 | To Our Readers |
Has something you've read here startled you? Are you angry, excited, puzzled or pleased? Do you have ideas to improve our coverage? |
On closer inspection, however, things are not so simple. "The only way to force the Russian media to be honest and responsible is through the credible threat of ruinous fines or damages," a high-ranking official, now retired, once told me. He had been the victim of an attack by the "information racket" operated by one particular banker-oligarch. He cleared his name in the courts, but, to this day, when his name comes up, most people associate it with the smear campaign against him in the media.
While ordering the payment of $11 million in damages for an honest editorial mistake is an outrage, it would be a different matter if the court establishes that material damage has been inflicted as a result of an unscrupulous campaign carried out in the interests of the victim's business rivals.
The problem is that the moment a major media outlet starts experiencing difficulties, people immediately suspect Kremlin involvement; just as when critical or controversial articles appear in the press, particularly ones impinging on business interests, the immediate assumption is that they have been bought.
Alfa Bank representatives, commenting on their lawsuit against Kommersant, imply that they are victims of such a provocation.
If, at some point, Kremlin involvement is uncovered, then suspicions of a commercial "hit" as a rule remain both unrefuted and unconfirmed, even though clarifying the issue is of fundamental importance.
Normally, plaintiffs are in no hurry to dig too deep. The thing is, there are very few victims of bought articles in the business and political establishment who have not themselves planted such stories and would not be vulnerable to similar scrutiny.
Moreover, it is perhaps unreasonable to expect independent journalistic investigations, as there are few newspapers that have not taken money for placing articles.
Any attempt to dig too deep would inevitably open a Pandora's box. In other words, a system of Mutually Assured Destruction is in place. Without a thorough investigation, however, in instances such as the Kommersant case, suspicions over the corruption of the press and of the courts, and of Alfa Bank doing the Kremlin's bidding in trying to bring down a Berezovsky-owned newspaper, will remain equally credible.
One possible solution -- apart from gradual cultural change -- would be for people and institutions that are certain they have suffered unjustly at the hands of the press to create an independent center for investigating bought articles in the press. Its conclusions could serve as a weighty argument for or against the imposition of hefty fines on a newspaper. Whether innocent victims would ever want to have anything to do with the media again is another matter.
Alexei Pankin is the editor of Sreda, a magazine for media professionals. [www.sreda-mag.ru]