Anton Lyadov correspondent biography. Not “foreign”, not “media”, but lies, lies, lies

Arina Borodina about the “French” story of VGTRK

RFI: After the French TV channel Canal+ released a story about how the journalists of the Russia 1 channel work, they responded to the French journalists, but it turned out that they re-edited the original story, and it shows. The RFI editorial office has two versions of Anton Lyadov’s story. Is this some kind of traditional practice?

Arina Borodina: Firstly, yesterday I watched the response of the Rossiya 1 channel - what was in Vesti. There's a rather strange approach there. No, I don’t know of such a thing where they showed a re-edited story. Moreover, they even showed the sources that they recorded and which they still have in the archive; They showed the entire interview, which did not correspond to what was in the story in Vesti Nedeli, which French journalists investigated.

In general, in Russian, this is called “getting out of it”, “hitting the tails” - there is also such a slang expression. Dmitry Kiselev also speaks about this. I think that next Sunday in “News of the Week” there will be a continuation, they will return to this topic, because yesterday the story was for a whole 10 minutes.

There was a lot of distortion there, including the interpretation of Russian correspondent Anton Lyadov that French journalists “insisted” that the French politician (Bruno Le Mer - ed.), whom they cite in the story, changed his point of view, although I did not see any insistence on Canal+ - people were simply asked questions. The fact that they showed the source code there is, of course, very funny, completely unprofessional and therefore unconvincing.

But do you somehow remember Anton Lyadov from some other subjects? What does Russia know about this correspondent?

I wrote about this on my Facebook page. I would never have remembered the name of a specific, quite ordinary correspondent of the Russia 1 channel, if not for one story that, in my opinion, should be included in journalism textbooks.

This concerns the events of the spring of 2014, when events in Ukraine flared up and the war in Donbass began. Anton Lyadov was then working in Nikolaev. I remembered this story because even in my practice there was no such story, a well-watched viewer who, on duty, saw many different propaganda blunders.

It was about this: a certain citizen Andrei Petkov became the hero of stories on both NTV and the Rossiya 1 channel. With a difference of several minutes, the NTV channel first showed this character in a Nikolaev hospital after clashes between the so-called militias and Maidan supporters. He was in the hospital, and, I repeat, his name was Andrei Petkov.

They said on NTV that he was a German mercenary who brought 500 thousand euros to Ukraine to help the opponents of the militia, in general, in the NTV story he was an absolute villain. And literally 40 minutes later on the Russia 1 channel there was a story from Nikolaev, and it was Anton Lyadov who did it.

In his story, the same Andrei Petkov was lying in a hospital bed, and it was said that he was a hero, a supporter of the militia. Yes, he is a German citizen, and the same 500 thousand were mentioned, but in a completely different context: supposedly Andrei Petkov brought them to support the militia, buy them uniforms, food, and so on. That is, a radically opposite degree in contrast to the story on NTV.

Naturally, Ukrainian and foreign media wrote about this, and in Russia this mistake was noticed that two Russian TV channels presented the same character on air in completely opposite ideological ways.

But the Russia 1 channel did not let up, and three days later Anton Lyadov himself filmed a big story dedicated to this very Andrei Petkov. He was lying in a hospital room, for some reason they tied a St. George ribbon to his hospital bed, and Anton Lyadov claimed that he was a hero. Moreover, the people's mayor of Nikolaev, who was, naturally, on the side of these same militias, had already spoken in this story.

He said on Skype that this Andrei Petkov is a German citizen, but he is one of his own, he came to Nikolaev many times, he is from these places.

That is, they tried to convince viewers of the Russia 1 channel that Andrei Petkov is a real hero who got into a brawl and is lying in a hospital ward. These stories are in the archive, so everyone can find them and watch them, these are not my versions.

And then three days later, again on the NTV channel, this same Andrei Petkov is called violently insane, crazy, they say that he is just a schizophrenic who had a spring exacerbation. He himself admits this on camera, his brother says that he is crazy and has been registered in a mental hospital for a long time, showing some certificates.

It reached some kind of absolute phantasmagoria, and at the end of the story on NTV they said that he misled the journalists, he learned German from old Soviet gramophone records and the NTV story featured songs from old Soviet trophy films about the war.

The surrealism of this story is that on the Russia 1 channel he remained a hero in a hospital bed with a St. George’s ribbon. That is, something incredible must have been going on in the audience’s heads: either he is a foreign mercenary, or a hero with a St. George’s ribbon, or simply crazy.

Actually, that’s why I remembered Anton Lyadov, because he sculpted the image of this incredible Andrei Petkov. I would have forgotten about it if I didn’t have to analyze this example in my speeches; I wrote about it on the Forbes.ru website and discussed it with journalism students.

Then, after some time, I was watching TV and suddenly I saw a story from France. It was dedicated to a historical date - the First World War. It was very detailed, 10 minutes long, and it was made by Anton Lyadov. I even shuddered: well, wow, I thought, apparently he is in good standing with the leadership of VGTRK, if they sent him from a daily “reel” to France, to a European country, with a difficult job by the standards of a correspondent.

This is the third or fourth time I’ve seen his stories from France. Therefore, when I heard his last name, naturally, I remembered the story from two years ago about this same Andrei Petkov.

