|
Office of Research
Issue Focus Foreign Media Reaction |
|
Commentary from ... Europe East Asia |
| 26 April 2001 Russia: Is Free Press In Jeopardy? |
The recent takeover of Russia's only non-governmental national television station, NTV, by state-dominated gas monopoly Gazprom and subsequent actions against other parts of mogul Vladimir Gusinsky's Media-Most empire (including the closure of daily Segodnya and replacement of weekly Itogi's staff) were seen by observers in Russia and elsewhere as a clear Kremlin victory in the nearly year-old battle between Mr. Gusinsky and the government. Russian commentators were sharply divided over whether the Kremlin campaign to silence Gusinsky's independent media outlets was a serious threat to a free press in Russia, or merely a business move directed at the debt-ridden Media-Most conglomerate. Still others in Russia portrayed the Media-Most/Kremlin dispute as an overblown "political show" involving infighting between high-level politicos and big business, finding fault with both parties. Outside Russia, most European opinionmakers struck alarmist tones, worrying that Russian President Putin's "blitz against the free press" posed a serious challenge to this most visible sign of Russia's nascent democracy. Highlights follow:
FREE PRESS UNDER SIEGE: Among the Russian press, the harshest criticism of the Kremlin assault on Gusinsky's media holdings emerged, not surprisingly, from former Segodnya journalists, with one arguing--in a piece published by reformist Noviye Izvestiya--that the latest salvo in "the war the government has been waging" against Media-Most sends "an important political signal that we all live in a one-party, quasi-Soviet-type country." Noviye Izvestiya was at the forefront of independent news outlets denouncing the "Kremlin-mounted attack," featuring several broadsides warning of press freedom under siege. "The stake is not merely NTV, but the entire media...along with Russians' right to know the truth," contended one writer.
'NTV AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH ARE FAR FROM ONE AND THE SAME': A wide spectrum of Moscow and St. Petersburg papers discounted the notion that the NTV "hubbub" reflected state encroachment on press freedom, seeing it alternately as political gamesmanship between "presidents and oligarchs" or as a business dispute. Indeed, some pundits scoffed at depicting NTV, and by extension Mr. Gusinsky, as champions of press freedom. Official Parlamentskaya Gazeta, for its part, averred, "You'd think it was not a TV channel's routinely replacing its management but evil forces storming the last bastion of Russian democracy." Such sentiments were not confined to government publications. St. Petersburg's liberal weekly Delo, for example, asserted that NTV had long since compromised its journalistic standards by putting "business and politics above the obligation to provide objective information."
VIEWS OUTSIDE RUSSIA: Led by German papers, European analysts saw the Kremlin's hand behind the NTV row and rebuked Mr. Putin for wanting to impose his vision of a "one state TV station, one state news agency and one state radio" on the Russian people. More modulated in tone, leading British and Swiss dailies agreed that while the NTV saga "calls into question Putin's democratic commitments," it is "unlikely to mark the end" of Russia's "buffeted but half-free press." They nonetheless joined others in exhorting Western leaders to "let Putin know" that media crackdowns of this sort "keep his country outside the club of civilized nations."
EDITOR: Katherine L. Starr
************************************************************************ **********
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 59 reports from 12 countries, April 4-26. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
RUSSIA: "It's For Putin To Decide"
Leonid Radzikhovsky, who had been a commentator for the now defunct reformist Segodnya, said in reformist weekly Obshchaya Gazeta (4/26): "If Putin wants to maintain press freedom he ought to do something. The least he can do is state plainly that he supports the media. But if the Kremlin has in mind doing away with press freedom, it need not do anything--the press ministry and local administrations will do the job. Too bad only Putin (bureaucracy) can decide. With him, only the West's opinion matters. That of the Russian public does not. There are many good people in Russia. Many of them are worried over press freedom and want it protected. But they have no political power. So it is for Putin to decide. All responsibility, including historical responsibility, is vested in him."
"It Happens Everywhere"
Lidia Andrusenko on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta commented on PACE's session discussing press freedom in Russia (4/25): "To many Europeans, the story about Gusinsky's media empire does not look as simple as the one presented by critics of the Russian government. Besides, the media's property sometimes gets re-divided in Europe, too, with some countries seriously worried over media tycoons' trying to influence their governments and lobby their interests. Still, the press freedom situation in Russia caused a stormy discussion in the Europarliament. 74 out of 104 deputies voted for an amendment expressing concern over the latest events in this country which contradict the basic principles of the EU and violate Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights."
"Media-Most Case Political"
Vladimir Mironenko, reporting from Strasbourg, noted on page one of reformist, business-oriented Kommersant (4/25): "Europe's lawmakers followed the Western press and the Spanish court in judging the Media-Most case to be a political one. But theirs is a purely symbolic gesture and carries no penalty against Russia."
