Articles About Internews
Why Manana?The New Times | May 30, 2007 Why was Manana Aslamazyan singled out? We have all been asking ourselves, Why were the consequences of bringing into the country an undeclared extra 70,000 rubles so grave? And, most importantly, why did these consequences befall not only Manana Aslamazyan personally, but the entire “Internews” organization as well? It sure seems a bit excessive. What are the driving forces of yet another pogrom on the already sterilized landscape of Russian television? Why was one necessary in the first place? Irina Yasina, Just in case some people do not know, Manana Aslamazyan has single-handedly done more to strengthen the fledgling Russian regional television than all the journalist unions, ministries and agencies institutionally and all the Lesins and Seslavinkys personally combined. For over ten years, she had taught, conducted training sessions, brought TV celebrities with her to Russia’s periphery, arranged various contests and master class presentations. Sure, she was not doing it all by herself. She had her team to help her. She led that team ably, as she still does, with her unquestionable reputation. Then, she screwed up – just as many other intellectuals had before her. They were not very good with money and did not read the law carefully. Well, it now seems she would have been better off if she had conducted her master classes in customs law instead of journalism. But to use this as an excuse to harass “Internews” (after the renaming in conjunction with a repeat of the official registration procedure, the organization has become known as “Educated Media”)? Note the qualifying adjective in the new title: not “submissive,” not “loyal,” not “pro-government,” not even “independent.” The descriptor of choice is “educated.” The authorities have been excessive in all manifestations of their power. They have even awarded one another a few decorations to celebrate. The political landscape is being cleaned up down to the bare pavement. These actions do, however, make sense. Not some common sense that we could relate to. They follow some other logic. The KGB logic, perhaps? This is all about making an example of one to scare others. No need to kill off an entire pack of wolves if [for the same effect] you can just take out the alpha male, right? Why was the treatment of the NTV Channel so rough? Well, because the example made of NTV’s star anchors (who had to look for any job they could get with any TV channel and were continuously changing their core values to please the employer) has become, among other things, an opportunity for others to do some thinking of their own. You see, if even the most freedom-loving journalists can be made to “give up their core principles,” then doing that with others will not even require any discussions. Others will simply get the message well in advance and do what is expected of them. They will not even have to be pressured. Same story with [Mikhail] Khodorkovsky. Whether the absolutely terrified Russian business community was just a side effect of the Khodorkovsky case or scaring them was an unstated objective all along does not really matter now. What does matter is the result. And the result is that everyone understood that nobody was immune anymore. Now, time to ponder a little. It is difficult to keep track of what is going on regional television from the Kremlin. There are way too many regional TV outlets in the country (once again, hats off to Manana for that). People watch their programming simply because they can no longer take all the propaganda rushing in from the channels controlled by the federal government. In order to [intellectually] “streamline” the broadcasting on all the [recalcitrant regional] channels without incurring too high an expense for staff censors, one fires a single shot across the bow to scare them all into submission at once. This has to be done in such a way as to make it evident to all that the warning is no longer being given only to Moscow-based media having the misfortune to have to operate in risky proximity to the Kremlin walls. Now, they all are targets. For this to have the desired effect, the target of choice has to have iconic status in regional journalism. If you simply trump up some charges against a reporter or even an editor-in-chief from Siberia, people elsewhere – for example, in Stavropol’ye or in Lipetsk – may or may not perceive that as a threat to them. More likely than not, the signal will be ignored, perceived as a byproduct of local intrigues and turf wars. In this logical context, choosing Manana Aslamazyan for the role of a “whipping girl” is dead-on accurate. The taming of the “old NTV” was a perfect choice. It was all a slam dunk from there. The case against Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Russia’s wealthiest and most successful businessman was a perfect choice as well. Now, all business leaders, from the very prominent to the most obscure, see in their sleep the chilling visuals of the Krasnokamensk correctional facility. The head of “Internews” (“Educated Media”) is a well-known person. Besides, she is an enthusiast, does not care much about money, and enjoys recognition of the journalistic community throughout the free world. The warning shot in the form of “criminal prosecution” [of such a person] will definitely be heard on the country’s periphery – in offices of newspapers and in studios of television outlets where remnants of freedom are still alive. In fact, everyone will hear and understand this kind of warning shot. Manana need not castigate herself for not being well versed in the intricacies of bringing foreign currency into her home country. By her transgression, she only expedited the pre-ordained. 1Mikhail Lesin is a high-ranking mass media official in the Russian
government. From 1999 to 2004, he served as Russia’s Minister
for Press, Television and Mass Media |
|
