Transcript

David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of ’s media

Svetlana Pasti

Senior Researcher, Centre for Journalism, Media and Communication, University of Tampere

Rt. Hon Hilary Benn MP

Shadow Foreign Secretary (2015-16)

Chair: Bridget Kendall MBE

Diplomatic Correspondent, BBC (1998-2016)

11 December 2017

The views expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the speaker(s) and participants, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Chatham House, its staff, associates or Council. Chatham House is independent and owes no allegiance to any government or to any political body. It does not take institutional positions on policy issues. This document is issued on the understanding that if any extract is used, the author(s)/speaker(s) and Chatham House should be credited, preferably with the date of the publication or details of the event. Where this document refers to or reports statements made by speakers at an event, every effort has been made to provide a fair representation of their views and opinions. The published text of speeches and presentations may differ from delivery. © The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2017.

10 St James’s Square, London SW1Y 4LE T +44 (0)20 7957 5700 F +44 (0)20 7957 5710 www.chathamhouse.org Patron: Her Majesty The Queen Chairman: Stuart Popham QC Director: Dr Robin Niblett Charity Registration Number: 208223

2 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Bridget Kendall

Good evening everyone. It’s so nice to see you all here this evening for the first David Benn Memorial Lecture on the state of Russia’s media. A few housekeeping words before we begin. This is going to be on the record and you can comment via Twitter if you want to. The hashtag is #CHevents. Should be up here somewhere, yes. And please put your phones on silent. So, you can tweet away, but we don’t want the ringtone of Star Wars coming out in the middle of remarks.

Now, all of us here will know, those of you who remember and knew David Benn, that there is no better topic with which to honour his memory, such an acute and perceptive analyst of the Soviet and then the post-Soviet world. He was a veteran contributor to the BBC Russian Service, a long, long time member of the BBC World Service, where he made, first, the practice of socialism in the Eastern Block and then the importance of persuasion and propaganda in wielding power, the target of his forensic analysis. His book of 1989, “Persuasion and Soviet Politics” and his study for here at Chatham House, “From Glasnost to Freedom of Speech” were considered invaluable contributions to this topic.

And how we all wish that he was still with us here today, sitting there somewhere in the front row, about to raise his hand ask, in his penetrating, well-informed way, some killer question. But we do have many members of David’s family here today, which we’re very, very delighted. And we’re also fortunate that he – maybe he’s not here, but we do have another formidable expert on this subject, Svetlana Pasti, from the Research Centre for Journalism, Media and Communications at Tampere University in Finland, an expert on the transformation of journalism in post-Soviet Russia and with much on the ground experience of her own. She was at the Journalism Department of Leningrad University. She worked as a Journalist and Editor at Murmansk Radio for 14 years. So, who better to address us, on the state of Russian media, what role it plays in politics and society today, how Russian Journalists are recruited and trained, and what place independent journalism still has in Putin’s Russia.

But before I invite Svetlana to speak, we’re delighted to welcome Hilary Benn to the stage. He needs no introduction, of course, the Labour MP for Leeds Central, Former Shadow Secretary of State for the Foreign Office, but most importantly perhaps, for this evening, David Benn’s nephew [applause].

Rt. Hon Hilary Benn

Well, Bridget, thank you very much indeed. First of all, on behalf of Frances and Piers, David’s children, and all of the family, can I thank you for coming here this evening for this lecture in honour of my uncle, David Benn, known by all of us on our side of the family simply as Uncle Dave, who died on the 2nd of February this year. Can I also thank Chatham House for hosting us tonight? He had a very long association with this place, you, Bridget, for chairing this evening’s proceedings and to you, Svetlana Pasti, for kindly agreeing to deliver this lecture, which we are all greatly looking forward to, spasibo.