"Political Motives; Kiselyov Loss Inevitable"
Valeriy Ostrovskiy wrote in St. Petersburg's liberal weekly Delo (4/23): "If there's room for doubt about the hypothesis that the Kokh/Jordan moves at NTV were a political project devised by Putin's allies, the political motive behind the Kiselyov/Krichecskiy moves at TV6 is unquestionable. Given the actions of both parties to the conflict, one has to admit that Kokh and Jordan were looking for a compromise. Kiselyov and his supporters were aiming for nothing short of complete victory. Their loss was inevitable, as it is at TV6 as well."
"Conflict Shifts To TV6"
Mikhail Loginov opined in St. Petersburg's pro-reform Nevskoe Vremya (4/20): "The NTV conflict has seamlessly moved to TV6. Part of the channel's staff, members of the news team first among them, have decided to leave the station. It is quite likely that those who left will find new employment at NTV, filling in gaps in news program staffing there (left by the departure of the Kiselyov team). Let's hope that viewers will not come up losers as a result of all this personnel turnover."
"To Slow Down Is Wise"
Reformist weekly VEK (# 16, 4/23) editorialized: "Bringing order to the information market is inevitable, but so far it has been limited mostly to the financial area. That does not mean that there is no political aspect to it. If so, the government will have to make its role known somehow. It can't turn things around, nor does it want to. To try to use administrative measures to stop the market mechanism of the information business would be wrong, too. To slow the process and keep it from becoming wild and destructive would be wise and, given the current state of affairs, reasonable, including from the standpoint of the president's image within and without."
"People Silent"
Editor-in-chief Viktor Linnik asserted in neo-communist weekly Slovo (# 15, 4/23): "Gusinsky's media empire is gone, crushed by the Gasmen, ethnic Germans Kokh and Jordan. That is the main thing. Whether or not Gusinsky will be extradited does not matter at all. Let him stay in Spain. What is he without his empire? His last and most ambitious show, the Battle of Press Freedom in Russia, has bombed ignominiously.... Not a sound has been heard from the people, save the screams of 'champions of press freedom' and the incoherent rumblings of individual members of NTV's Public Council. Neither the journalists' community nor anyone else with sense in this country has said a word to defend 'the best and last hope of humanity,' NTV. There are many fools in Russia, but few would rush to protect NTV's owners, who have been riding the gravy train, living on loans all these years."
"Gusinsky Is A Client Of APCO, AKIN GUMP STRAUSS"
Yuri Yeryshev said in reformist, youth-oriented Komsomolskaya Pravda (4/21): "It is an open secret in the United States that Gusinsky is a client of two major PR companies, APCO and AKIN GUMP STRAUSS. Anything related to Gusinsky's business finds support overseas, at the topmost level at that. Vremya MN, with a circulation no smaller than Segodnya's, has been struggling, steadily on the way down for strictly financial reasons. But it has had no words of support from the West. Newspapers come and go. Press freedom has nothing to do with that. Of course, what is going on between America and Russia these days can't be blamed entirely on Gusinsky or Tom Lantos. Lantos may sincerely believe that democracy wouldn't have survived in Russia but for Gusinsky. In that, he, naturally, has been encouraged by professionals from APCO and AKIN GUMP, whose job is to secure their client's interests. You can't blame the client, either--he has been doing his best to protect himself and his money. Where that money came from is common knowledge. Every school student has heard about Gazprom's loans to Media-Most. But then, the Americans like to say that money doesn't smell--gas gets blown away so soon."
"What Price Press Freedom?"
Official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta carried a commentary by Vitaly Dymarsky (4/20): "Now that they know the taste of freedom, journalists and their audience won't give it up. But they have to decide how much they are willing to pay for it. It turns out that a word, printed or said, costs money or becomes a bargaining chip in political games. So there is not much choice. It is either economic expediency or political commitment."
"Exorbitant Price"
Yekaterina Deyeva said in reformist, youth-oriented Moskovskii Komsomolets (4/20): "Overall, it is too high a price that television has had to pay for press freedom a la Kiselyov. (The Kremlin does not look any better in this story.) Three TV channels are a mess, and more and more journalists get hurt and lose their jobs, with the audiences, naturally, suffering the most."
"Gusinsky Wins"
Kirill Belyaninov claimed on the front page of reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/19): "After almost a year of fighting against the formidable Kremlin, Vladimir Gusinsky has won a clear victory. The Spanish High Court has decided not to extradite the embattled media tycoon to Russia, thereby acknowledging that he has been persecuted for political reasons. The founder of the Media-Most holding can just as well be called new Russia's first dissident."