I don’t know what the practice is in Russia, but if a French correspondent is sent as a special correspondent to some country, at a minimum he must speak the language of that country. In my opinion, Anton Lyadov has problems with French. This can be seen precisely during that very interview with the French politician Bruno Le Maire, who gives him an interview in English. Is it really possible for a person to be sent as a special correspondent to Paris without speaking French?

I don’t know the details, for what reasons and who is sent where by the VGTRK company, but I will note that he is not a permanent correspondent in France, there is Anastasia Popova, who makes stories from France and Europe in general. I think that these were one-time business trips, and for this, to be fair, let’s say that the correspondent does not always have to know French. I believe that he knows English, because without a foreign language it would be strange to send a correspondent abroad. But this factor at least needs to be taken into account. I think if the company were asked this question, they would say that it was a one-time business trip. But now, for the sake of credibility, they invite translators from French, who must convince the audience that the translation was correct. Usually all these resources and efforts only indicate that they have been caught and now they need to get out. They will get out of it, and on Sunday, I think, there will be a continuation.

In addition to the translators, Dmitry Kiselev himself comments on this in Kommersant’s material and says that yes, indeed, “we sometimes let burrs go on air.” This phrase - burrs - will apparently become the phrase of the day.

Meme. Maybe. Here, too, the situation is twofold. On the one hand, he admits that they made some kind of mistake or mistake on air. On the other hand, it does not decipher what it is. Therefore, I think, depending on how the company decides to behave, this is how Dmitry Kiselev will show and tell this Sunday in his program. I repeat, I carefully watched yesterday’s story and was discouraged by the fact that the working source codes were shown to us, and they did not at all convince me as a viewer that the French journalists also distorted reality. Moreover, not all the characters who were in the plot initially are there, and this is very important.

Deputy General Director of VGTRK and host of the Vesti Nedeli program, Dmitry Kiselev, called Canal+’s analysis of the Rossiya 1 story about “Eurosceptics” in France a “controversy between channels.” Journalists from the French Canal+ program Le Petit Journal discovered that the characters in the “News of the Week” story were attributed words that they did not say. In one case, this is confirmed by filming conducted by the girl herself, the heroine of the Vesti Nedeli report. All the characters in the VGTRK story said in an interview with Canal+ that their words were misinterpreted or distorted. Mr. Kiselev told Kommersant that Europeans “do not see the beam in their own eyes.”

Dmitry Kiselev, in response to an analysis of the Vesti Nedeli story by journalists from the Le Petit Journal program, said that “this is a controversy between TV channels.” “We’ll look at it in Vesti Nedeli on Sunday,” he told Kommersant. “We, indeed, sometimes miss burrs.” Rossiya 1 special correspondent Anton Lyadov, who prepared the story, when asked by Kommersant to comment on the information that he had distorted the words of the people he interviewed, hung up.

A story about “Eurosceptics” - citizens dissatisfied with the European Union - aired on Vesti Nedeli in France on May 15. The “Eurosceptics” themselves are discussed in the third minute of the plot. It begins with scenes of demonstrations against the labor law, then the correspondent talks about migrants and interviews a girl in Republic Square who allegedly says that she is afraid of them.

The host of the Le Petit Journal program, Jan Barthez, compared the plot of “News of the Week” with a recipe for Parmentier casserole, “where everything is layered.” French journalists discovered that the characters in the Vesti Nedeli story were given words that they did not say. Thus, Anton Lyadov interviews a protester against the labor law, to whom the words “The President betrayed us” were attributed in the story of Vesti Nedeli. He's trying to shut us up. We invest thousands of euros in our education so that later we can be fired right and left.” However, Savannah Anselm (that’s the name of the heroine of the report), who was found by French journalists, said that she “didn’t say that.” “I don’t even know how to say this in English,” she admitted. Savannah Anselm had a video recorder hanging on her chest, which recorded the entire dialogue; on the recording, Anton Lyadov can be heard asking a question (in English): “Many people here on the streets say that the government of Francois Hollande is doing a lot for Europe, but not for France . What do you think?" The demonstrator responds in English: “I don’t know what he’s doing for Europe. But I know what he doesn’t do for France.” She doesn't say anything else. Journalists from the Russian edition of RFI Radio France Internationale translated the interview and provided the program with Russian subtitles, which its authors clearly did not count on.

The other characters in the Vesti Nedeli story (Le Petit Journal journalists found everyone) also refused the words that the Russian channel attributed to them. The press secretary of National Assembly deputy Bruno Le Maire (his interview is included in Anton Lyadov’s story) Dimitri Luca, although he agreed with the quotes, added to Kommersant that Vesti Nedeli freely compiled them.

Dmitry Kiselev told Kommersant that he “publicly recognizes and takes apart each of these “burrs.” For example, on May 16, Mr. Kiselev was on air "News of the week" admitted that the identity card of a Ukrainian soldier of the SS Galicia division, which formed the basis of the plot of his program on April 16, turned out to be a fake. However, commenting on Kommersant’s analysis of the Vesti Nedeli story by French journalists, Dmitry Kiselev said that Europeans “do not see the beam in their own eyes.” “Take, for example, personal sanctions against me for “calling for the deployment of troops to Ukraine.” I certainly never said that.” Mr. Kiselev was included in the EU sanctions list in 2014 as “the central figure of state propaganda that supports the entry of Russian troops into the territory of Ukraine.”