My father used to say that Dave, his beloved younger brother, was the intellectual in the family and he was known, from quite an early age, as the Professor or simply the Prof. His lifelong interest in the and subsequently, in the and then again in Russia, began during the three years he spent in bed with tuberculosis, from the age of six to the age of nine, following which he had to learn to walk again. With typical determination, Dave decided, despite his illness, he was going to learn Russian from one of his Doctors, who was, himself, a Russian emigre. So, he bought himself Hugo’s Teach Yourself Russian and learned it by himself, in the main, encouraged by Dr Bromley, as he was called, on his visits.

3 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

My father later recorded, in his book, “Dare to be a Daniel,” “David became so proficient that when he visited the Soviet Union later he was treated as a native Russian and even congratulated on his accent.” And I think even allowing for a bit of, you know, brotherly pumping up, I’m sure that that is entirely true. And my earliest memories of his interest in the Soviet Union came literally, from encountering the piles of Pravda that filled shelf after shelf after shelf, whenever you came to talk to Dave.

Now, he had many characteristics that we loved him for: his warmth, his modesty and his gentleness, his other-worldliness, as Frances recounted as his funeral and I quote, “I could well believe one story told at the BBC that David, deep in thought, accidentally collided with a pillar, to which he immediately and most courteously apologised.” His courage, demonstrated both in overcoming that terrible illness, three years in bed before the age of ten, and when he wrote to Winston Churchill in 1940, as an 11-year-old, to say that he would rather be bombed to fragments than leave England, because he didn’t want to be evacuated to Canada. His piercing intellect and his rare ability to identity the heart of an argument and his instinct always to see the best in other people.

Now, having graduated from Oxford, he trained as a Barrister. He later went on to work briefly for the Socialist International and from there joined the BBC World Service at , where he became an expert voice in BBC Russian broadcasts, before eventually becoming Head of the Yugoslav Service. He believed in understanding better what was happening in the Soviet Union and this informed his approach to his broadcasting and to his academic work, including the two publications: Persuasion and Soviet Politics and the Chatham House pamphlet, “From Glasnost to Freedom of Speech,” that Bridget has just referred to.

And I would sum him up by saying this, that his aim was always, as it was put, to shed more light than heat. That was the spirit in which he approached the world and political discussion and academic analysis, and it was in keeping with his nature. And that spirit of enquiry endured to the very end of his life, because I – he would’ve said if we’re going to respond to Russia and what is happening, we have first, to understand it. And I simply want to say that he would be absolutely tickled pink to think that we were gathering here today in honour of his memory, and enthralled by the subject of this evening’s lecture. And I would simply say that from wherever he is, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if he were to seek, Bridget, to try and catch your eye in order to ask a question.

Thank you very much indeed [applause].

Bridget Kendall

Thank you very much, Hilary, very much indeed. And now, without any further ado, may I invite you, Svetlana Pasti, to speak to us. Thank you [applause].

Svetlana Pasti

Thank you, Bridget, and ladies and gentlemen, and especially the members of the Benn family, many thanks, James, for your invitation to come to this event to honour the memory of David Benn. It is hard to get used to the idea that David will never call again. Last time we talked on the phone on Saturday January 14 and the end of our conversation, he said, differently, and in a tired voice, “Until the next call.” And until Thursday February 2nd David was no longer among us.

In my memory, David is a very bright, jovial and inquisitive person, an attentive companion, a hospitable host, a unique reader and collector of the newspaper, Pravda. His personal study, his library, and the

4 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

archives of the newspaper, Pravda, left unforgettable impression. It was a laboratory of a genuine Scientist and Scholar. He said, “I write very slowly.” Thanks to this style, we have your perfect works, David. What amazed me about him was his keen mind and his attention to detail. Hence, I think about his ability to pose the most burning questions and so wonderfully, concisely and then to reflect on them from different perspectives and against their historical background. That is at the heart of his thinking and writing. I perceive a dialogue of different points of view. As a result to the question he took under study, he applied different arguments and interpretations.