"The Kremlin Must Be Happy"
Lidiya Andrusenko noted in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (4/19): "The Kremlin must be happy. Had the Spaniards decided otherwise, Russian law enforcement agencies would have had to make 'abrupt motions,' causing more talk of encroachments on press freedom."
"One-Party Nation"
Former Segodnya editor Mikhail Berger held in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/18): "Government-controlled Gazprom's gobbling NTV is an important political signal that we all live in a one-party, quasi-Soviet-type country. The war the government has been waging against a major media holding is a sufficiently serious argument for those who, fearless, will criticize the Kremlin in earnest and revise the official view of events in Chechnya, the Kursk tragedy, and other sensitive topics. In fact, the owners of the media and journalists are confronted with a choice between having to control themselves to fit into a 'controlled democracy' or fighting to the bitter end for their right to do their job as professionals even at the risk of being crushed beneath the wheels of the state juggernaut. The Vladimir Putin team is working to build a system to spare itself competition wherever it originates--parliament, politicians or the media. There is no influential political force in this country that would want to support independent sources of information."
"Acid Test"
Liliya Shevtsova commented on page one of reformist weekly Novaya Gazeta (4/17): "The NTV drama has helped highlight this country's most serious problems. First are property issues. The controversies they engender result from the way Russian capitalism has been built, and can only be resolved in court. The NTV story shows that there are no independent courts in Russia. What courts we have function under political orders. This means that we have yet to see an appropriate effective type of capitalism in Russia. Second, the NTV saga indicates the vector of the evolution of power.... Third, how effective can a regime be which is, in effect, an imitation? It can't be effective.... Experience shows that for any ruler to have all resources concentrated in his/her hands eventually works against him/her.... [But] I am optimistic. It is 2001, not 1968."
"Add A Spoonful Of Information To Barrel Of Propaganda"
Dmitriy Travin commented in St. Petersburg's liberal weekly Delo (4/16): "There are three different levels of discussion in the NTV story--legal, political and moral.... For those of us who are acquainted with Russian politics, there is little doubt that the possible transfer of NTV to Gazprom control would put more control of the media in Kremlin hands. But NTV and freedom of speech in Russia are far from one and the same thing. The problem is that NTV today has no moral right to seek special treatment. In the mid-1990s, NTV openly put business and politics above the obligation to provide objective information and analysis (in the second Yeltsin presidential campaign and later). Having once made his choice in favor of business, [NTV general director] Kiselyov has no moral right today to be treated differently than other businessmen. True freedom of speech does not derive from an agreement between the authorities and oligarchs to add a spoonful of information to the barrel of propaganda."
"TV-Viewers Are The Chief Judge"
Valery Yakov stated in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/13): "Neither hard battles for independence nor heavy losses have deprived the NTV team of its chief asset--feeling responsible to the audience. It is the audience, not the government, even less so the government's stooges, whom NTV continues to consider its chief judge."
"Telling Your Own From Other People's"
Duma Deputy Aleksandr Gurov said in official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (4/13): "With all due respect for Gusinsky's talents, Stanislavsky, who did no less for this country's culture, must have loved his theater more--he did not destroy it. NTV's best traditions ought to be kept up. Its leading journalists ought to stay. But you can't ignore economic reality. You must tell what is your own from other people's, seek ways to be independent and responsible in your work without kowtowing to your masters, whoever they are. In this, I am sure, journalists can count on many to help."
"Fear"
Aleksey Kiva queried in official parliamentary Parlamentskaya Gazeta (4/13): "As most of NTV's staff members are indulging in the shameful farce of a struggle for press freedom, don't they realize what Gusinsky, Kiselyov, Malashenko and Co. are really fighting for? Hardly. More likely, they are being driven by fear, the fear of losing their salaries, awesome by Russian standards, now that the television network is losing money and its creditors are demanding their money back. Press freedom has nothing to do with this."
"NTV Long Since Gone"
According to Slava Taroshchina of reformist Vremya MN (4/13): "NTV, for which interested parties are fighting so fiercely, has long since gone never to return again. There are many sins Kiselyov has been accused of. I would reduce them to one--the company has consistently been destroying itself for more than a year, and its director general has done absolutely nothing to stop that. Under enormous pressure from the government, disguised as Gazprom, motives of personal loyalty have replaced all others."
"Info Security Doctrine In Action"
Valery Yakov commented in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/11): "The Kremlin has set out to enforce an information security doctrine, aimed at shielding the government from media scrutiny. Seeing how consistently NTV is being destroyed, it does not fit into that doctrine--at least not in the format it has been struggling to maintain. The worst part of this story is journalists falling prostrate at the feet of the powers that be and, as they do so, trying to smear their recent comrades. Their behavior, whatever their motives, is most ruinous to the profession."