In the evening program “Vesti” Anton Lyadov responded to the claims of his French colleagues - the press service of VGTRK told Kommersant that the story can be considered the “official position” of the holding. “We are pleased that the channel’s audience has crossed national borders,” said presenter Ernest Matskevičius in a summary of the story. According to him, in order to avoid “misunderstandings,” interviews with characters in the new story are presented “in their original form.” Anton Lyadov suggested “sorting things out point by point.” According to him, French politician Bruno Le Mer only “oh, horror - allowed himself to speak positively regarding Russia.” Moreover, according to him, the French channel “has no complaints about the interview itself,” and they “didn’t argue at all” with the statistics regarding unemployment and refugees announced in the story. “No one is immune from mistakes, I’m not afraid of this word, even the French,” said Anton Lyadov. However, he did not comment on the interview with Savannah Anselm, who did not say the words attributed to her by News of the Week.

Kommersant’s interlocutor at the French Foreign Ministry, when asked whether they were going to, for example, revoke the accreditation of Rossiya 1 correspondents, replied that “in his memory there were no such cases.”

Sergey Goryashko, Natalya Korchenkova, Maxim Yusin; Alexey Tarkhanov, Paris

The Russian state television channel invented the monologues of the characters, took words and facts out of context and assembled a special reality from it. This is the same news as the fact that the main star of the TV channel is called Dmitry Kiselev. But still, the revelation made on the French Canal+ “blew up the RuNet.” Why?

Firstly, despite the common sense reforms carried out in recent years, many Russian citizens are still at a crossroads of logic: on the one hand, they hate the West and don’t care about it, and on the other hand, any sneeze from the West resounds in our edges with a thunderous echo. Secondly, the Western sneeze was translated into Russian (this was done by the Russian editorial office of RFI radio) and instantly spread into quotes, likes and reposts.

What was the Russian story from Paris about?

Before the correspondence from Paris, the host of the Vesti Nedeli program, Dmitry Kiselev, briefly told the audience about the negotiations between Europe and Turkey on the migration issue (“the deal of the century is going downhill”), and that “no one has a plan B,” and that , that the ratings of European leaders - Hollande, Merkel and Cameron - are falling sharply... “Against this background, Eurosceptics are rapidly gaining points... Anton Lyadov talks about what this looks like using the example of France.”

First shots: a correspondent on a Parisian street, where another demonstration against the new labor law is taking place. It’s really hot at the demonstrations, but the correspondent increases the tension: “The stones flew back, duck down, duck down.” Perhaps the viewer ducks, but this does not save him: “The police went with batons at the protesters, they just beat them!” - the correspondent shouts, and “in confirmation” the operator snatches a four-second picture in which it is difficult to make out anything. It is probably the police (who, by the way, are often prohibited from acting harshly at rallies) who are twisting one of the casseurs (“pogromists”). But these were jokes, warming up: “As soon as new slogans appeared in the crowd - “Resign the president and his entire cabinet”: it began!”

And everything is logical: if the police “simply beat people” even before the slogans about the resignation of the president and the government appeared, then after the slogans appeared you understand what “began” here. For some reason, there are no images of the slogans that started it all in the story, although there are plenty of them at every rally; and about “the president with his entire government,” as well as about the police themselves, the protesters shout with impunity things that are embarrassing to repeat.

But since “it has begun” in the correspondent’s head, he gives a second frame in which someone with a red bandage on his sleeve is twisting someone. Following this, for some reason the correspondent repeats the same illegible four-second frame with the police, only commenting on déjà vu in a different way. Instead of the lapidary: “The police are just beating them up,” the old picture is accompanied by torn details: “Knee on the ground, grabbed by the scruff of the neck and back on the asphalt!” “The one below is a policeman in civilian clothes!” - the correspondent warns.

Then he gives the floor to one of the rally participants, who (in Russian translation) will say: “The President betrayed us. He's trying to shut us up. We invest thousands of euros in our education so that later we can be fired right and left.” (In France, higher education is mostly free; thousands of Russian students can tell about this - ed.) Then there is a comment from a Russian-speaking Frenchwoman, a graduate of a French university, Elena Timoshkina, who says that “one person from four there are no jobs in France right now” (and this is true)… Then - a commentary by a French economist about the crisis of power in France; The correspondent then reminds us that the government uses Article 49.3 of the Constitution to pass the labor law, although before his election Hollande stated that “this article is a rejection of democracy” (also true).

“However, for the sake of approval in Brussels, Hollande will not give up anything like that,” says correspondent Lyadov and moves on to the main topic: “In the fall of 2015, he (Holland) said: France is ready to accept tens of thousands of refugees stuck in Germany.” In fact, this was a modest figure by the standards of the “migration crisis” of 24 thousand people. But France will have difficulty filling this “quota”: migrants do not really want to come here.

Then they show a woman in a Muslim headscarf and several dark-skinned children. It appears that these are probably refugees. The “migrants” also turn out to be two unpleasant young men of unknown origin and biography, one of whom is trying to hug a girl on Republic Square, a regular participant in the “Night on Your Feet” protest. Freed from the obsessive “migrant,” the girl tells Vesti Nedeli (in Russian translation): “I don’t understand why the police, instead of chasing us on the streets, don’t deal with these migrants. We’re really scared” (Looks like a reference to the “New Year’s story” with the rapes in Cologne - ed.).

What did they say about the Russian story in the French program?