We met in at the BASEES Conference in 2006. I remember how I was struck by his perfect and elegant use of Russian language. Later, I learnt that he had learnt his Russian from the first wave of Embrace. He was always insatiably inquisitive about the situation in Russia. His books and articles document the turning points in the history of Russian media. We hear the voices of witnesses of those ears and the voice of the Author, David Benn himself, who raises pertinent questions and invites the reader to think about them. For me, his books are a source of the joy of slow reading. Every word is worth its weight in the gold and leads to a process of reflection and gives a source of inspiration for new ideas.

He was preoccupied with the question of how to help in the relations between the West and Russia. He wrote about this and wanted to promote real dialogue and trust between the two sides to improve mutual understanding. He was a goodwill ambassador for good relations. I think this mission should continue. In March 1995, David visited Moscow and made several interviews with Journalists, Editors and the Head of the Press Service of the President of Russia. The result of this trip was this Article, “The Russian Media in Post-Soviet Conditions,” published in Europe/Asian studies.

In the article he analysed the state of media freedom at the time in Russia and asked his respondents about its future. Therefore, under his microscope, David puts the legal field, the economic field, and the professional field of journalism to see what could threaten media freedom in each of them. Scrutinising the legal field, David noted that the Government itself violated the law of the media and cited specific cases, for example, the pressure of the Government on all media to cover a discussion on the draft of the new constitution. Analysing the transition to the market, David notes the potential threats of the media becoming dependent on the Government. The economic difficults of that time: inflation, the burden of taxes, had forces many media to close down, or ask to subsidise from the State in order to survive.

Another factor that determines the quality of media, pluralism, according to David Benn, is political culture. He said the words of Pavel Gusev, the Editor in Chief of the Newspaper, Moskovskij Komsomolets, who in interview with David said that, I quote, “Forward party officials simply cannot, under the new conditions, give up the habit of using the most stupid methods of fighting the press.”

In 1995 Gusev and Sagalayev were optimistic about the prospects for media freedom in Russia. Eduard Sagalayev told David, I quote, “The main guarantee of television independence was public opinion.” David agreed with his respondents that the most serious threats facing Russia were not dictatorship or civil war, but the growth of crime and indeed, of organised crime. By that time, the Journalist, and Vladislav Listyev had already been killed. At the end of the article, David concludes that, “Russian media pluralism, among other things, depends on one) the law, second) economic factors, the three) the calibre of Journalist, and four) disassembly and the last – as the last of the [inaudible – 16:17] public opinion.

20 years after the publication of these articles by David, we see how right he was when he argued that, I quote here, “The survival of media freedom in Russia ultimately depends on the faith of the Russian

5 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

democracy. Gradually, year-after-year, the State control increased in all spheres: politics, economy, the social sphere, culture, including the media.

Today Russia, in the well-known Western ranking on the level of democracy, political rights, civil liberties and media freedom, is located in the group of non-free countries. In addition to the reports of these agencies, many critical publications have appeared on the state of Russian democracy and media freedom in both the West and in Russia. Among them, for example, a report by the NGO Agora 2016 on, “Tightening the State Control over the Media, the Internet and Civil Society,” the foreign agent law had already come into force in 2012, resulting in the closure of many scientific and cultural NGOs and the compulsion to refuse funding under threat of closure.

Since 26th November 2017, this law applies to the media. In the early 1990s, when David visited Moscow, Russia was in a honeymoon relationship with the West, from the beginning of Gorbachev’s Perestroika. Russia progressed along the road of democracy and the West was her main partner. Dr Daphne Skillen worked in Russia and describes this unprecedented period in her booked titled “Freedom of Speech in Russia,” which was published this year, and our distinguished Chairperson, Bridget Kendall, worked as a BBC Diplomatic Correspondent in Russia.

In 1995, David too was free to conduct interviews and the Editors in Chief and even the Head of the Press Service of the President of Russia agreed to meet with the British Researcher and talked openly about the problems that appeared during this transition period: failure by officials to comply with the law on media, Government pressure on media, growing organised crime, corruption in journalism.