"Give Putin A Hand"
Reformist weekly Literaturnaya Gazeta (# 15, 4/11) front-paged a commentary signed "Literator" (man-of-letters): "It is clear now that Putin's reform--all of the West has finally acknowledged this--is a genuine revolution and can save Russia. Clearly, up against the Family, bureaucrats, prosecutors and oligarchs, Putin needs help. Instead, he has been under heavy fire from populists. It is detestable that NTV, while being so pathologically in love with Chechnya, completely disregards Russia's suffering over Chechnya. Democracy in Russia will not prevail until the people realize that there is a need to support the president, as he is waging hard battles against bureaucrats, and to safeguard press freedom, meaning that NTV should be left alone--let it speak. It is gratifying that Russians are beginning to see that cowardice is dangerous, intolerance is intolerable, and freedom of the press is freedom of everything."
"Nothing Much"
Irina Burdenko remarked on page one of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (4/11): "Everybody has grown a little tired of this conflict, the emotions and fervor of the week before worn out by now--especially as there really is nothing much going on around NTV, the hubbub being over the newly-elected management of the television channel."
"It's Worse Than An Attempt At Censorship"
Semyon Novoprudsky charged in reformist, business-oriented Vedomosti (4/10): "It wouldn't have been so bad if it had been just an attempt at political censorship. It is much worse, with the government involved in a major financial conflict between private companies, more specifically between Gazprom-Media managers, the 'injured' party, and the founder of Media-Most, the 'injurer.' Remarkably, before the word go from the government, nobody seemed to mind operating in the atmosphere of a total fraud, accustomed to it, and moreover, thinking it was the only right way to do things in this country."
"Not All Want To Go Back To Totalitarian Paradise"
Yelena Katsyuba commented in reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/10): "It is not our fault that the absolute majority of Russians came from a country that knew nothing of human rights. But for us to follow the Leontyevs and Svanidzes [TV journalists who don't share the views of their NTV colleagues] after nine years of unrestricted freedom of the press would be like agreeing to go back to Uncle Tom's cabin and stay there the rest of our lives. We are responsible for those who have refused to be tamed. An untamed Russia came to a rally outside NTV's offices in Ostankino to remind this country's 'tamed' that not all want to return to the totalitarian paradise."
"After NTV"
Leonid Radzikhovsky held in reformist Segodnya (4/10): "It's not replacing NTV's boss. No. It's getting the private NTV under government control. Gone will be the only big TV channel that is not afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes. You can call it press freedom or opposition or insurrection or something else. A country where you can scold the president in public and a country where you cannot do that are two different countries. A country with both Western and anti-Western sentiments and a country with only anti-Western sentiment are two different countries. It is stupid to speak of ante-NTV Russia and post-NTV Russia. Still, without NTV, Russia will be somewhat different. Taking a step away from freedom, to itself?"
"Don't Build Fire In Your Own House"
Official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta ran this by Sergei Sukhoverkhov (4/10): "The way NTV's Director General Yevgeny Kiselyov has been acting these days does not seem logical. Instead of trying to save the television company through a compromise, he has turned it into a 'weapon' and is using journalists in political battles they have not been trained for or felt like waging. Kiselyov is acting as a man who, feeling cold, tries to keep warm by building a fire in his own house.... The idea is simple. With NTV and its management presented as victims of a totalitarian regime, getting permanent residence for Kiselyov in the West won't be a problem.... Too bad the NTV staff, talented professionals, have let themselves be drawn into this game and are ruining their careers so that the management can have a bright future."
"Routine Replacement Of Management; That's What It Is"
Sergei Minyayev contended in official parliamentary Parlamentskaya Gazeta (4/10): "You'd think it is not a TV channel's routinely replacing its management but evil forces' storming the last bastion of Russian democracy. Clearly, all this noise is meant to make it difficult to find the guilty party."
"It's Not Only NTV. It's The Entire Media"
Reformist Noviye Izvestiya ran this article by Otto Latsis (4/7): "Let's face it: What's going on is not a fight to save a free market. It is a bid to do away with press freedom. The stake is not merely NTV, but the entire media, along with journalists' right to work and Russians' right to know the truth about things around them. If so, rather than referring to Kokh or Jordan or even Gazprom's owners, we should go straight to this country's top leadership."
"Press Freedom At NTV Long Gone"
Editor-in-chief Vitaly Tretyakov of centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta weighed in on page one (4/7): "There is no economic journalism at NTV anymore--everybody there, including the company's lawyers and managers, either knows nothing about the laws and reality of the market economy or, inexplicably, avoids speaking on this subject. Press freedom at NTV is long gone. It's pointless to protect NTV as a home of press freedom. There is nothing to protect."
