplicated desig. And no matter how the Duma "United Russia" included the fool, Racism Rodnina was obvious to the whole world. As well as the zipping and use of stylized swastika has one meaning, fascist, despite all the durling of Russian nationalists about the gesture of “from heart to the sun”, “Roman legionnaires” and other “signs of the eternal movement”.

At the end of his “banana” column, Kashin asks another rhetorical question: “Imagine that Rodnina’s critics will achieve their own. Her lice about hackers will be exposed, and Rodin as a fuel racist will be deprived of an American visa. Will Russia become freer from this? Will there be at least something better? " And he predictably replies: "I think it will not."

You can, of course, ask Oleg Kashin if Russia will become freer of exposing the next Kremlin or from pulling into the light of God of another dissertation thief? Will there be at least something better from the articles of Kashin himself? I am trying to find some most neutral words to determine the set of polemic means that Kashin uses, but I can find anything but the words “demagogy” and “sophistry”.

Logical errors, tricks, the most common of which is the substitution of the thesis or “scarecrow”, are contained in every second journalistic material, including the most popular authors. Julia Latynina, criticizing Viktor Shenderovich for the same “Olympic” text that made him Persona on February, makes a classic substitution: first, instead of comparing the Sochi and Berlin Olympiads, which Schenderovich had a comparison of the Putin and Nazi regimes, and then this, the very substituted comparison, criticizes it.

I chose the text of Oleg Kashin to analyze cases in our journalistic house because he, this journalist, seems to be quite typical. This is one of the vivid representatives of the first “non -Soviet” generation of Russian journalists, who studied in the elementary grades in 1991, whose political socialization was already in the post -Soviet years, and journalistic activities began in zero. We, scoops, were waiting for this blanket, who did not know the Glavlite censorship of the generation of journalists. And so they came. With linguistic style and methods of polemics adopted on social networks. With postmodern ideas about the fluidity and fundamental relativity of any norms and readiness to change positions on any issue for a year.

With bizarre ideas about recent history. In the same column, Kashin writes that "Gagarin and Vysotsky, if they had not died, is much easier to present to United Russia, trustees of dubious funds and friends of dubious businessmen than Russian Mahatmas Gandhi and Vaclavs with Gaveli." In his Kashin, the whole Soviet elite is one continuous kobzon to his head. But what about Yursky, Akhedzhakov, Fadeev, Lyubimov, Mirzoev and thousands of others, who are neither in Osra, nor in funds, nor with dubious businessmen? How is Sakharov, after all?

I do not grumble or grumble. I am trying to understand what happened to the profession in which the skill and technique of crafts were not transmitted to the next generation. Take any text by Vladimir Nadein, Yuri Growth or Vasily Peskov. Try to find a slit into which the slightest inconsistency may fit, not to mention a logical mistake. The density and connectedness of any of their text is such that you can’t score a nail and you can’t chop it with an ax! The conflict of generations is normal. The rupture in the continuity of the craft is bad. Я не вижу в журналистах кашинского поколения новых владимиров надеиных, юриев ростов и василиев песковых. Впрочем, возможно, это дефекты моего зрения. Well, if so.


Collage hedgehog