Today, such a favourable situation for the Researcher and especially for the Western Researcher, is difficult to imagine. Two years ago, colleagues from the Hull School of Economics, at my request, tried to obtain permission from Pavel Gusev for an interview with his Reporters. We were doing a content analysis of newspapers, including the Moskovskij Komsomolets and wanted to do an online survey of Journalists, the Authors of articles that we analysed. We were granted no such permission in Moskovskij Komsomolets.

At the end of October, I was in Moscow and met with some Secretaries of the Union of Journalists and the Chairman of the Glasnost Defence Foundation, Alexei Simonov. The Glasnost Defence Foundation was established in 1991 and monitored media practice in Russia, analysed a clause relating to the media, conducted research, issued Carter Glasnost, a publicity map, and helped Journalists in legal proceedings.

In 2015, the fund was listed among the foreign agent of NGOs. As Alexei Simonov told me in an interview, I quote here, “My case is in the European Court. I became much less active. I do not want all the time to do what I have to do as a foreign agent, that is constantly remind people of this.” The fund stopped issuing a publicity mark. According to Simonov, this is pointless, because, I quote here, “There is practically no live press. All the press is dead. As soon as the living press arises, a conflict arises. Accordingly, there is much to talk about.”

For today, unfortunately, this is very legal. According to Simonov, I quote, “Today, Russian media are formed by two opposite victors: on the one hand, a sense of their own dignity and on the other hand, money. Where dignity wins and this becomes less and less, there appear media. Wherever money is to begin, there are means of propaganda and PR.” Simonov believes that only 10/15% of the media have refused to resort to servility. For example, in Moscow, I quote here, “This is only Novaya Gazeta, Radio Ekho Moskvy, Vedomosti, Kommersant.”

6 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

To a greater extent, online media have indeed chosen the road of dignity. Among them, Mikhail Afanasyev, a Journalist from Khakassia, who in 2004, became a Laureate of the Sakharov Prize for Journalism as an Act, zhurnalistiku [mother tongue]. Having received an award of $5,000, Afanasyev created the online magazine, Novy Fokus, which highlights the most acute and typical problems of Khakassia. Journalistic investigations and analytical materials become events in the life of the Republic.

Journalists see their role in society as a [mother tongue], warning it owns, the citizens, of any danger. Boris Lazovsky, Dean of the Faculty of Journalism at the Ural Federal University in Yekaterinburg, whom I met in Moscow in, those days, in the – at the conference in Moscow State University, to the question, “What forms media in Russia today?” Answered, “Economy.” He mentioned three economic models of media in the regions.

The first model is Governmental – Government funding. Newspaper elbow each other, only to get money from the local budget. Dean Lazovsky’s students brought him the manual secretly from the Editorial Office, where they were practising. The manual lists the requirements for the Editorial Board to get money from the budget, including a paragraph requiring that their Governor, the Mayor, should only be shown in a positive light. The second model is the so-called information support, that Aksana Panova introduced in the Urals. She has been suspended for two years, but the ban on the profession was lifted, and therefore, she continues to work. Some local media work according to her scheme.

Lazovsky speaks of an information contract that an enterprise or organisation concludes with the media to provide positive coverage of its activities, voluntarily or involuntarily. In the case of Panova, these contracts were made with some organisations, using extortion and blackmail. The third model is when the municipal media earn money themselves, rendering services to all comers, like a service agency. For example, they take photos at weddings and provide other services that are in demand in the market, but not journalism.

Another side that freedom is dying seem have called the changes in the Union happening in 2016, when the new Secretaries were appointed in the Union of Journalists by the holders of power. I quote here, “Where they came from and who voted for them, except people from the Presidential Administration, no- one knows.” They appeared and already command the parade. Three Secretaries of the Union withdrew from the Secretariat in protest: Pasha Gutiontov, [inaudible – 27:28], Nadia Azhgikhina. Our meeting was on October 19th of the – on the eve of the next 12th Congress of Journalists.

