The Russian leadership will closely monitor stuffing information aimed at swaying the political situation inside the country.
On March 31 said the President’s press Secretary Dmitry Peskov. “We very carefully monitor the situation information. We believe that such information exercises will continue, as we are not talking about a purely journalistic work”, — said Sands. The question is how effectively our society will be able to resist the pressure of external information.
On March 28, Dmitry Peskov said that the information discharge is planned in the form of some revelatory material personally against the President and his entourage. “This is about Putin personally, trying to reach his family, talking about childhood friends, about the business (Kovalchuk, Rotenberg), about offshore companies, business with Putin, and in eyes didn’t see. All it was already repeatedly, in different variations, although it is preparing the next repetition,” — said Dmitry Peskov.
Conclusion about preparing the stuffing was made on the basis of requests from several media outlets. As Peskov said, “we received a very unctuous-kind requests made in interrogation manner in fact.” It is known that one of these requests came from the International consortium of journalistic investigations (ICIJ).
And that’s not done, Dmitry Peskov, to make his warning, as RBK reported that Reuters published an article about the partner Arkady Rotenberg a certain Gregory Bayes, who allegedly sold the property to some women, “associated with President Vladimir Putin.”
Although, to be honest, information doesn go a long time. It is possible to remember, for example, the BBC film about the alleged planned Russian nuclear attack against Europe. How many “revelations” in the Western media about the “Russian military presence in Ukraine”, is hardly possible to count.
But the main problem, of course, is not that foreign media do not like us. The trouble is that a number of Russian publications play along with them. Under the guise of opposition and independent point of view, they actually promote in the field of Russian information policy of other States.
Get at least an article in the edition of RBC under the title “Analysts have estimated the number of civilian victims of Russian air strikes in Syria.” Outwardly, everything looks as dry informing our citizens about what is funded by the George Soros “open society” Monitoringovaja air wars (AMG) has released a report. Unknown for some sources, AMG concluded that the Russian VC killed about a thousand Syrian civilians, and in the first months of operation “were actively shelling the civilian infrastructure”. At first glance, objective information. In fact, the promotion of the stamps of the Western anti-Russian propaganda.
Or take the TV channel “Rain”. Group “Cybermarket” published the conversations of the master channel Timur Olevskiy with employees of security service of Ukraine and senior Ukrainian officials Vasyl Budik (Secretary-General of the Ministry of defense of Ukraine), Arsen Avakov (member of the Collegium of the Ministry of internal Affairs), Vladislav Seleznev, (press Secretary “ATO”). Olevsky directly received instructions how to cover certain events and how best to pass a lie for the truth. Thus, in particular, was created a myth about the allegedly detained in Ukraine Russian servicemen Alexandrov and Erofeev.
And such bogus “investigations” in the Russian media space a lot. To the readers, the journalists appear as pravdoruba, and in fact they are tools in the hands of foreign propaganda.
On the other hand, is it any wonder. Portal Politrussia.com last year published a study in which, with reference to official documents of the U.S. agencies, it was shown that the RBC and the channel “Rain” have been selected by the Board of governors on issues of broadcasting American propaganda in Russia. There are even requests to the Congress for funding these publications.
At the same time, you need to understand that just because you close all hostile to us is really impossible. Then there is the question of an effective opposition. And here on the agenda — create your own, patriotically oriented, media. That did not avoid sensitive issues, but would not give to interpret them in a way favorable for other States.
— Overlapping channels of information disseminated in the interests of other States, depends on the procedure — says the Professor of Moscow state University Sergei Chernyakhovsky.
— It is necessary to block the funding. But the disadvantage of our legislation that it is focused not on things semantic, and formal. Not formally breaking the law, can in fact act opposite to the law course. That is, not directly call for a coup, but in fact want him.
Therefore, it is necessary to create a certain public opinion and to draw attention to the essence of the activity. In relation to public organizations and mass media should proceed from the simple principle: they are interested in the preservation of national sovereignty of Russia, or they believe that our country should obey some external forces. If the publication is against the principle of national sovereignty, it must go from the public space.
We can recall one historical example. When the United States declared independence, then in fact they’ve done exactly what we did in the case of the Crimea, has refused to submit to the will of a global hegemon — the United Kingdom. Groups that advocated submission to the British crown, were completely excluded from political life. Or squeezed out of the country, or deprived of the opportunity to act. If the US did not, the States could become prosperous dominion like Canada or Australia, but would never became a great power.
“SP”: — Maybe we need an alternative, Patriotic and the media?
— Domestic media and should be Patriotic, with all the complexity of understanding the concept of “patriotism”. In this respect it is logical operate in the field of cinema. Why give the government money to films that promote values at variance with public policy.
Public policy determined by the President, who is elected by the people. Politics can be different, including and reactionary. But this does not mean that it must also be allocated money from the budget. It is impossible to imagine that the Bolsheviks tried to come to power at the expense of the Ministry of justice of the Russian Empire. If you act against the state, then count on the opposition.
