Navalny against the media

The valor of journalism is to unearth and inform the unknown. The valor of Russian journalism is to report that everyone already knows.

Alexei Navalny published an investigation that claims that the mother of the State Duma speaker Vyacheslav Volodin owns a lot of real estate. As usual, the investigation is made in a journalistic manner. Navalny has long been using journalism for his own purposes, which, of course, are not journalistic. And it does it better than many (or even all) Russian media.

For these purposes, you need a “hype” raised by the next exposure. But the growth of emissions leads to devaluation. The network public is already accustomed to the exposure of Navalny, not to mention the habit of the manners of the authorities. Therefore, Navalny and his supporters would like the scandal to go beyond the network, rolled along the media, lead to some consequences.

This did not happen. On his Facebook, Navalny hung a post on August 17 under the heading “something about“ few business media that consider themselves decent publications ””, in which he listed the leading business media that published the note with information about the apartment of the State Duma of the State Duma: “Kommersant”-0 notes, “RBC”-0 notice-0 notes. Maybe it ironizes Navalny, they considered this story insignificant? Navalny suggests watching the Vedomosti website at the request of Volodin and find “such important news” there as “Volodin sees in the words of Trump the possibility of recognizing Crimea part of Russia” or “Volodin doubted the desire of deputies to relax in the unfriendly countries”.

It is followed by an offensive maxim: “It is amazing as Kudryavtsev (Demyan Kudryavtsev, a media manager, a member of the Board of Directors Vedomosti. - Ed. ) Managed to turn the best newspaper of the country, which determines the advanced journalism standards, in the bunch of cowardly murziloids in just two years.”

Facebook was followed by a sharp reaction of Vedomosti journalists and sympathetic, who indicated Navalny, that if he already cares for the ideals of democracy, he must know that they were also listed as an independent press. Therefore, journalists sent requests to double -check the texture in the investigation of Navalny and publish their material .

Links to the “dogma”, the legendary internal regulations of “Vedomosti”, after which everyone should stand up and sing, do not take into account one thing: the procedure does not make the meaning of journalism.

The theses also sounded in the unfolding skirmish that journalists should remain aloof from political games. That is, a fact is also needed in order not to become a drain channel, if Navalny itself is suddenly such a channel. In addition, a blogger is an amateur and simply does not understand professional standards of business journalism.

Mutual irritation between the bulk and journalistic workshop has been growing for a long time. In part, internal competition is partially affected: Alexei Navalny does the media, especially in the part that is considered the most important in the West, WatchDog Journalism , Accountability Journalism , that is, supervision of power, the protection of institutions and principles of democracy. Over the past 10 years, Navalny, whatever his motives, has made more investigations in this area than all the Russian media combined. Honestly, it is even difficult to recall whether in recent years there was at least one story that stirred society and excavated by the media. The publications at best followed the already rising hype. But this valor of domestic journalism - boldly report that everyone already knows - is less and less.

Navalny, who was flattered 10 years ago, he was flattered, he was their secret favorite, now he dares them and is annoyed. Refuses an interview and comments , he says: read, they say, FBK, there we have already done all the work for you. The audience also sees everything and also blames reporters. This attitude cannot but affect their moods. Now they will be even more willing to adhere to the version popular among the guards that Navalny was working on plums (as if she was justifying or canceling something).

Behind this quarrel of the adjacent, much deeper processes are hidden. “Unwillingness to be used” signals a new function of the media, which, thanks to the Internet, spreads on all media markets, but on Russian - with special doom.

The media now is a validation platform, but not information. This is something like a stamp in a passport to recognize existing relations by official. Navalny Publication in Vedomosti or Kommersant was needed for this: to make an already sensational network publication as an offline event. And not in order to get, pack or spread the facts. He can even without the media. Moreover, it is often better in all three indicators: prey, packaging, distribution.

