Anton Lyadov correspondent biography personal life. “The words were distorted and simply invented”: the plot of “Vesti Nedeli” with Kiselev was sorted out in France. What was the Russian plot from Paris about

Arina Borodina about the "French" plot of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company

RFI: After the French TV channel Canal+ released a story about how the journalists of the Rossiya 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 edition has two versions of Anton Lyadov's story. Is this some kind of traditional practice?

Arina Borodina: Firstly, yesterday I looked at the answer of the Rossiya 1 channel - what was in Vesti. It's a rather odd approach. No, I don't know that they show a rewired plot. Moreover, they even showed the source files 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 Nedelya, which was investigated by French journalists.

In general, in Russian speaking, this is called "getting out", "beating the tails" - there is also such a slang expression. Dmitry Kiselev also speaks about this. I think that next Sunday there will be a continuation in Vesti Nedeli, they will return to this topic, because yesterday the story was for a whole 10 minutes.

There was a lot of juggling, including Russian correspondent Anton Lyadov's interpretation that French journalists "insisted" that the French politician (Bruno Le Mer - ed.), which 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 thus unconvincing.

But did Anton Lyadov somehow stick in your memory for some other plots? What is known about this correspondent in Russia?

I wrote about it on my Facebook page. I would never remember 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 applies to the events of the spring of 2014, when events in Ukraine flared up with might and main and the war in Donbass began. Anton Lyadov worked then in Nikolaev. I remember this plot, because there was no such story even in my practice, a well-watched spectator who, on duty, saw many different propaganda blunders.

It was about this: a certain citizen Andrey Petkov became the hero of stories both on NTV and on the Russia 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 supporters of the Maidan. He was in the hospital, and, I repeat, his name was Andrey 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 channel "Russia 1" 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 citizen of Germany, and the same 500,000 were mentioned, but in a completely different context: allegedly Andrey Petkov brought them to support the militia, buy them uniforms, food, and so on. That is, a radically opposite degree, in contrast to the plot 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 the air in a completely opposite ideological way.

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

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

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

And then three days later, again on the NTV channel, this very Andrei Petkov is called violently mad, crazy, they say that he is just a schizophrenic who had a spring exacerbation. He himself admits this in the frame, his brother says that he is crazy and has long been registered in a psychiatric dispensary, shows some certificates.

It got to some kind of absolute phantasmagoria, and at the end of the story on NTV they said that he misled journalists, German I learned from old Soviet gramophone records and in the plot of NTV there are songs from old Soviet captured films about the war.

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

Actually, that's why I remembered Anton Lyadov, because he sculpted the image of this incredible Andrey 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 a while, 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, for 10 minutes, and it was done by Anton Lyadov. I even shuddered: well, wow, I thought, apparently, he is in good standing with the leadership of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, if they sent him from a daily “coil” with a difficult job by the standards of a correspondent to France, to a European country.

I see his stories from France for the third or fourth time. Therefore, when I heard his last name, naturally, I remembered the story of two years ago about this same Andrey Petkov.

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

I don’t know the subtleties for what reasons and whom the VGTRK company sends where, but I note that he is not a permanent correspondent in France, there is Anastasia Popova, who makes stories from France and Europe as a whole. I think that these were one-time business trips, and for this - in fairness, let's say - after all, the correspondent does not always need to know French. I believe that he knows English, because without a foreign language in general it would be strange to send a correspondent abroad. But this factor at least needs to be taken into account. I think if companies asked this question, they would say that it was a one-time business trip. But now, for the sake of persuasiveness, 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 were caught and now they need to get out. They will get out, and on Sunday, I think, there will be a continuation.

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

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

The Russian state TV channel invented the characters' monologues, took the words and facts out of context and assembled a special reality out of it. This is the same news as the fact that the main star of the channel is called Dmitry Kiselev. But still, the exposure, made in French Canal +, "blew up 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 do not care about it, and on the other, any sneeze from the West sounds in our the edges of the thunder echo. Secondly, the western sneeze was translated into Russian (this was done by the Russian edition of RFI radio) and instantly sold out in quotes, likes and reposts.

What was the Russian plot 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 “nobody has a plan B”, and that that the ratings of European leaders - Hollande, Merkel and Cameron - are falling sharply ... "Against such a background, Euroskeptics are rapidly gaining points ... About how it looks - using the example of France - Anton Lyadov."