We, unfortunately, have a situation where to act is against public policy becomes comfortable and prestigious. And this is not normal. The state should not create favourable conditions for their opponents. Especially if it is not about the discussion about the development of the state, but if the so-called “opposition leaders” do not see themselves as citizens of their country and citizens of another state-political system. And such people should be excluded from political life.
Of course, your content needs to be smart enough. Don’t need to put Bandera on the channels that show movies with the participation of fascist elements, which play a positive role.
The problem is confirmed by Professor of the Moscow state University Andrey manoylo:
— Independent journalists today do not exist, if the journalist starts to behave independently, he begins to feel the pressure from the sponsors of the publication. Freedom is abstract.
The press has always been the “fourth estate”, it became a major tool of political influence. And who controls this tool and implementing its policy. This is seen especially in the West. If journalists Express the opinion, does not fit the information policy, then they are immediately fired.
Indeed, some of our publications possess to one degree or another, foreign structure. These structures partially are funding our media. Naturally, they have an impact on information policy. But this does not mean that the media automatically become “registered”, but when the release of information they take into account the interests of sponsors who might be offended and more money.
Some countries have implemented laws that restrict the participation of foreign capital in the publications. But foreign capital may be implemented through other companies and thereby to circumvent the law.
“SP”: — Some publications in Russia don’t just get money from abroad, but also long time supporters of foreign centers.
— If a journalist shares some of his views, then in principle it is impossible to forbid him to have an opinion. To restrict his activity is also hardly reasonable, as there will be increased public scrutiny. Appears the image of the persecuted and downtrodden.
It is reasonable to limit the share of foreign capital in our publications. This can limit those who want to influence our political leadership, media buying in Russia.
It is important to understand that many opposition media, promoting the ideologies of the owners, suffer from lack of arguments. The slogans of Western propaganda used against Russia, look brightly and vividly. But in terms of real controversy and debate, they cannot defend. The opposition just lost.
In my opinion, the best way to counter publications, Western news running order, is to raise the level of their journalists. Good reasoned debate, none of the opposition will not stand. And once it becomes clear where their source of activity and engagement.
“SP”: — Sometimes it seems that even state media occupy a position of detached onlookers.
— This is the place to be. But it is a question of the effectiveness of public media, which, of course, need to improve.
On the other hand, message opposition media often provocative. Their task is not to convince someone, namely to provoke the authorities to any emotionally charged actions. And here such actions can become the object well in advance of planned massive criticism. Therefore, not all information discharge which comes from the opposition media, it is necessary to analyze. It’s just to promote their activities.
In some cases, when the activity of the opposition are not paying attention, this tactic is justified.
Our citizens have different moods. A considerable number of people listening to different editions. The winner is the one who communicates his position more clearly and convincingly, and who responds faster. The speed of response to significant information events and communicate the essence of accessible language — the key to success.
— Now the Russian media is already a lot to ensure the information security of the state, — said the Director of the Institute for strategic studies and forecasts of the peoples ‘ friendship University Georgy Filimonov.
— Demonstrate the success of Russia Today, MIA “Russia today”. But we should not, in my opinion, to underestimate the influence of the blogosphere, the influence of the potential of civil society in the information field. We need to focus on the work of Patriotic bloggers.
Let me remind you that the work in the blogosphere — a separate direction of work of the United States. In 2010, Deputy Secretary of States confirmed that the blogosphere is an independent sphere for the conduct of foreign policy interests of the United States. We must understand that in the state Department, the CIA, the Pentagon have special departments for monitoring foreign blogs and international bloggers.
Our policy in the information sphere should not lag behind. We should more actively use the resource of civil “soft power”, on a network basis to form the cells of the Patriotic society. While this is not fully appreciated by our foreign-policy leadership.
Even more important is the work of aliens. Abroad there are people who relate well to Russia and ready to help her. There are a few projects made by foreigners aimed at creating a positive image of Russia.
Russia does not have enough to work with the leaders of public opinion in the Internet. They need to work. They are in the U.S., Europe, Canada, Australia and other countries. Even parts of the Republican electorate in the States there is a desire to objectively understand the world. In my opinion, working with civil society abroad — a new word in public diplomacy.
We could help bloggers financial. These are not large investments, but the effect may be more significant than the work of official diplomatic channels.
We know that in Prague created a special headquarters, which prepares journalists for information war against Russia. There is a branch in Ukraine. To mitigate their efforts, we must work more actively in the public segment.
At the same time, you need to understand that the figures, which are sometimes referred to as “the opposition” can be considered agents of influence. They do not bear a common agenda, they are not for the betterment of the state. They are generally for the dismantling of the state, became a resource of the external force. Some of our editions is the element of manipulative techniques.