Now, it is already known that Vladimir Soloviev became the new Chairman of the Union. He was a State Television Producer and Documentary Filmmaker, who sorted the rules of the best TV programme, was a Military Correspondent for seven wars, including two in . Since August 2017, he has served as an Advisor to the Director of the State channel Russia-1.

Scrutinising Russian journalism in the context of the BRICS countries, reveals similar changing – changes in the profession. The popularity of journalism as a profession is juniorisation, feminisation, the increased precariousness in the working conditions, downsizing of the staff, high professional mobility, the need for a second job, and the arrival of new information technology specialists in the Editorial Office. At the same time, the results of the study show that the Russian model of journalism is moving closer to the Chinese model, namely the acceptance by the majority of the State’s role in the media sphere. This is evident in the desire to work in the State media, in the PR Departments of the Government and business, because the State media provide access to information, good wages, stable employment, opportunities for personal and professional career, advancement, the perception of journalism as social lift, when other

7 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

social lift cease to work. This leads to a perception of journalism like any other work. Journalists have come to owe their first loyalty to the employer, not the audience.

It can be expected that, with the advent of the new leadership of the Union of Journalists, and the immediate care of the State Duma in the person of Leonid Levin, Head of the Committee of Information Policy and the new Secretary of the Union of Journalists, the development of the Union and the journalistic organisations will go, according to the Soviet model. The Union of Journalist will get State funds and work hand in glove with the Government. It is no coincidence that the previously Independent Journalist Organisation of Moscow, Saint Petersburg and Tatarstan have announced they have joined the Russian Union of Journalists.

The Union of Journalists supported financially by the State, again, would be attractive for young Journalists to advance their careers and obtain other possible preferments, that the prestige will be achieved, including the old tried and tested methods. Since last year, when the leadership of the Union was renewed, they changed the agenda of the Union. For example, as Soloviev said, “In the house of the Union of Journalists, Zhurnalistiku, they haven’t done it round tables on questionable topics, financed by foreign organisations and non-governmental funds.” What will be the fate of their Press Council [mother tongue], which have been independent in their job? It is difficult to say. Nor can one predict if Independent Publishers in the regions will survive when the decisions are made on the financing of the municipal press by the State.

David Benn visited Moscow and wrote his article in the dawn of the media freedom in Russia. Today we are witnessing its sunset. In this period in the history of Russian journalism, I think we need to look at the dynamics of the relationship between official journalism, State sponsored media and independent journalism and to remember that after sunset comes a new dawn. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen [applause].

Bridget Kendall

Thank you very much indeed, Svetlana. A slightly sobering portrait, but very interesting one to hear from you, given all your research and your own personal experience. Just a couple of questions from me to get us going. If the State control of quite a lot of the media landscape has grown a lot since David Benn was there in the mid-90s, not just newspapers, but main television and quite a lot of other areas, does that – you were saying that people are chasing good wages and good career opportunities and they’re now thinking more about their first loyalty to an employer and not the audience. So that begs the question, will the audience want to consume this?

I mean, we all remember in Soviet times that people got a bit fed up with a very narrow diet from the Soviet State media, which was one reason why organisations like the BBC, that David worked for, had something of an audience. So, will – are people actually migrating elsewhere, for example, online, where you can set up small, maybe very local, media organisations to meet local needs and talk about real news and maybe provide – meet a demand, which has not been met by this State funded journalism?

Svetlana Pasti

Hmmm, this is a good questions, and the first point is, my first point is the Journalists are a part of the society. This is the ordinary people who work as a Journalist. So, according to Simonov, we have, today, 10/15% of the media, which chose the road of dignity, or independent media and the – many of them appeared in the online, especially at – for example, journalistic start-ups. And this, from young

8 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

generations or from old generations, who do not watch – work in the State media or in commercial media and the – but now, according to the last Levada Center, again, this is a – the – we have only again, the same numbers, 10/15% of the public want to read independent media. This is a big question, because I talk about the independent media as the quality journalism media. We have commercial media, for example, in Arkhangelsk, Severodvinsk. This is below [inaudible – 36:34], who had more than ten different newspapers: Pionerskaya Pravda and many other. They wrote about garden, about these are some not important issues, and people like this press. So, this is question about journalism and about society, about the public.