A response to the Russian story about France appeared in the popular satirical program Le Petit Journal (Canal+). The host of the program, Jan Barthes, feigned surprise at why the material about Eurosceptics began with a showing of “pogromists” at a purely French demonstration against the labor law and why it then “slipped onto migrants.” And he asks: “Do you understand what the Russian channel is leading to? No? We, too. Maybe this is a recipe for casserole parmentier, where everything is layered? In the same absurd vein, everything continues with the story of the lyceum, “captured by migrants.”

The next piece from the Russian story: correspondent Lyadov tells how migrants occupied a lyceum in the 19th arrondissement of Paris. Quote:

“They brought the bales straight to the Jean Carré Lyceum. Children of 15-16 years old studied there. They pulled ropes in the yard and immediately hung up everything they had arrived in...” “Only the special forces soldiers managed to drive them out: they were returning in the morning...” And further: “When the number of refugees in the school exceeded a thousand, the French authorities closed the school and abandoned the building we're coming."

“Pogromists,” labor laws, migrants, a lyceum in the 19th arrondissement that turned students out the door? What are they leading to? - the French presenter is again “surprised”, recalling that, in fact, the story was about “Eurosceptics”.

The theme of migration develops further: the elderly Madame Nicole Ber says that she worked for 26 years in the mayor's office of the Parisian suburb of Noisy-le-Sec. “I was retired and at the same time three migrants were hired,” says Madame Behr.

The ultra-right old man Le Pen immediately comes up close and personal, assuring that “Europe is condemned to extinction, to replacement of the population, if it does not take radical measures. The solution is to abandon the European Union...” Then - a transition to the commentary of Bruno Le Maire, one of the prominent members of the right-wing Republicans party (the head of the party is Sarkozy). Le Maire tells the correspondent: “We must work more with Russia, the future of all Europe depends on it.” Back to back - students clapping for some unknown reason in some audience and again - Le Pen. The old man speaks incoherently. Or that's how it's translated. He says that “interaction between Russia and the European Union is really necessary. And for both sides. The fact is that the French have completely changed their values ​​in recent years. They no longer count on Europe as a guarantor of security.”

Jan Barthes: “And now the plot is ready, it is beautiful”, his message is: “because of Europe in France people are smashing everything in the streets - there is no more democracy - migrants are feared - migrants are taking French jobs and their schools. The only solution is to get closer to Russia.”

Then Le Petit Journal gives the floor to the heroes of Lyadov’s plot. Bruno Le Maire claims that his speech in the story is a "copy-paste of different phrases" and the end result is "not the opposite of what I wanted to say, but something quite different." A girl from the rally (Savannah Anselm), after listening to her speech, laughs: “I don’t even know how to say this in English...” (The correspondent speaks very little French, so he tries, where he can, to use some English - ed.) Savannah also recorded this interview - from the camera she wears on her chest. Judging by her entry, the girl does not want to “deviate” from the topic of “Euroscepticism.”

Raphael, a girl from Republic Square, hears her words about “fear of migrants” translated and winces: “It’s disgusting and insulting that my words were conveyed in this way. It’s not even a false translation, they just completely made something up.”

Well, the mayor of the 19th arrondissement reminds that the statement that “the French authorities closed the school and left the building to visitors” cannot be true. If only because the lyceum closed in 2011, i.e. several years before refugees occupied the empty building.

Continuation in France

“Le Petit Journal exposes the manipulations of the Russian state channel,” wrote the Figaro newspaper the next day, which, by the way, has long and regularly published the Rossiyskaya Gazeta tab. “The apologies and explanations of Rossiya-24 could be welcomed, because this is not the first time that the state company VGTRK, which owns Rossiya-24, has ‘adjusted’ the French reality,” the Figaro newspaper recalled. But, of course, no one began to apologize, but explanations followed.

Continuation in Russia

The response of Vesti employee Anton Lyadov to French journalists was published under the headline “The French channel tried to teach “Russia” the Russian language.”

Judging by the title, the story with the innocuous caption “Elena Timoshkina, graduate of a French university” occupies a dominant role in the “criticism of criticism.” In the Le Petit Journal program, this signature was indicated with a red arrow, the presenter explained it this way: “the third certificate - and this is marked (by the signature) below - from a graduate of a French university.” The French did not make any “accusations” in this regard.

But for some reason correspondent Lyadov takes a long time to refute the non-existent accusations: “Another terrible lie that we are allegedly accused of. Elena Timoshkina appeared in our story as a graduate of a French university. French journalists were indignant: how can you call a person who has already graduated from a university a graduate?”

Lyadov does not clarify when and where “the French journalists were outraged.” But he states that “in the Russian language, even a sixty-year-old person can be called a graduate,” and those who reproach us for not knowing French are trying to teach us a lesson in Russian.”

“And there are no complaints about the content of the interview itself,” adds the Vesti correspondent.

In this material, The Insider offers to learn about how propaganda works on Russian television, directly from employees of state television channels. The first part of the “confession” that we are publishing today is devoted to censorship and propaganda in news broadcasts, the second part is about how propaganda is organized in political talk shows.

Today’s text features confessions from an employee of the Rossiya TV channel, an employee of the RT TV channel, and the former editor-in-chief of Vesti. They talk about how the Kremlin controls the political agenda, why a news editor can be beaten with impunity right in the studio, what people from the regions tell employees of state channels, and how money replaces political beliefs.