The first shots: a correspondent on a Parisian street, where there is another demonstration against the new labor law. It’s really hot at the demonstrations, but the correspondent intensifies the tension: “Stones flew-back-crouch-crouch-crouch.” Perhaps the viewer bends down, but this does not save him: “The police went with batons to the protesters, they just beat them!” - the correspondent shouts, and "in confirmation" the operator snatches out a four-second picture, in which one can hardly make out something. Probably, it is the policemen (who, by the way, often act harshly at rallies) 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 with his entire cabinet”: it began!”

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

But since the correspondent “began” in his head, he gives a second frame on which someone with a red bandage on his sleeve twists someone. Following this, the correspondent for some reason repeats the same illegible four-second frame with the police, only comments on deja vu in a different way. Instead of the lapidary one: "The police just beat them up" - the old picture is accompanied by torn details: "Knee on the ground, grab by the scruff of the neck and back on the asphalt!" “The one below is a policeman in civilian clothes!” the reporter warns.

Then he gives the floor to one of the rally participants, who (in Russian translation) will say: “The President has 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, and thousands of Russian students can tell about this - ed.) Then there is a comment by a Russian-speaking French woman, a graduate of a French university, Elena Timoshkina, who says that “one person from four there is no work in France right now” (and this is true)… Then, a comment by a French economist on the crisis of power in France; next, the correspondent recalls that in order to adopt a labor law, the government needs article 49.3 of the Constitution, 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 refuse such a thing yet,” says correspondent Lyadov and moves on to the main topic: “In the fall of 2015, he (Hollande) said: France is ready to accept tens of thousands of refugees stuck in Germany.” In fact, it was a modest figure of 24 thousand people by the standards of the “migration crisis”. But it will be difficult for France to fill this “quota” either: migrants do not really want to come here.

Then they show a woman in a Muslim headscarf and several dark-skinned children. It looks like they are probably refugees. “Migrants” are also two unpleasant young people of unknown origin and biography, one of whom is trying to hug a girl in the Republic Square, a regular participant in the “Night on the Legs” protest. Having freed herself 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, do not deal with these migrants. We are really scared” (Looks like a reference to the “New Year story” with in Cologne - ed.).

What was said about the Russian plot in the French program

The answer to the Russian story about France appeared in the popular satirical program Le Petit Journal (Canal+). The host of the program, Jan Bartes, is feignedly surprised why the material about Eurosceptics began with the showing of “pogromists” at a purely French demonstration against the labor law and why it then “slid down to migrants”. And he asks: “Do you understand what the Russian channel is leading to? Not? We, too. Maybe it's a Parmentier casserole recipe where everything is layered? In the same absurd vein, everything continues with the story of the lyceum, "captured by migrants."

The plot of Le Petit Journal from 05/20/2016 with subtitles of the Russian radio service RFI

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

“They dragged the bales straight to the Jean Carré Lyceum. Children aged 15-16 studied there. They pulled ropes in the yard, immediately hung everything they came in ... "" Only special forces soldiers managed to drive them out: they returned in the morning ... "And further:" When the number of refugees in the school exceeded a thousand, the French authorities closed the school and left the building we're coming."

"Pogromists", the labor law, migrants, a high school in the 19th district, which put students out the door? What are they leading to? - the French presenter is again “surprised”, recalling that the story about “Eurosceptics” was actually announced.

Further, the topic of migration develops: the elderly Madame Nicole Bert says that she worked for 26 years in the mayor's office of the Parisian suburb of Noisy-le-Sec. “I was sent into retirement and at the same time they hired three migrants,” says Madame Behr.

The ultra-right old man Le Pen immediately comes across, assuring that “Europe is doomed to disappear, to replace the population, if it does not take drastic measures. The way out is to abandon the European Union…”. Then - the transition to the commentary of Bruno Le Maire, one of the prominent members of the right-wing Republican Party (the head of the party is Sarkozy). Le Mer tells the correspondent: "We must work more with Russia, the future of all of Europe depends on it." End-to-end - students clapping for some reason in some audience and again - Le Pen. The old man speaks incoherently. Or so it is 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 rely 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 breaking everything in the streets - there is no more democracy - migrants inspire fear - migrants take the jobs of the French 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 result is "not the opposite of what I wanted to say, but something quite different." The 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 approximately French, so he tries, where he can, to use some kind of English - ed.) Savannah also recorded this interview - from the camera that she wears on her chest. Judging by her entry, the girl does not want to “turn off” on the topic of “Euroscepticism”.