Public now, in this period, they do not strive for independent media and for quality journalism. Quality journalism is supported by the some rich people, business people, who want to save this journalism in Russia, for example, Alexei Kudrin, who support the Gazeta deal in Saint Petersburg. And so, this is, I think, again, the question about the young generation in Russia and young gene – who is young generation?

This is a young generation is grow up in the Putin time and then, his parents tried to supply them with everything and this is especially in metro city. They want only to consume fun and maybe they note this the young and they have more important things than not politics. So, this is the question. But I agree that they’re people who – the Russian people have chose to select different opinions and different media. For example, now they get information used from social media, from Facebook, from VKontakte. So, this is no problem for young generation and young generation, usually they say that “We do not watch TV, because TV, this for older people.” So – but on the other hand, the young generation, many of them, like Putin. They perceived him as a strong leader.

So, this is the uncertainty and I think with people who wants to get different news, different opinions, in Russia they have possibility to get this, but the question is about, as this is – Simonov said in October that, “We have the dead press now,” because now the – if we approach the Russian Journalist, are they not – this is not from the cosmos, but people who live in this society, they think they have this credit in bank, they have family and so, in the locality or in the regions where there’s narrow market, practically no advertising. So, in Moscow and Saint Petersburg, or Saint Petersburg is periphery in comparison with the Moscow. They have this – I – in my opinion, this is a moral or ethical choice now to Journalists.

I go to the State media and I should recognise that I should be as a propagandist and social organiser, of course. This is old roles is keeping from the Soviet time. But if I do not like my politics, I go to commercial media. But commercial media today, for example, Pavel Gusev, and the State media, are very closely, because it’s – this is a – their business was to give with their Government in the good relations, because the Government start to put many obstacle to the business. So, now we know that the Russian is emerging of the officials or Government and business and Government have a lot of own business. This is combined. They have the second job in their business. So, I think this is a warring of the Western audience, because they’re – of course this – I understand, but they have now, a possibility to get BBC, this is a different – Radio Liberty, but the question is, if they have – wanted to read this news, this question. And this is a – when I was in the Union of Journalists in October and I talk with different Secretaries, not only similar, because I have only 20 minutes to give my speech, I talk with other peoples, and they said to me, “Do not be optimistic.”

Now this – I very sad, because if this Union of Journalists, this is a self-regulation of journalism, now under the holder of power and this – because the now for the new Secretary or for the new leaders, the State give a lot of money. And so, I see, with the Soviet model as it was before, for example, you cannot get, maybe in the future, the hard position if you do not belong this Union of Journalists. And now the cut

9 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

throat, because young Journal – according to my research, the young Journalists do not want to join the Union of Journalists because no sense, they said me. But only the old generation, because we have now three/four generation in journa – national journalism, they state. But this is now when the Union of Journalists have money, and this is – there’s maybe this for the profit.

Bridget Kendall

Let’s take some questions. Hands up who’s got a question to ask? Quite a few. Let’s start over here. Can you please say your name and where you’re from? Keep your question short. And Svetlana, I’ll ask you to keep your answers short too, ‘cause we have a lot of hands up, yes.

James Rogers

James Rogers, I teach the MA International Journalism at City University and I’m a Former BBC Moscow Correspondent. Thank you for a very interesting lecture, Svetlana. Could I please ask, you mentioned that foreign media will now be affect by the – affected by the foreign agents’ legislation, what difference do you think that’ll make in their day-to-day operations?

Svetlana Pasti

What difference it – well, before this law and…

James Rogers

What difference do you think it would make now that…

Svetlana Pasti

Now?