Employee of the TV channel "Russia"

It is clear that there can be no social or political protests on air. When Navalny spoke in April, the channels were silent for 2 weeks, then they only started commenting on something. Everything related to politics is agreed upon, sometimes they play it safe and don’t give anything just in case. Sometimes, on the contrary, they give instructions to cover it - for example, when the May decrees were issued, they brought us a folder from the Kremlin on which “IMBARGO” with an “I” was written in large letters. When Trump became a candidate, they were instructed to give only positive things. They did so until he began to strike Syria. If the Kremlin was dissatisfied with something, everything was resolved instantly. There was an incident with a colleague: the president was at the Christmas tree in the Kremlin, either they gave the wrong angle, or some other technical issue - the employee was instantly removed from the daytime broadcasts. But in general, in the Kremlin they only watch the 20-hour edition of Vesti Nedeli; everything else is of little interest to Dobrodeev. In general, he is already tired of everything, and he has nothing to do except for the final program to come out.

In addition to political censorship, there is also a block on some state corporations. I know of at least one state-owned company that has a budget to block negative mentions. This is a well-known fact. If it sounds on the air, it’s very streamlined, but if it’s something serious, it doesn’t sound at all.

I'm talking not only about technical defects, but also about professionalism in general. For example, there was a scandal with Anton Lyadov, a Vesti correspondent, when he filmed a report in France, distorting the words of protest participants. The channel had to justify itself... Or he, Anton, again distinguished himself during the Olympics in Brazil in one of his reports: “They speak Brazilian here”... Recently they gave him a medal, they say that someone is actively protecting him. There was nothing for him after that broadcast from France; his channel began to block him out. They made a separate episode, a 150-minute report about how the French don’t know French, grandmothers said what Anton Lyadov said, and so on. Some kind of stupidity.

The presenter, if he wants to sit in the frame, must enter into an intimate relationship with someone in order to be promoted. Or someone needs to be deliberately denigrated or framed in order for the person speaking to allow a marriage to happen on air; this can be done in different ways.

Under these conditions, of course, there is no corporate spirit. When two of our fellow correspondents were killed in Donbass, there was a farewell at 11 am. Dobrodeev, Zlatopolsky, and several more people came. Some Vesti employees were absent. Dobrodeev calls Revenko, he says: “We have a flight”...

Propaganda, of course, powerfully washes people’s heads, especially in the regions. I myself was shocked at how one-sided people perceive things. When you communicate with residents of the regions, you understand how easy it is to govern Russia. I’m surprised how it’s possible to argue like that, and they respond – “you said it yourself.” I try to explain to them: “You have to analyze. Watch RBC, watch Rain.” - “What is Rain?” - “Turn on and watch.” - “But they all lie!”

Theft and nepotism on the channel is terrible. Ordinary correspondents receive 30 thousand, and, for example, Skabeeva’s salary is almost 400 thousand. There was such a family tandem formed there, Skabeeva-Popov, they had business trips with such a budget, they flew to New York, some carried out their “investigations”.<подробнее о фейках в эфирах Евгения Попова см. здесь>.

Spouses Olga Skabeeva and Evgeniy Popov

Another revealing point: remember when they passed the law on “gay propaganda”? There are many representatives of the LGBT community on television, including top management. So, did anyone even say a word against it? And this is not only on TV. I talked with one deputy when this law was adopted, I asked him: “What was that? You are all the same color there. I can name you by name." He answers: “Old man, understand correctly, this was a social request of society, we met halfway, it was necessary.” But there was no such request, of course. State media, authorities, deputies, state corporations - there are gays in the leadership everywhere. I don’t know whether they live in conflict with their conscience, but at least everything is in its place, which means everyone is happy with everything... I haven’t heard anything about high-profile resignations and high-profile dismissals.

Dmitry Skorobutov, chief editor of Vesti until August 2016.

I came to the Rossiya channel at the age of 22. Worked there for 15 years. For the last 10 years, he has been the chief editor of the night, morning and afternoon editions of Vesti. I admit, I had my convictions. I sincerely believed that everything was being done correctly, that Navalny was an agent of the State Department, and so on. It’s like we’re in a looking glass there. I liked my work and I did it well. There were no complaints. In this sense, I have nothing to be ashamed of.

But, of course, I saw a discrepancy between what we show and reality. I’m a simple person, not an elite, I see what’s happening. Gradually I began to perceive work more critically. Sometimes I tried to broadcast something that was not allowed. For example, the mass poisoning of disabled children in the Irkutsk region in August last year. The deputy director of Vesti, after doubts and reflections, allowed it. As a result, there were checks, the situation received resonance. But this topic was non-political. In politics, no one will allow amateur activity.

Many colleagues understand everything. For example, the editor-in-chief of the Vesti Nedeli program, as far as I know, adheres to opposition views, but all this does not prevent him from making Vesti Nedeli. I think it's a question of money. A high salary helps overcome doubts for those who have them.

But not everyone makes good money. My employees and I had ridiculous salaries. I received 57 thousand in hand, of which the contract salary was 8,600. My editors, the girls for whom I fought, received about 40 thousand in hand. There was a scandal when I went to Zhenya Revenko (former director of Vesti), I said: “Evgeny Vasilyevich, here’s the situation: one of my employees is a single mother, the second is a young family girl, salary is 35 thousand. Do you think this is normal? With great difficulty, he added 5 thousand. Of course, I got hit on the head for this - the so-called “curator” of the morning broadcasts, Sasha Voronchenko, threw a hysteria: “How could you?! Who are you?! Yes, bypass me! I answer her: “Your people have been 10 years old and haven’t seen an extra penny, but here it’s 5 thousand...” And people work for that kind of money. The person on duty at the escalator in the metro gets the same amount, and we did federal editions of Vesti.