Rafael, a girl from the Republic Square, hearing the translation of her words about “fear of migrants”, winces: “It is disgusting and insulting that my words were conveyed in this way. It's not even a false translation, they just made something up completely."

Well, the mayor of the 19th district recalls that the statement that “the French authorities closed the school and left the building to visitors” cannot be true. If only because the lyceum was closed in 2011, i.е. a few years before the refugees occupied the vacant building.

Continuation in France

“Le Petit Journal exposes the manipulations of the state-owned Russian channel,” wrote the next day the Figaro newspaper, which, by the way, has a long and regular tab for Rossiyskaya Gazeta. “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, “adjusts” French reality for itself,” the Figaro newspaper recalled. But, of course, no one began to apologize, but explanations followed.

Continuation in Russia

The answer of Vesti employee Anton Lyadov to French journalists came out under the heading “The French channel tried to teach Russia the Russian language.”

Vesti's response to French criticism. 05/23/2016

Judging by the title, the story with the innocuous caption “Elena Timoshkina, a 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 host explained it this way: "the third testimony - and this is noted (by signature) at the bottom - is from a graduate of a French university." The French did not put forward any "accusations" in this regard.

But for some reason, correspondent Lyadov refutes non-existent accusations for a long time: “Another terrible lie, in which we are allegedly accused. Elena Timoshkina appeared in our story as a graduate of a French university. French journalists were indignant: how can a person who has already graduated from a university be called a graduate?

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

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

But the trouble is that the "claims" are connected precisely with the content. With the fact that the 7-minute story, in which they were going to talk about "Eurosceptics", does not contain (except for Le Pen's statements) any evidence of "Euroscepticism". Although, if you want, evidence can be found. You can start with a March poll, according to which 53% of the French would like a referendum on leaving the EU. But instead, the viewer is frightened by explosions of smoke bombs at a labor rally and by refugees, who, judging by the content of the plot, are the main "misfortune" of Europe. But the French have never gone to a big rally "against migrants." They went out only "for".

“The issue of migrants has nothing to do with security issues for me, and I advocate that we accept people fleeing a country where there is a war,” says Rafael, a “terrified” girl from Republic Square.

The fact remains that from the recent program with the participation of Francois Hollande, as the correspondent Lyadov rightly noted, they really removed two uncomfortable characters. It is not clear what this has to do with the program Le Petit Journal, Canal + and a detailed response to criticism.

By the way, the article that Vesti quoted verbatim about censorship committed during the preparation of the program with Hollande was published on the website of the French state radio station RFI.

P .S. Hint: you can give a worthy answer to the Canal + TV channel for “collision” with the free journalism of Vesti. It is enough to make a revealing story about the film, which was recently on the TV channel. The film is called "Ukraine. Masks of the Revolution”, its author, French journalist Paul Moreira, made a film in the best traditions of Vesti Nedeli with Dmitry Kiselev.

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

Today's text presents the confessions of an employee of the Rossiya TV channel, an employee of the RT TV channel, and a 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 say to employees of state channels, and how money crowds out political beliefs.

Employee of the TV channel "Russia"

It is clear that there can be neither social nor political protests on the air. When Navalny spoke in April, the channels were silent for 2 weeks, then they only began to comment on something. Everything that concerns politics is agreed, sometimes they play it safe and give nothing just in case. Sometimes, on the contrary, they are instructed to cover it - for example, when there were May decrees, they brought us a folder from the Kremlin on which “IMBARGO” was written in large letters through “I”. When Trump became a candidate, they instructed to give only positive. They did so until he began to strike at Syria. If the Kremlin was dissatisfied with something, everything was resolved instantly. There was a case with a colleague: the president was at a Christmas tree in the Kremlin, either they gave the wrong angle, or some other technical moment - the employee was instantly removed from daytime broadcasts. But in general, only the 20-hour issue of Vesti Nedelya is watched in the Kremlin, 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. On the air, if it sounds, it is very streamlined, but if something serious, then it does not sound at all.

I'm talking not only about technical marriage, 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 the protesters. The channel had to make excuses… Or he, Anton, during the Olympics in Brazil, once again distinguished himself in one of his reports: “Brazilian is spoken here”… Just 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 be shielded. They made a separate issue, a 150-minute report, that the French do not know French, grandmothers said what Anton Lyadov said, and so on. Some 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 slandered or framed so that the person speaking allows marriage on the 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 the Donbass, at 11 am there was a farewell. Dobrodeev, Zlatopolsky, and a few more people came. Some Vesti employees were absent. Dobrodeev calls Revenko, he says: “We have a flyer” ...