"Money Enslaves"
Denis Gorelov held in reformist Izvestiya (4/7): "In a free society, advocates of democratic values usually fall into two groups: Some take a position on the left-of-center and the others on the right-of-center. The former put debts ahead of humanitarian values. They pledge allegiance to courts and law only as long as they serve their ends. It is with joy that they refer to big mouths in the foreign media who never miss a chance to hurt this country. The latter don't like people with KGB pasts picking on the president for his KGB past. They don't like a covey of monkeys with bad manners insulting the man who has paid their salaries for the past 12 months. They don't like the names of Dudayev, Raduyev, Basayev, Barayev, Udugov and Maskhadov shoved down their throats every night by telecasts--must we know those bastards by their names? So when the former group get ensnared in debts, people in the latter group reserve the right not to interfere in their problems with their creditors, not even in the sacred name of press freedom."
"A Show For Fools"
Leading political expert Aleksandr Tsipko summed up in an interview for reformist youth-oriented Komsomolskaya Pravda (4/7): "All those meetings and protests on behalf of
NTV are a show for fools."
"Like Father Like Son"
Sergei Agafonov commented on page one of reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/6): "The sum total of unlawful acts, unseemly or outright vile, by officials, as they fight for control over the NTV, has reached a critical or, more specifically, a 'threshold' point.... This means that undoing the TV tangle, whatever the outcome, will not stop the force of inertia that has been carrying a campaign against the 'unlikeminded' in this country ever since the Kremlin mounted an attack on Media-Most a year ago. Like father like son.... There are no miracles--there couldn't have been any, with the incumbent president, regrettably, just another product of the KGB Academy, not a unique political gem by a long shot. To Putin, press freedom, a state with the rule of law, and democratic values are abstract things, immaterial, sort of optional."
"NTV: Look-Like Victims Cum Provocateurs"
Lidiya Andrusenko, writing about the 'NTV rebels,' said in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (4/6): "On the one hand, they look like victims of violence. On the other hand, they are trying in every way to provoke the government to make it 'cross the line' and do what it would routinely do in the past: use force to drive out the 'old' masters and install new ones. Gusinsky's scenario has been acted upon to the letter. A spectacular political show involving not only the main characters, 'the most independent and incorruptible journalists in this country,' but also renowned politicians, just as honest and incorruptible, and the upper crust of the intellectual elite, as they call themselves, as well as thousands of ordinary people who sincerely believe that the government is bent on destroying their favorite TV channel. Ironically, this tussle of big businessmen may greatly benefit the government, provided that it takes it easy. The hubbub over press freedom in Russia, oddly enough, has made major investors like Turner, Soros and Murdoch take a closer look at the Russian market."
"Public Must At Last Realize That..."
Vitaly Portnikov stated in reformist, business-oriented Vedomosti (4/6): "The public must at last realize that neither government-controlled television nor private television can ensure its right to impartial information. There is neither legislation nor awareness in this country of how public television differs from government-controlled or private television. Before we have all that, we are bound to live in anticipation of clashes between oligarchs and presidents."
"It Has Nothing To Do With Press Freedom"
Editor-in-chief Viktor Linnik of neo-communist weekly Slovo (# 13, 4/6) asserted on page one: "The screams and wails we have heard in recent days have nothing to do with press freedom. Gusinsky's NTV is a typical totalitarian corporation with all the attributes of the employer-employee relationship and an extremely rigid pro-Western and often anti-Russian philosophy."
"Freedom As Commodity"
Official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta front-paged this by Yadviga Yuferova (4/5): "We will all lose if this unique television channel disappears from the information market. This country needs independent private television. Civil society can't survive without it. But who says that the government, not Kokh, Turner and others will own NTV? Young talents at NTV, eager for work and sensing big money, see (Yevgeny) Kiselyov as not only a charismatic figure but also a co-owner of the company, who is fighting for press freedom and his vast private property.... Press freedom has become a commodity, the most tragic and salutary sign of our times. You can't ban it just as you can't ban the sunrise or sunset, not even if you hire the highest-paid lawyers."
"Let Turner Do It"
Valentin Yeliseyenko said on page one of reformist Vremya MN (4/5): "Now, after a 24-hour strike by NTV's journalists and technicians, Putin has a real chance, without dragging the Kremlin into public polemics, to 'close this case' by letting Ted Turner buy into NTV. In America, you can't have foreign tycoons as guarantors of press freedom. Russia is different. We can have them here if it is good for democracy and freedom, as long as our democratic and public institutions are weak and can't do the job on their own. In other words, owing to the clumsy ways of our branches of power, this American can buy Russia's best media on the cheap."