At the same time, it was the morning episodes—I’m talking about my programs in particular—that gave the highest ratings on the channel. Sometimes the figure reached 37-42%. This means people are watching, the product is in demand. But at the same time, we didn’t even hear “thank you,” let alone any bonuses. They are given to “whoever needs it”... Once I went to Dobrodeev’s deputy and said: “Olga Genrikhovna, please look. This is humiliating! My employees receive 35 thousand!” She leafed through her statements: “Here, Dmitry, there are salaries of 29,500 at Vesti-Moskva, so everything is fine with you.” And there are salaries for their “bug-granddaughters”. 200-300 thousand and more... In the halls of VGTRK there was an announcement for a long time: “An anti-corruption commission works at VGTRK. We ask you to report facts of corruption to such and such an address.” Funny…

In general, I worked conscientiously, one might say. I liked making news. Live by them. I tried to protect my colleagues and help them. But…

I was beaten by my employee - editing director Mikhail Lapshin, at the workplace, with complete inaction of security

The incident that occurred on August 17 last year forced me to rethink everything. I was beaten by my co-worker, editing director Mikhail Lapshin, at my workplace, with the security completely inactive. The reason for the attack was my remark on the occasion of his next marriage on air. When I sat down to write a report (the management of Vesti still did not react to them, although the defects on air were literally multiplying), he attacked me. I ended up in Sklif. Concussion, head contusion, closed head injury. Misha liked to drink, an attack on me was not the first such case; several years ago another employee was beaten. The management of Vesti decided to “cover up” this case and force me to remain silent.

Vesti director Andrei Kondrashov, who was afraid of publicity, repeatedly repeated that he would fire me if I defended myself legally and went to court. Sasha Voronchenko demanded not to write a statement to the police. They began to put pressure, ignoring the state of my health. Lapshin himself was hidden from the police immediately after the attack and was quickly sent on leave. I, in turn, began to receive threats from management.

Neither the VGTRK Security Service nor the holding’s management responded to my official requests. The CCTV recordings that recorded everything were hidden from me and were not given to the police. Kondrashov repeated at a personal meeting that “I will be fired if I go to court with a lawsuit against Lapshin,” that “I can only sort things out with Lapshin if I am not an employee of Vesti.” Kondrashov cares about the “reputation of the company,” as he told me. And the fact that in his editorial office production issues are resolved through beatings does not seem to bother him. For more than a month I tried to resolve everything peacefully, within the holding, and suggested that Kondrashov at least impose an administrative penalty on Lapshin, but nothing happened.

About a month later, on condition of anonymity, colleagues said that “your dismissal is being prepared, your issue is on the agenda, but they can’t come up with anything,” etc. At this point I already began to fight for myself: I tried to pick up my work documents from the channel - they gave me practically nothing. I had to call the State Labor Inspectorate. After she carried out an inspection and issued an order to the channel, they gave me something, but I still don’t have some important documents.

The new lawyer of the Rossiya channel, Inna Lazareva, was unable to fulfill the management’s command to “come up with something,” so she grossly violated the law, the Labor Code, and illegally fired me, knowing that I was on sick leave. And she confidently stated that “I’m making a big mistake,” that “I won’t prove anything,” etc. Now the criminal claim against Lapshin is in cassation, in the Moscow City Court, my lawyer and I, we cannot do anything: the world and district (Savelovsky) courts illegally refuse to accept the claim for proceedings. The labor claim against the Rossiya channel is being heard in the Simonovsky Court. June 20 first meeting.

We perceive any event as a picture and text.

Before this beating incident, I lived, like my colleagues, in a parallel reality. We perceive any event as a picture and text, this is already the cost of the profession. For me, events automatically turn into editorial or correspondent text and video. Terrorist attacks, disasters, social problems and everything else are just a picture and text. Then, at home, after the broadcast, and even then not always, you think: My God! 100 people died there! In this terrorist attack in Kabul... Or something else - an afterthought. And, since we work live, it’s also about efficiency, we have to do it all faster, you don’t have time to reflect.

But in general, everyone understands everything, but some are held back by money, and others who worked for pennies, like me, are held back by the desire to remain in the profession. Still, despite everything, we enjoy this work; producing news is very interesting.

We, the editors-in-chief, did not formulate an ideological agenda; we moved in the general direction. Many people have intuition at such a level that without instructions from above, we broadcast everything correctly. By the way, I remember how the president and prime minister made contradictory statements about the Khimki forest. The prime minister gave one comment, the president another. Voronchenko, who was in the Far East at that moment, simply blurted out: “Get out yourself.” In general, he did everything right - there were no contradictions between the words of the president and the prime minister on air...

Problems rarely arise because we are told in advance what not to broadcast. For example, last summer the arrest of the rector of the Far Eastern University. The deputy director of Vesti said “not to give.” I didn’t bother to find out the reasons. Sometimes it happens that the introductions change several times during the day, but the situation develops, and sometimes within half an hour you have to, as they say, change your shoes in a hurry. Over time, professional intuition develops; you understand what to broadcast and what not to broadcast. Ask for advice if in doubt.