Propaganda, of course, powerfully washes heads, especially in the regions. I myself was shocked at how one-sided people perceive. When you communicate with the inhabitants of the regions, you understand how easy it is to manage Russia after all. I am surprised - how can one argue like that, and they answered - "you yourself said." I try to explain to them: “You have to analyze. Watch RBC, watch Rain. “What is rain?” - "Turn on and see." “But they all lie!”

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

Spouses Olga Skabeeva and Evgeny Popov

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

Dmitry Skorobutov, editor-in-chief 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 editor-in-chief of the nightly, morning and afternoon editions of Vesti. I confess I had convictions. I sincerely believed that everything is being done correctly with us, that the same Navalny is an agent of the State Department, and so on. We are there as if in a looking glass. I liked my work and I did it qualitatively. There were no claims. In this sense, I have nothing to be ashamed of.

But, of course, I saw a discrepancy between what we show and reality. I am a simple person, not an elite, I see what is happening. Gradually began to perceive the work more critically. Sometimes he tried to broadcast what 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 a response. But this topic was non-political. In politics, no one will allow self-activity.

Many colleagues understand everything. For example, the editor-in-chief of the Vesti Nedeli program, as far as I know, adheres to oppositional views, but all this does not prevent him from doing Vesti Nedeli. I think it's a matter of money. A high salary helps to 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 my hands, of which the salary under the contract was 8,600. My editors, the girls for whom I fought, about 40 thousand in my hands. There was a scandal when I went to Zhenya Revenko (former director of Vesti), I said: “Evgeny Vasilyevich, this is the situation: one of my employees is a single mother, the second is a young family girl, salaries are 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 editions Sasha Voronchenko threw a tantrum: “How could you?! Who are you?! Yes, bypass me!” I answer her: “Your people have not seen an extra penny for 10 years, but here it’s 5 thousand ...” And people work for that kind of money. The duty officer at the escalator in the metro receives the same amount, and we did federal issues of Vesti.

At the same time, it was the morning episodes - I, in particular, I'm talking about my programs - that gave the highest rating on the channel. Sometimes the figure reached 37-42%. It means that people are watching, the product is in demand. But at the same time, we didn’t even hear “thank you”, not to mention any awards. They are given to “who needs it” ... Once I went to the deputy of Dobrodeev, I said: “Olga Genrikhovna, look, please. It's humiliating! My employees get 35,000!” She leafed through her statements: “Here, Dmitry, there are salaries of 29,500, in Vesti-Moskva, so everything is fine with you.” And there are salaries for their "bugs-granddaughters-daughters." For 200-300 thousand and more ... In the halls of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, an announcement hung for a long time: “An anti-corruption commission is working at the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company. We ask you to report the facts of corruption to such and such an address.” Funny…

In general, he worked for his conscience, one might say. I liked making news. Live by them. I tried to protect my colleagues, to help them. But…

I was beaten by my employee - editing director Mikhail Lapshin, at the workplace, with the guards completely inactive

The incident that occurred on August 17 last year made me rethink everything. I was beaten by my colleague, editing director Mikhail Lapshin, at the workplace, with the guards completely inactive. The reason for the attack is my remark on the occasion of his next marriage on the air. When I sat down to write a report (the leadership of Vesti still did not react to them, although the marriage on the air literally multiplied), he attacked me. I ended up in Sklif. Concussion, head injury, closed craniocerebral injury. Misha liked to drink, the attack on me is not the first such case, a few years ago another employee was beaten. The leadership of Vesti decided to “cover up” this case, and to force me to be silent.

The director of Vesti Andrey Kondrashov, who was afraid of publicity, repeatedly repeated that he would fire me if I defended myself legally, I would go to court. Sasha Voronchenko demanded not to write a statement to the police. They began to press, ignoring the state of my health. Immediately after the attack, Lapshin himself was hidden from the police - he was quickly sent on vacation. I, in turn, began to receive threats from management.