"How To Change Everything Without Changing Anything"
Vitaly Portnikov commented in reformist, business-oriented Vedomosti (4/4): "Vladimir Putin...wants to carry out economic reform without building a civil society that would effectively control the government. For more than a year now, he has been working hard to prove that it is possible to effect radical economic reform while tightening the government's control over society. After watching Vladimir Putin and NTV's new Gazprom management on television, all on the same day, people must be thinking that this is really so."
BRITAIN: "Russia's Battered Press"
The independent weekly Economist observed (4/21): "The saga of NTV reflects badly not just on an authoritarian president...but also on the practices of post-communist Russia. Yet it is unlikely to mark the end of Russia's fragile democracy or of its buffeted but half-free press.... Russians' thirst for information, and the modern means for slaking it, are nowadays too strong to let the country slide all the way back to the tyrannical past.... Still, the takeover of NTV is bad news.... The NTV row highlights two serious inadequacies in modern Russia. One is the lack of protection afforded to the press, whose freedom Putin patently regards with disdain. It is unclear how much he minds about the second one--the uncertain rights of shareholders and the disreputable conduct of Russian companies, especially state-owned ones.... Yet the NTV debacle, sorry as it is, should not be blown out of proportion. The story is not entirely over; journalists from the afflicted channel are migrating to independent outlets; and other bits of Gusinsky's empire...are still afloat.... Moreover, neither NTV's owner, Vladimir Gusinsky, nor its top journalists were always angels of integrity.... The new managers installed by Gazprom may be right when they claim that NTV's finances were in disarray due to mismanagement.... Moreover, talk of a return to the Soviet past is exaggerated.... The internet, the mobile phone, the ability to travel...mean that attempts to squelch the press can only stifle the purveyors of news and debate a bit.... But the West can and should help Russia's media.... America is right to boost its state-aided broadcasts.... Western leaders should keep letting Putin know that the sort of behavior dished out to NTV keeps his country outside the club of civilized nations."
FRANCE: "Democratic Regression"
Jacques Amalric held in left-of-center Liberation (4/10): "Officially, NTV is victim of its debts.... Believe it if you want. Instead of debts, the incriminated channel is rather paying for its independent spirit, and the dissidence of its founder, Vladimir Gusinsky, the oligarch. A court decision allowed Putin to get rid of this opponent...several months ago. He still must muzzle NTV in order to normalize the totality of the Russian audio-visual landscape and to overcome a written press that is guilty of impertinence. This would be the end of relative freedom of the press that started under Boris Yeltsin.... If Putin succeeds, a movement of democratic regression will start in Russia."
GERMANY: "Russian Media Caught In A Vicious Circle"
Jens Hartman pointed out in right-of-center Die Welt of Berlin (4/19): "The Russian media is caught in vicious circle. Income from advertising is extremely low.... No Russian TV channel, and only a few papers, are making a profit. Foreign investors are very cautious when approaching the Russia media jungle. They not only encounter conflicting political and economic interests, but also massive prejudices. According to a poll, two out of three Russians do not like the idea of Western money in Russian media.... The Kremlin has a clear vision of the future media landscape. In the long run, one state TV station, one state news agency, and one state radio are supposed to set the tone. Stations like NTV could serve the public with easy entertainment, like game shows or soap operas."
"Putin, Press Czar"
Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau judged (4/18): "More troublemakers have been silenced: With the coup-like takeover of NTV, the cancellation of the daily Segodnya, and the firing of the entire Itogi editorial team, Putin has come considerably closer to his goal of doing away with freedom of the press in Russia. If things continue at this pace, Russians who want to know what is going on in their country will have to get their radios from their attics and tune in the short-wave signals from the old enemy stations, BBC and Deutsche Welle."
"Like Stalinist Times--But In Color"
Centrist Tagesspiegel of Berlin observed (4/18): "On Tuesday, Gazprom, following orders from the Kremlin, hunted down the critical daily Segodnya and the sharp-tongued news magazine Itogi. Soon, the tender attempts at criticizing the regime...are likely to make way for general announcements reminiscent of the Stalin era. In his annual address, Putin demanded that Russia needed to embrace new values. He must have been talking about obedience."
"A Very Young Civil Society"
Christoph von Marschall opined in centrist Tagesspiegel of Berlin (4/9): "Protests against the takeover of NTV are already crumbling. The station needs outside support in order to survive. Russia's civil society is still very young. Russia's future is at stake: democracy or a relapse into dictatorship. That is why a clear statement [from the German chancellor] is necessary, not only in his interview with 'Radio Moscow,' which belongs to the NTV family.... Whoever sits down with Putin should not remain silent on the issue of freedom of speech."