Usually, a few hours before the broadcast, a release plan was agreed upon, in which everything was written out: what we give, what we don’t. Including personalities. In the plan there is such a line “we do not give” or, as Sasha Voronchenko brilliantly “encrypted” it, “ND”. For some reason, some figures even from the authorities got into it. Bastrykin was there, Astakhov, Zhirinovsky for some reason. Who was there? I didn't ask why.

Unfortunately, the professional level of Vesti's management decreased every year. For a long time we had an excellent leader, Yulia Anatolyevna Rakcheeva. Iron discipline and the highest quality of news. Then Zhenya Revenko, now Andrey Kondrashov. Degradation, in my opinion. Because of this, people left: correspondents, chief editors, editors, presenters... The atmosphere on the channel is also the same. Intrigue, nepotism, humiliation, alcoholism.

All this is reflected on the air. The attitude of TV viewers towards Vesti is also changing. Last year I gave an interview in my hometown, Krasnoyarsk, and there was a flurry of negative comments. I ask my fellow countrymen: “Why?” They answer: “Dima, because you are from Vesti.” And it’s not about you personally...” When “Vesti” says one thing, but the reality is different, people see and feel it for themselves, a protest arises.

It was also difficult to communicate with friends. They ask questions. “Why don’t you give it like that? But here they distorted it. But here they got it wrong.” Many of my friends don't watch television. Youth in general have been lost a long time ago. Channel One still maintains an audience because it has a higher quality product and very good money is invested. Konstantin Ernst does excellent television. But Dobrodeev is “tired of everything” and he “has been wanting to retire for a long time,” as people around him say...

Many presenters are talking heads who understand what is written to them and what they voice. There was a case when the UN Security Council decided the fate of the world - the most important vote, we were waiting for it, it was the first news. We promptly gave everything, and now my presenter reads one issue, the second, third, fourth, on the fifth or sixth he says to me: “Did you see that the UN Security Council voted?” I answer: “Kolya, did you see that this is your first news for the sixth issue in a row?” I think they don’t really care what they read, they are deprived of any reflection. Once, in a conversation with Dobrodeev’s assistant, Sasha Efimovich, I asked a question: “Sasha, you see that VGTRK is degrading, that smart and thinking people are being removed. Why?" He replied: “We need functional people, not creative units.”

Will I go to the rally on June 12? I don't know, I'm in doubt. As one of my friends said: “Dima, the most ardent oppositionists are formed from people like you.” Maybe it's true. I know how it all works and what I did myself...

RT TV channel employee

As a place to work, RT is a good company. In terms of salary, health insurance and conditions in general. But ideologically, this is an ordinary propaganda channel. That is, only the “right” topics are covered and from the “right” angle. For example, there are a lot of stories about human rights violations in the United States, but not a word about human rights violations in Russia. In short, this is the same as the biography of Stalin, written by Stalin: the damned West strives for power over the whole world, and Russia, where honest and peace-loving people live, successfully resists them under the leadership of an experienced mentor.< >

At the same time, there are a lot of normal and adequate people on RT. It seemed to me that most of them absolutely do not care about ideology. They work because they are paid well. There are also many who sincerely hate their job, but endure it because there is nowhere to go. I’m sure that Channel One has the same garbage. A lot of RT employees hate their jobs. Phrases like “I’m so f******” can be heard anywhere: in the smoking room, hallway, dining room, studio, newsroom, etc.

Almost all the content is aimed at denigrating the West, emphasizing and highlighting those points where the ruling elite there discredits itself

The RT audience is basically the same target group for which the channel was created - people in the USA and Western Europe who are really dissatisfied with their authorities and the policies of the so-called “West” in general, but who know nothing about Russia. Subsequent language versions - Arabic and Spanish - were initially more designed for former students of Soviet universities and their descendants, but today these two channels no longer work for “Russophiles”, but for anti-Westerners, who also don’t know anything and don’t really those who want to know anything about Russia. This is where RT's success lies. Almost all the content is aimed at denigrating the West, emphasizing and highlighting those points where the ruling elite there discredits itself. RT is not talking about Russia, but about the “decaying West”, so the question of caesura is practically not raised.

Poklonskaya tries on a quilted jacket on RT

In my particular work, no one tells me what can and cannot be said. Of course, the channel has a format and a position on various issues.

Therefore, RT raises some topics, ignores others, events are covered from a certain angle, and not equidistantly. Of course, this does not mean that RT is the kingdom of freedom, equality and fraternity, where you can broadcast whatever comes into your head. Someone who does not personally agree with RT’s position distinguishes between the personal and the professional – he does the work for which he receives money. Someone who can't do it leaves. But we had cases when employees refused to work on a particular topic because they did not agree with the channel’s position. Nothing, they just transferred them to another topic.

The political component of the information that we convey is of little interest to me, because, in my opinion, there is no smell of money on TV. And I don’t get involved in politics, I already have enough joys. But what immediately caught my eye when I came to the channel was how the European model of organizing work within RT and our Russian mentality combined! What I mean: we were all initially organized into groups. The idea is banal and as old as life - group cohesion during work (on air). To a certain extent, the management succeeded in this - over time, we began to understand each other perfectly. They also wanted to include some kind of team spirit, competition... But! We are in Russia... This all turned out to be the fact that each subsequent team omitted the work of the previous one. And so - in a circle.