Neither the Security Service of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, nor the leaders of the holding responded to my official requests. The CCTV footage that recorded everything was hidden from me, they 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 sort things out with Lapshin only 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 by beatings does not seem to bother him. For more than a month I tried to resolve everything peacefully, within the holding, offered Kondrashov to at least impose an administrative penalty on Lapshin, but nothing happened.

About a month later, on condition of anonymity, colleagues reported that “your dismissal is being prepared, your issue is on the agenda, but they cannot think of anything,” etc. Here I already began to fight for myself: I tried to take my employment documents from the channel - they gave me practically nothing. I had to call the State Labor Inspectorate. After she checked 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, could not fulfill the command of the management - “think up something”, therefore 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 am making a big mistake”, that “I will not prove anything”, etc. Now the criminal lawsuit against Lapshin is in cassation, in the Moscow City Court, my lawyer and I cannot do anything: the world and district (Savelovsky) courts illegally refuse to accept the claim for proceedings. The labor lawsuit against the Rossiya channel is being heard in the Simonovskiy 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 the cost of the profession. For me, events automatically turn into editorial or correspondent text and video. Attacks, disasters, social problems and everything else - this is just a picture and text. Later, 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 are working live, this is also efficiency, we need to do all this faster, you don’t have time to reflect.

But in general, everyone understands everything, but someone is kept by money, and someone who worked for a pittance, like me, is the desire to remain in the profession. Still, in spite of everything, we enjoy this work, news production is very interesting.

We, the editors-in-chief, did not formulate an ideological agenda, we moved in a general direction. Many have intuition at such a level that without instructions from above, we broadcast everything correctly. By the way, I remember how the president and the prime minister made contradictory statements about the Khimki forest. The prime minister made one comment, the president another. Voronchenko, who at that moment was in the Far East, generally merged: "Get out yourself." In general, he did everything right - there were no contradictions between the words of the president and the prime minister on the 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 did not investigate the reasons. Sometimes it happens that the inputs change several times during the day, the situation develops, it happens that even within half an hour you have to, as they say, change shoes in a jump. Over time, a professional intuition is formed, you understand yourself what to broadcast, what not to broadcast. Advise if in doubt.

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

Unfortunately, the professional level of the leadership of Vesti has been declining every year. For a long time we had an excellent leader, Yulia Anatolyevna Rakcheeva. Iron discipline and highest quality 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 in the broadcast. The attitude of viewers to Vesti is also changing. Last year I gave an interview in my hometown, Krasnoyarsk, there was a flurry of negative comments. I ask 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 it 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? And here it is distorted. And here they screwed up." Many of my friends do not watch television. The youth has been lost for a long time. Channel One still has an audience, because there is a better product, very good money is invested. Konstantin Ernst does great television. And 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 they write 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, this 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 do not care what to read, they are deprived of any reflection. Once, in a conversation with Dobrodeev’s assistant, Sasha Efimovich, I asked the question: “Sasha, you can see that the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company is degrading, that smart and thinking people are being removed. Why?" He replied, "We need function people, not creative units."

Will I go to the action 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 this is true. I know how it all works and what I did myself ...

RT channel employee

As a place of work RT - good company. In terms of salary, medical insurance and conditions in general. And ideologically, this is an ordinary propaganda channel. That is, only the “correct” topics are covered and from the “correct” angle. For example, there are a lot of stories about the violation of human rights in the United States, but not a word about the violation of human rights 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, in which honest and peace-loving people live, successfully resists them under the guidance of an experienced mentor.< >

At the same time, there are many 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 well paid. There are also many who sincerely hate their work, but endure it because there is nowhere to go. I am sure that the same garbage is on Channel One. A lot of RT employees hate their jobs. Phrases like "How do I all ******" can be heard anywhere: in the smoking room, corridor, dining room, studio, newsroom, and so on.

Almost all content is aimed at denigrating the West, emphasizing and sticking out those moments where the local ruling elite discredits itself.

The RT audience is basically the same target group for which the channel was created - people in the USA and Western Europe, really dissatisfied with their authorities and in general with the policy of the so-called "West", but knowing nothing about Russia. The subsequent language versions - Arabic and Spanish - were originally intended to a greater extent 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 know nothing and do not particularly wishing to know something about Russia. This is where the success of RT lies. Almost all content is aimed at denigrating the West, emphasizing and sticking out those moments where the local ruling elite discredits itself. RT does not talk about Russia, but about the "decaying West", so the question of caesura is practically not raised.

