(These are edited excerpts from an interview with
the Chair of the Duma Committee on Information Policy and Communications,
formerly Minister of the Press and Information. It was conducted
by Pavel Anokhin and published in Rossiiskiye vesti on Aug. 18, p.
2. A new media draft is being considered by the Committee.)
I see information policy as a component part of
Russia’s policy as a whole. The strategic objective of Russia’s policy
is to develop and deepen democracy. This means that information policy
must be directed at broadening freedom of speech and at creating and maintaining
an extensive network of independent media outlets. This is one aspect
of the problem.
Another aspect of information policy is the protection
of Russian citizens’ constitutional rights. Protecting them from
deliberate disinformation, from information racketeering and gangsterism.
Obtaining full information on the progress of reforms and on the operations
of all branches of government—this, too, is a constitutional right of citizens.
Many events have taken place in the information field
in the past three years. This, too, is something to think about.
To begin with, I will cite two figures. The total subscription circulation
of the so-called central newspapers for the second half of the year is
about 10 million copies. Most of the subscribers are Moscow readers;
the number of subscribers in outlying regions is negligible. On the
other hand, the total subscription circulation of regional newspapers is
21.3 million copies. Just two years ago, the Moscow publications
were predominant in Russia. But now we have a clear victory for the
regional journalists, so to speak.
This can be explained by saying that, with the destruction
of the totalitarian regime, the importance of its mouthpieces—the central
newspapers—fell off as well. There is some truth in this, although
large-circulation publications that can explain the Moscow authorities’
policies are still extremely necessary for a country in the process of
reform. But the fundamental reason for the Moscow newspapers’ plummeting
circulation is to be found somewhere else—in their position, in their attitude
toward life with the exception of a few reputable publications, the great
bulk of the capital’s newspapers have become carried away with a search
for pseudo-sensations, with petty political squabbles on the Moscow pavement,
or with singing the praises of their sponsors with dubious reputations.
This has alienated the provinces, which are engaged in worthy endeavors
and are thinking about the most acute problems facing Russia today.
Importance of Regional Media
Central television has also begun to lose its viewers:
Its loss of a sense of proportion in showing the capital’s luxuries on
television screens and its propaganda for spiritual emptiness have done
their job. The regional newspapers have been followed to the front
ranks by the regional television companies, whose journalists ate not squeamish
about getting liquid manure on their feet along with dairymaids or about
crawling on all fours along low-ceiling drifts with miners.
Some Western correspondents recently asked me who will
become Russia’s President in the next election. I replied” Whoever
the regional journalists allow to win. You smile? You shouldn’t.
The regions now have more than 100,000 print and broadcast journalists.
Each one of them has at least 1,000 admirers. Multiply those figures,
and the result is 100 million people, virtually the entire electorate.
Lyonya Golubkov [the main character in the MMM investment company’s television
ads—Tram.] has proved the strength of people’s confidence in the mass media
in our country. In the provinces, that confidence is twice as strong.
Another lesson of the past few years is that society
has grown tired of boundless freedom for impudence and slander, of freedom
for instigation and political foppishness. It has now become a pattern:
The more unbridled and aggressive a publication becomes, the faster its
circulation drops. In this way, the people of Russia are sending
a signal, as it were: The state can no longer continue a policy of peaceful
nonresistance to evil. The instigators of hatred are being corrupted
by their utter impunity. Earlier, we were in no hurry to adopt amendments
to the Criminal Code and the all that has to be done is erect more reliable
barriers to excesses from either side.
Coverage of Governmental Bodies
Much attention has been paid to my proposed law
“On the Manner in Which State-Owned News Media Are to Cover the Activities
of Government Bodies,” passed by the State Duma but rejected by the Council
of the Federation and condemned by some as a “dangerous tilt in the direction
of control over the press.”
Journalists working for regional television and radio
companies have not expressed any dissatisfaction with this approach.
The law strictly allocates airtime for news segments dealing with the various
branches of government. This arrangement will keep television-company
executives from being constantly called on the carpet by their bosses,
asking why one government body was given airtime while another was not.
They understand this. Everyone at Ostankino and the All-Russia State
Television and Radio Company understands this perfectly, too, but they
are cleverly trying to present the law as an infringement of their rights.
Everything is much more prosaic: Those television companies’
airtime has been “pulled apart” by various groupings, but the law will
make them put it back together—put it back together to the point where
the state, through its own (I repeat: its own) television companies, can
provide citizens with more extensive information about the activity of
Russia’s authorities. I will tell you this: For all practical purposes,
there is no state-owned television in Moscow now. It exists in name
only, regularly pulling enormous amounts of taxpayers’ money from the budget,
but others call the tune there. Those people want very much to continue
to torment the state, but at the same time they want to be completely independent
and to be sitting pretty when, airtime is apportioned.
As far as the position of the Council of the Federation
is concerned, it too is transparent. First of all, the Council refused
to confirm amendments to the law “On the News Media.” Those amendments,
like the law “On the Manner of Coverage,” prohibit bodies of state power
from acting as founders of periodicals We envisioned that that the entire
press would be independent, and that bodies of state power would work with
it on a contractual basis.
Most of the members of the Council of the Federation
are governors of territories or provinces. Since October 1993 and
the abolition of the local Soviets, the administrations have gained a monopoly
on newspapers. Naturally, they do not want to give up what they have
own. In addition, the Russian President’s staff has begun to set
up its own publications. In short, a process in which executive-branch
structures are acquiring their own newspapers is in full swing.
But one has to look a bit further than one’s own nose.
I assure you that if everything is left as it is, tomorrow the legislative/representative
branch’s structures will under take a similar process of acquiring their
own newspapers. This is not only an enormous waste of budget money;
as experience has shown, it is a war among publications, and through them
a war among the various branches of government. I am certain that
State Duma will return to these problems, as well as to many others from
the sphere of information policy.
I would also like to say that, in reforming Russia,
we have not yet learned to alter our tactics in a flexible way or adjust
the operation of various structures to the new conditions. We put
a chair in the middle of the room in order to screw in a light bulb, but
then we forget to remove the chair and stumble over it. In Russia
in 1990 and 1991, when a sharp confrontation between the leaderships of
the USSR and the Russian SFSR was under way, many structures were created
to deal with immediate problems, so to speak. They were not abolished
after the collapse of the August putsch, and they began to ossify, duplicating
structures that Russia inherited from the USSR and swallowing up billions
and billions of rubles in money from the budget.
Do you remember how Ostankino and Tass assailed Yeltsin
to break the information blockade, we were forced to create our own television
and radio company and our own news agency. That is how the All-Russia
State Television and Radio Company (Russia n Television) and the Novosti
Russian News Agency came into be being.
The USSR is long gone, but the alternative television
a radio company and [news] agency remain. Today there is not enough
money to fully maintain Ostankino, the All-Russia State Television and
Radio Company, Itar-Tass and the Novosti Russian News Agency. Some
are receiving 30% of the budget money they are supposed to get, others
50%. Instead of doing creative work, they are looking for sponsors.
I think it is time to squeeze the now-open hand shut, eliminating the superfluous
element 3.
Will there be discontent? Bosses at various levels will
grumble a little and show some irritation, but for rank-and-ilk, employees
the door to freedom will be turned over to a network of independent media
outlets.
Today government circles are giving some thought to
a different path—converting these large news structures into joint-stock
companies. But his path would be destructive—economically, Russia
is not yet mature enough for what, generally speaking, would be a normal
step.