To be continued…

This entry was originally posted at http://personalviewsite.dreamwidth.org/3641039.html. Please comment there using OpenID.

Titled “Investigation of the Boeing MH-17 crash: what the Netherlands ignored.” Everything there is predictable — the investigation is biased, they didn’t listen to us, all the Western media are lying, blah blah blah. And then this passage: “ However, after the publication of the report, some media outlets began to change their tough position towards Russia. Canadian editionGlobal Research published a column with the headline “The report on the Boeing crash, as expected, did not provide evidence against Russia””.

Let's take a closer look here.

Website Globalresearch.ca- this is a Canadian publication, but not a publication. This is the site of the so-called “ Center for Globalization Research” (Centre for Research on Globalisation), which was founded in 2001 in Montreal by Canadian professor Michel Chaussudovsky ( Michel Chossudovsky). This is a rather interesting character — he really is a professor, an honorary professor (emeritus, that is, in honor of his merits, a position and even an office with a telephone are assigned to him, but he no longer conducts scientific and teaching activities) professor at the University of Ottawa, and he is really a scientist. His specialty is neoliberal economic policies, the destructive consequences of which he observed back in the 70s in Chile under Pinochet. In 1993, Shossudovsky wrote a column in the New York Times, where he predicted that Yeltsin’s policy of “shock therapy” would lead to the extinction of the industrial monotowns of Siberia and the Urals — and he was not mistaken. In order not to repeat myself, I will attach here a link to my own article, where Chossudovsky’s biography is outlined in detail.

But then the professor finally went crazy out of hatred for the United States, his scientific career ended there, so now the site GlobalResearch.ca- this is a collection of the wildest conspiracy theories that can only be found on the Internet today. Anything — from the so-called chemtrails(allegedly the government pollinates citizens from airplanes with chemicals) and climate weapons before planet Nibiru. The Global Research website devotes dozens and hundreds of pages to any of the most fantastic nonsense about the machinations of reptilians. The site, I must say, is quite popular, especially in the USA - a couple of million visits per month. Another thing is that all these theories in the United States, although popular, are deeply marginal; no one in their right mind would seriously discuss them. But in Russia, Global Research’s “investigations” penetrate the air of federal television channels - on REN-TV, for example, they are regularly quoted.

But the above is just nonsense that has little relation to reality, and another aspect of Global Research is actively used by Russian propagandists. Here it is necessary to note two fundamentally different approaches to the perception of information in Russia and in the West. In our country, if they said on TV that 2x2=5, then the viewer will be happy to believe it, well, they can’t lie up there, and if they lied, then that’s how it should be, we’ll believe it. This is an effect described by George Orwell in his famous novel “1984”, it is called “ doublethink”(doublethink). A person cannot sincerely believe that 2x2=5, this is incompatible with survival. To build a bridge that won't fall under your feet, or a rocket that will reach its target, you need to know that 2x2=4. But to justify what target this particular missile should fly to, you need to believe that 2x2=5. Therefore, two mutually exclusive positions simultaneously coexist in the mind. In America and other developed countries, if the government says that 2x2 = 4, then many people are ready to lay down their lives just to prove that it is 5. Simply because the government says 4, and the government, by definition, cannot tell the truth. From this pathological skepticism, in fact, conspiracy theories are born — if the government, the “corrupt media,” or anyone in general who is vested with some kind of power tells us something, it means that some powerful, but necessarily malicious, super-power is trying to control us. an organization that rules all those in power for some of its own dark purposes. So it is imperative to get to the bottom of the truth, even if it obviously sounds crazy compared to what is perceived as a lie. That is, of course, various powerful organizations are trying to manipulate us — I myself, as you can see, am no stranger to such thoughts — but in this revealing frenzy the main thing is not to lose ground and not to start believing in completely fairy tales.

And since Global Research and other similar sites — thousands of them — work primarily for an American audience, it’s natural that their extreme distrust of everything their government says is perceived from the outside as anti-Americanism: everything he says and does American government — lies and conspiracy. Here, according to the “enemy of my enemy” principle, Global Research becomes a favorite ally of Russian propagandists, who are completely satisfied with this anti-Americanism. Therefore, Global Research has firmly established itself on the pages of the state news agency over the past year and a half. RIA News, and on air on federal television channels. The editors of Russian publications take advantage of the fact that their reader or viewer will not understand — if they say “foreign publication” or “analytical center,” that means it is so, after all, foreign really does sound solid — “ Global Research" Although this is not a publication or a think tank, and there are no “journalists” or “experts” there. This is just one of the sites where all sorts of conspiracy theories are published.. So everything is very simple here — if you are presented with a link to Global Research as an argument, then you are either crazy or a liar. So decide which one of them Anton Lyadov and other editors and employees of Vesti, who prepared the report “Investigation of the Boeing MH-17 crash: what the Netherlands ignored.”

This is Anton Lyadov, Vesti. He's lying to you

But that's not even the funniest thing. The editors of Vesti understand perfectly well what they are referring to, but even here they could not resist cheating. This is some kind of scam squared: if you are not too lazy and go to the Global Research website and find that one, this article is on the website pravda.ru.

That is, everything is not true: not “foreign”, not “media”, not “changed its position”, but simply one propaganda company quoting another, trying to hide behind a solid-sounding foreign name. Lies, lies, lies. Ashamed, Anton Lyadov, shame on Vesti.

I want to say thank you for this story

Return