Poklonskaya on RT is trying on a quilted jacket

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

Therefore, RT raises some topics, ignores some, events are covered at some angle, and not equidistant. Of course, this does not mean that RT is the realm of freedom, equality and fraternity, where you can broadcast whatever comes into your head. Someone who does not personally agree with the position of RT, distinguishes between personal and professional - 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 position of the channel. Nothing, just tossed them to another topic.

The political component of the information that we transmit is of little interest to me, because, in my opinion, money does not smell on TV. And I don’t get into 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 inside RT and our Russian mentality combined! What I mean is, we were all originally organized into teams. The idea - banal and as old as life - is the cohesion of the group during work (air). In a certain way, the leadership succeeded in this - over time, we began to understand each other perfectly. They also wanted to include a certain team spirit, competition ... But! We are in Russia… It all turned into the fact that each next 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 .

The deputy general director of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company and the host of the Vesti Nedeli program, Dmitry Kiselev, called the Canal + analysis of the Rossiya 1 story about “Eurosceptics” in France a “controversy between channels”. The journalists of the Le Petit Journal program of the French Canal + found that the heroes of the News of the Week story were attributed words that they did not say. In one of the cases, this is confirmed by the shooting, which was conducted by the girl herself - the heroine of the report "News of the Week". All the heroes of the VGTRK story in an interview with Canal + stated that their words were misinterpreted or misrepresented. Mr. Kiselev told Kommersant that the Europeans "do not see the log in their own eyes."

Dmitry Kiselev, in response to the analysis of the Vesti Nedeli story by journalists from the Le Petit Journal program, said that "this is a controversy between TV channels." “We will analyze it in Vesti Nedeli on Sunday,” he told Kommersant. “We really sometimes miss the burrs.” Rossiya 1 special correspondent Anton Lyadov, who prepared the story, hung up on Kommersant's request to comment on the information that he misrepresented the words of the people he interviewed.

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

Le Petit Journal presenter Jan Barthez compared the Vesti Nedeli storyline to a Parmentier casserole recipe, "where everything is layered." French journalists found that the heroes of the Vesti Nedeli plot were credited with words that they did not say. So, Anton Lyadov is interviewing a protester against the labor law, to whom the following words are attributed in the story of Vesti Nedeli: “The President has 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.” 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 it in English,” she admitted. A video recorder hung on Savannah Anselm’s chest, which recorded the entire dialogue, on the recording you can hear Anton Lyadov 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 answers in English: “I don't know what he's doing for Europe. But I know what he doesn't do for France." She says nothing more. The journalists of the Russian edition of RFI Radio France Internationale translated the interview and provided the program with Russian subtitles, which the authors obviously did not count on.

Other heroes of the Vesti Nedeli plot (journalists from Le Petit Journal found everyone) also refused the words that the Russian channel attributed to them. The press secretary of the deputy of the National Assembly Bruno Le Mer (his interview is included in the story of Anton Lyadov) Dimitri Luka, although he agreed with the quotes, he added to Kommersant that Vesti Nedeli had freely arranged them.

Dmitry Kiselev told Kommersant that he “publicly recognizes and disassembles” each of these “burrs”. For example, on May 16, Mr. Kiselev is on air "News of the Week" admitted that the certificate of a Ukrainian fighter of the SS division "Galicia", which formed the basis of the plot of his program dated April 16, turned out to be a fake. However, commenting on Kommersant's analysis of the Vesti Nedeli plot by French journalists, Dmitry Kiselev said that Europeans "do not see the log in their own eyes." “Take at least personal sanctions against me for “calling for the deployment of troops to Ukraine.” I certainly never said that." In 2014, Mr. Kiselev was included in the EU sanctions lists 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 reacted to the claims of his French colleagues - the press service of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company 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,” host Ernest Mackevicius said in the introduction to the story. According to him, in order to avoid "misunderstandings", interviews with the characters in the new story sound "in their original form." Anton Lyadov suggested "sorting things out point by point". According to him, the French politician Bruno Le Mer is just "oh, horror - he allowed himself to speak positively about Russia." Moreover, according to him, the French channel has no “claims about the interview itself”, and they “did not argue at all” with the statistics announced in the plot regarding unemployment and refugees. “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 speak the words attributed to her by Vesti Nedeli.

The interlocutor of Kommersant in the French Foreign Ministry, when asked if they were going, for example, to revoke accreditation from correspondents of Rossiya 1, replied that "there were no such cases in his memory."

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