"Window On Europe"
Markus Wehner front-paged this editorial in center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine (4/7): "NTV is the only station which reports on the darker aspects of Russian reality, gives voice to the country's different political factions, and performs an educational mission even in Russia's most remote provinces. It is the only station viewing the West positively; it is a window on Europe. If Putin closes this window, the era of the free press will come to an end in Russia after just one decade."
"Controlled"
Center-left weekly Die Zeit of Hamburg opined (4/5): "Vladimir Putin's State of the Nation address did not contain any details on the freedom of the press. No, he did not want to act in a hypocritical way. On April 3, the Russian state was inexorably honest. On this day, its servants buried something that began 13 years ago under Gorbachev and that entered the vocabulary of global languages: Glasnost. Russia's only independent TV station NTV will now be forced under the control of the Gazprom state company."
"Freedom Of The Press In Russia"
Business Financial Times Deutschland of Hamburg held (4/5): "Before complaining about a looming loss of the freedom of the press in Russia, we should take a closer look. The conflict that has been smoldering for weeks between NTV and the Kremlin is mainly based on a strong personal antipathy between the previous owner of the TV station, Vladimir Gusinsky, and the government. President Putin has been trying to push back the oligarchs from the political arena and deny them access to state coffers. Gusinsky, however, adamantly rejected these moves and used NTV to promote his own views. Even though the station was the only independent voice in Russia's media landscape, such a misuse of the medium has nothing to do with freedom of opinion. That is why the West should be wary of making Gusinsky a martyr. If, however, it turns out that the government is trying to influence the station's editorial line, the West must consider this a serious blow to freedom of the press and exert pressure on Putin. The motto right now can only be to wait and see what will happen next, instead of hastily complaining about the end of the last independent Russian media outlet."
ITALY: "Free Press, Crackdown In Moscow"
Viktor Gaiduk wrote from Moscow in pro-democratic left party L'Unita' (4/18): "All journalists from the independent daily Segodnya and the weekly Itogi were informed this morning of their firing. And the nasty surprise is that there are two new teams supposedly ready to replace them.... Indeed, the Kremlin is not at all sorry. It got what it wanted. With the expulsion of these journalists, Gusinsky's media empire no longer exists. And little time remains for radio 'Echo of Moscow.'... The blitz that began in Moscow last Friday and that led to the closure of the independent NTV, ends with the total closure of a daily and a weekly. Glasnost no longer exists. Political observers in Moscow consider the Kremlin's blitz against the free press to be only the tip of the iceberg. A wider campaign to make Russia 'a territory free of independent media' is indeed underway.... Gazprom's spokesman maintains that the responsibility [for the closure] lies with Gusinsky and his unpaid debts."
"War Is Underway On The Media"
Vladimir Sapozhnikov filed from Moscow in leading, business-oriented Il Sole-24 Ore (4/18): "Media-Most, Vladimir Gusinsky's media empire, is falling apart under the ruthless blows of Gazprom.... The Gusinsky group, which embarked on a collision course with the Kremlin with its refusal to support [the government's] propaganda for the military campaign in Chechnya, is falling apart like a paper castle. After Gazprom's takeover, the consortium led by CNN founder Ted Turner gave up the idea of buying a part of NTV. The State Department spokesman in Washington expressed deep concern over what is seen as a 'powerful attack against the free media in Russia.' It seems that Russian authorities are seeking Gusinsky's loyal journalists."
BELGIUM: "A Serious Political Test For Putin"
Pol Mathil commented in left-of-center Le Soir (4/11): "NTV is now the flagship of the freedom of the press and the freedom of expression in general, which is the most precious acquisition of Russian society since the end of communism. It is the very foundation of this civic society, without which Russia will be unable to build Putin's promised democracy. The NTV affair is the most serious political test for Putin. It also marks a very important date: It is now that the president has to show his real intentions, to keep his word, and to prove how serious his promises were. Letting Russian justice decide NTV's fate? This idea is not as good as it appears--there is no independent justice in Russia. This is another promise which Putin has not realized yet."
LITHUANIA: "Freedom Of Expression And The State's Millions"
Analyst Ricardas Gavelis commented in second-largest, national Respublika (4/23): "The media upheaval inspired by the Kremlin has taken place. Its consequences are not yet clear. Former NTV journalists categorically say that this puts an end to freedom of expression in Russia. The Kremlin and Gazprom affirm that it is a solely a property argument. The truth lies somewhere in between.... Politics and the state's millions are knotted together.... Russia's leaders...do not like criticism. Private media bosses intent on criticizing the state were condemned in advance. In this type of war, ordinary people always lose: the television audience and newspaper readers. The worst case would be if freedom of expression itself were also to lose."
