Who to walk along the Fontanka?

The owner of the main Internet media of St. Petersburg was replaced by the fourth time in five years-what will happen now?

The control package of the St. Petersburg newspaper Fontanka.ru is again resold, this time - the owner of the Hearst Shkulev media holding Viktor Shkulev. The minority shareholders of the company-Media, the publisher of Fontanka, are still its founders, four journalists: Andrei Konstantinov, Alexander Gorshkov, Andrei Potapenko and Evgeny Zashenkov. What will happen next with the newspaper, in particular, by investigations of the activity of the “Kremlin cook” Prigozhin or Petrov’s adventures with Boshirov in Salisbury, says editor -in -chief Alexander Gorshkov

- Why do you, the creators of Fontanka, generally needed to sell a control package?

- I will remind you that we did not sell the control package now. In 2013, the control package of shares of the Fontanka publisher - was sold to Swedes, Bonnier Business Press. In 2016, after the entry into force of the famous law, the Swedes decided to get out of the business ...

-Yes, the story of how foreigners refused to participate in the Russian media after the entry into force of the law on no more than 20 percent participation, we remember. But then the four creators of Fontanka, including you, became the owners of the entire company.

- As a result, after all the perturbations, the owner of the control package was the Russian joint -stock company, whose owner is a Russian citizen. And this was our partner until recently.

- Why was such a design needed? What did the control package interfere with you? The profitable, after all, publication.

- Of course, Fontanka is a profitable edition. But in order to pay off the Swedish partners, we still had to implement these shares.

- Why, two years later, resale was again required? Whose initiative was it?

- It was the initiative of our partner. Why did he make such a decision? Here the versions can be different, including he could calculate the media business for himself non -core. Actually, he was like that.

- With whom else, except Viktor Shkulev, did you negotiate? Who else wanted to buy Fontanka?

-Over the past year and a half, representatives of large media structures came to us several times. There is probably no sense in calling them, it would be wrong, because they did not ask about it. But it was precisely the negotiations directly with Viktor Mikhailovich Shkulev, who also went long, who was successful.

-In this year and a half, information has appeared many times that the Fontanka either really wants to buy Evgeny Prigozhin, or I already bought it. Did he really claim?

- If we talk about us - the founders of the Fontanka, who still remain holders of the minority package, then we certainly were not going to sell anything Prigozhin.

And Prigozhin did not come to us with such a proposal. But I heard that the previous owner of the control package received such proposals.

I don’t know how much this information is true, because I was not a direct witness and a participant in such negotiations.

- That is, the partner did not even share with you that, they say, Prigozhin is encroaching?

- Once again: I was not a participant in conversations, so I can’t broadcast them. Therefore, I used this wording: "I heard." Everything else is from the field of assumptions.

-Our colleagues discussed the topic during the same year-after-year: they say, the Fontanka is not the same, the publications have become softer, there is no previous acuteness. What is it connected with?

- It is difficult for me to judge how much the publications have become softer or sharper. But only in the second half of the last year, several investigations were published on Fontanka, which received a great resonance. And I know for sure that every day of the publication of Fontanka causes unrest in some circles. Probably, colleagues may have such an opinion, I respect any opinion.

- One of these high -profile investigations concerned the story with Salisbury, Petrov and Boshirov, right?

- Of course, Fontanka conducted its investigation on this topic, we had several such publications.

- And now your new partner says that he would like to see the publication city, and leave federal topics to the federal press. This will not be a step back for you? After all, Fontanka has long gone beyond the regional newspaper.

-Firstly, this is not quite an accurate quote. Yes, our new partner says that he sees Fontanka primarily by the city publication. But she was always a city newspaper. Our target audience is located in St. Petersburg, it would be strange to deny it. Secondly, our new partner means that Fontanka has a large reserve in St. Petersburg. And I also think that the St. Petersburg audience can be significantly increased. It is the St. Petersburg audience that gives us an advertiser, that is, it provides a profit.

Because whatever we talk about, whatever the social mission of the newspaper, this is still a business. Otherwise, we will not be able to fulfill any social mission.

And in this part I absolutely agree with Viktor Shkulev. But this does not completely cancel the fact that Fontanka had and remains his own face. And besides the fact that the newspaper mined and supplied readers from St. Petersburg, she gave and will give a certain Petersburg view of the federal agenda.

- The Swedes as partners were good in that in Western traditions they did not interfere in the editorial policy. But your new partner, like his predecessor, comes from the USSR and lives in Russia. You are not afraid that he will begin to dictate to you, what we write, but what are we wrapping in fish?

“I'm not afraid of that.” For long months, we also said views on editorial policy. And I understand for sure that Viktor Mikhailovich is not going to influence her. He spoke out on this subject to the editorial staff that he met. Nevertheless, the shareholder, of course, can have its own view. Actually, he must have his own view. It would be strange to deny such an opportunity.

-That is, it will still influence.

- The shareholder can express his point of view. Is this influence? In my opinion, no.

- Holding Shkulev publishes Elle, Maxim, Marie Claire magazines and other similar ones. His point of view will not be reduced to the fact that the Fontanka should go along the "glossy" path?

- No, I’m not afraid of this either, because Shkulev has a very diversified media business. He owns well-known glossy brands and a circulation television gym “Antenna-Telezem”, but he also owns a network of city portals in 15 cities. In particular, in most cities of millionaires. Among these portals there are well -known resources that occupy the first positions in their regions. These are Yekaterinburg E1.ru, and Novosibirsk NGS.ru, and Chelyabinsk 74.ru. It was 74.ru that was the main source of information about events in Magnitogorsk. And E1.ru in the fall very actively talked about speeches against pension reform in the region.

If there were some kind of censorship influence of the owner on an editorial policy, I am sure that the materials of such an acuity would not have come out there.

- But I do not ask about censorship, but rather commercial, when the interests of advertisers can suddenly become more important than journalism itself.

- Never at Fontanka ”the interests of advertisers have prevailed over editorial tasks. It would be strange to assume that with the advent of a new controlling shareholder, the situation will change. Moreover, he completely honestly says that for him media is a business. The business is the growth of traffic and the conversion of this traffic into advertising.

- Exactly. And what will you do if there is a contradiction between the interests of the advertiser and such acute publications as Fontanka is famous?

-It seems to me that the formula is still different. There are the interests of the reader. If they are respected, traffic is growing. If traffic grows, advertising revenues are growing.

If the media businessman is more focusing on the interests of the advertiser, he will just begin to lose traffic.

- So you said about the reserves that Fontanka can receive on the city “field”. Isn't all the niches in St. Petersburg over the 18 years of the existence of the newspaper?

- A huge number is not covered. But over the past years, we managed to move forward. All last year, I dreamed of creating a business department at Fontanka. And only in December I managed to implement this task. I would like to see more materials designed for a thinking audience at Fontanka, materials from the category of “science”. And these are far from all topics that are not enough for us.