That is why Navalny treats contempt for journalistic conversations about professional standards. The notorious factskening to the essence of history does not add anything and does not decrease from it. For the story itself, it is redundant. This is an option of Italian strike: transferring meaning from the result to the procedure. Links to the “dogma”, the legendary internal regulations of “Vedomosti”, after which everyone should stand up and sing, do not take into account one thing: the procedure does not make the meaning of journalism. It serves as a protective mechanism - just. In theory, for society, but in our conditions - for the editorial office. The fact ofkeeping did not surf with (telling already), and then to protect yourself.

And in this particular case, the following “dogma” generally distorted the attitude of journalists to event. Vedomosti journalists focused not on significant, but on the confirmed. Just because the “dogma” requires confirmation. They began to bother and duplicate Navalny’s investigation, check the facts set forth in it and send requests to be safe. Whereas a sufficient information farm to report significant information could serve as a completely different, obvious and irrefutable fact, the publication of this investigation by Navalny. There would be a desire free from the dogmas. This fact did not need any fact.

“Vedomosti” and others need Navalny with them - and society as a whole in this story - as a portal from online to offline.

But Vedomosti, most likely, did not want to follow Navalny. They wanted to portray a product with their own added value. This “own” product was the emphasis that “Navalny demanded that Volodin’s deputy powers have terminated the deputy powers.” That is, a formal info for a note is, as it were, different. But in reality, they took up the topic after and because of Navalny. And the value added in the form of a displaced emphasis is significant for self -conceit and even for the "dogma", but not for the information of the public.

However, such close attention to the “Vedomosti” is caused by the fact that they were just published information about the investigation of Navalny (and that Navalny insulted them the most rudely while they prepared this publication). Other business media at all noticed him in the picture of the day .

There was a situation in which the leading manufacturer of anti -corruption sensations does not need any investigations or distribution from the media. They are not what they don’t want - they, even when they want, cannot add anything new. For Navalny, independent publications “sit here not as a woman”, but “like a thermometer” from a famous joke. He needs them to register a network fact that has already occurred, to develop a network event with their institutional reputation. To introduce the event of a new social media into the old world of bureaucratic institutions. “Vedomosti” and others need Navalny with them - and society as a whole in this story - as a portal from online to offline. And not some journalism and factsching there.

Even the “Vedomosti”, the most worthy business media, having checked and rechewing the facts, observing everything that should be observed there, the same thing told their audience that she already knew from Navalny. After all, they have a high -quality, that is, well -informed by the Internet, an audience. The audience only watched with sluggish leisure curiosity: the “Vedomosti” (or someone else) or not dare. That's the whole request for paid content.

Navalny irritation is an irritation of an amateur not informal in the norms of the media, but a professional user, albeit very specific. Yes, he wants to use the media in his interests. The leading world media would seize such a user. Like for Assange, for example. They would have concluded exclusive agreements with him, would conduct partnership investigations. However, we have no other media for Navalny. So he chose the tone short -sighted - precisely from the point of view of the professional use of the media. And in relation to the journalists of "Vedomosti" this tone is generally unreasonably offensive. However, he seems to have put all the cross on them.

In general, the process of turning the media from media into the registry is global. It’s just that in Russia he goes with aggravating circumstances. But everywhere and everywhere online with all its variety of motives - commercial, political, sabotage - performs media functions much better than old media that grew out of offline and for offline. However, offline is significant as a space of life and solutions. Therefore, the function of traditional media is changing. They are increasingly serving not for the extraction and distribution of the unknown, but for official archiving already known.

Once upon a time, the Internet was perceived as a quick catalog of texts. Now the media has become a slow catalog of the Internet. They slow down and package the maintenance of the network for institutions that live slower than the network, and believe in frozen things. In fact, in truth.

Journalism in these conditions is needed as an intermediary between the world of the network and the world of institutions. The media turned out to be a sort of Haron - the carrier of the deceased news from the present to the past. And yes - at the same time, they also filter the dead news in the old memory in accordance with the one who is learned for what.