POLAND: "Muzzled Press"
Andrzej Jonas wrote in military weekly Polska Zbrojna (4/20): "There is no doubt that there must be an end to the loosening of the structure of the Russian state; the government must be able to govern. There is no doubt as well, however, that Russia can develop only as a democratic state. Without freedom of speech--that is, without media independent of the state--one cannot even dream about democracy. A barking press dog can be very unpleasant, but once it is muzzled we can forget about democracy."
"All Putin's Power"
Leopold Unger judged in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (4/17): "[It appears that] Putin follows the rule of 'winner take all.'... It is logical then that after securing control over the government, the Duma, the regions, the Army (not to mention special services), and having practically liquidated the opposition, he decided he cannot, and does not have to, tolerate criticism of the authorities and their policies.... He saw that time was up for the media--or rather for the last independent television network."
"Putin's Test"
Adam Michnik wrote in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (4/9): "NTV is today the symbol and the flagship of freedom of speech in Russia and of the entire Russian democracy.... The conflict over NTV is an important test for Vladimir Putin, one that tests his attitude toward freedom and democracy. To destroy the NTV leadership and make them mute will be a signal that the 'past is returning.' The people's reaction, though...proves that Russia does not wish for that return. This means that the years since the USSR's collapse have not gone to waste."
ROMANIA: "Debts Could Have Been Otherwise Recovered"
Cristina Terenche opined in opposition Romania Libera (4/10): "Gazprom said that its interest (in NTV) is purely financial; more precisely, the recovery of NTV's $120 million debt to the state.... But these debts could have been recovered in a different manner, said analysts from the Austrian Raiffeisen Bank.... The (purchase) of the stocks does not justify the replacement of the TV station's management board."
SPAIN: "Putin's Promises"
Left-of-center El Pais opined (4/6): "Putin has proven himself to be better at promising reforms than at undertaking them.... The only independent television network left in Russia, NTV, was put under control of the gas monopoly Gazprom, one of the Kremlin's economic arms.... If Putin believes in the press freedom he preaches, he now has a golden opportunity to prove so by supporting the dialogue that will allow NTV to remain outside of the Kremlin's control. The Russian people would be grateful."
SWITZERLAND: "Russia--Neither Democracy Nor Dictatorship"
Reinhard Meier, foreign editor of the leading, center-right Neue Zuercher Zeitung, held (4/22): "The takeover of Russia's independent television channel NTV by the state-controlled energy company Gazprom calls into question Putin's democratic commitments. It also stands in blatant contradiction to the rhetoric being spoken recently in St. Petersburg, during a visit by German Chancellor Schröeder. Among the declarations of a joint communiqué issued from the meeting was the statement: 'Freedom of opinion and freedom of the press are indispensible for the development of civil society.' It must be admitted that NTV was deeply in debt. Another aspect of a complicated story is the key role played by foreign-based actors in making the hostile takeover possible. Nor is Vladimir Gusinsky, the former owner of NTV, exactly the white
knight of press freedom he likes to claim he is. Nevertheless, NTV clearly annoyed Putin with its critical reporting, for example on the continued atrocities in Chechnya or on the tragic loss of the nuclear submarine Kursk. The casual way in which the takeover ensued had the English-language Moscow Times digging up an old quotation from Lenin. For what possible reason, the Bolshevik leader asked, should a government tolerate criticism from a private press? It is well for the West to understand this Russian ambivalence between democratic practices and relapses into old authoritarian ways. Yet, when actions in Russia do betray a penchant for Leninist thinking, precisely those politicians most interested in having Putin as a partner should be the last to hold their tongues."
THAILAND: "Russia's Media Will Survive Hiccup"
The lead editorial of the top-circulation, moderately conservative, English-language Bangkok Post commented (4/16): "No matter how much the station's founders and ousted board members complain that the Gazprom takeover is a 'creeping coup' against free speech, free media and Russia's nascent democracy, it was their poor management practices which have buried the station in a mountain of bad debt.... Changes in media ownership are nothing new in the rest of the world. Faced with new bosses who may hold different attitudes, many journalists justifiably become agitated and concerned about their future. But in most cases, the presses and TV cameras keep rolling and the public get the news they seek just as before. Clearly Russia has, and will continue to face, much political and social turbulence in the face of changing times, but it will never go back to the bad old days of Soviet totalitarianism. Most Russians would never allow it. The NTV dispute is probably just a hiccup, from which media institutions in Russia will emerge stronger and more competitive."
##
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