James Rogers

…the law covers their activities, please? Thank you.

Svetlana Pasti

Yes, but this is a – this situation will be – now, this – the Minister of Justice promised to give list of the media, which they identified as foreign agent. And this is terrible, because you have to put this brand as your foreign agent for – in a strand again. This is – quickly, this is a negative image. The second, you have to provide a lot of the requirements. This is a different financial inspection, every third month, and then this audit, then your report, where – with whom you meet and this – you forbidden to conduct political activity, but political activity is defined broadly.

This is – and so, then they cease you stopped your activity. So, this is a clear aim to take off the – any outside influence on Russian society. May – but it’s difficult to say is if the situation will be better after their President elections, because this – the law of foreign agents of the NGO was – came into the forces 2012 and so, this is – according to Vertanova, we have more 300 different the – and amendments, although the last ten years, regulating the internet. So, this is the – us – this legal field what David suggested to us their, how to say this, [mother tongue], to evaluate the Russian media pluralism is true,

10 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

but now this is very hostile to the journalism and because this is the – they – I think this is – we’re going to the Soviet model under the State.

Bridget Kendall

Okay, let’s take another question. Other hands up? Yes, you. Yes, the microphone is coming. Please say who you are and where you’re from.

Delegate

Hi, I’m August [inaudible – 46:17] from the BBC and formerly Reut – BBC Fellow at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at – in Oxford. I have one comment and one question. The comment is about television. We all, not just in Russia, look at television for solace. This is a source of distraction, and for , according to the recent research with audiences, Russians don’t like, for example, to see on television the discussions and disagreements between various Politicians or various parties, because it’s yet another reminder of instability and weakness of the authorities and that, of course, is not very popular. And my question is about something else. It’s about the sources from which Russians find their news.

Levada Center studies show that still most Russians go to television for their news. Even young generation would go to social media to, a) to socialise, and b) for consumer issues, to buy your latest trainers. So, they just don’t seek news on the internet. And that’s where the puzzle is, why don’t they go to social media for those news? And one more short question, since we’re in the Policy Institute, do you think we should be training Journalists, then, in Russia, because most of what you are saying seems to be it’s about Journalists understanding their role as our – serving their Masters and not serving the society?

Svetlana Pasti

Yes, I think this is according to the young generation that they do not seek their news in social media, I think this is a – the situation is diverse with – this is a – I understand the Levada study. But some of young, of course they get use from the social media and other, I think this is a question about the age, what age we take. Because if you 20, or 14/20/25, maybe not as interesting, they live for themselves. But maybe the – later, they try to get news. So, this is, I know this is YouTube, Instagram, they only as consumer, they enjoying the life. And so, this is – this – I know this and another the services or survey of the young generation, which are very commercial, apolitical, they enjoy, they support Putin, this is true, yes. But we have other young generations who work as volunteers, who helps this and to support and establish their journalistic start-ups.

Bridget Kendall

Yes. Sorry, more questions, yes? This gentleman here, yeah, there’s a microphone coming round.

Gabriel Barton-Singer

I’m Gabriel Barton-Singer and I’m a Chatham House member and I’m a student at Trinity College, Cambridge. Right, thank you. I’m wondering if you’d like to give any comments on the Russian media’s involvement in other countries. The export of Russia Today has gone down very successfully in some places and not in others. I wondered if you could talk about if there’s any pattern to where it’s working,

11 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

where it’s not and if the response of the expansion in BBC World Service will be, in your view, a successful counteract to that or not?

Bridget Kendall

So, Russia Today, you understand me…

Svetlana Pasti

Yes, yes, I – yeah.

Bridget Kendall

…so, how successful is it?

Svetlana Pasti

How succ – Russia Today?

Bridget Kendall

Is there a pattern where it works and where it doesn’t work? And BBC World Service, it just got some more money, partly to the Russian Service, will this have an impact inside Russia, yeah?

Svetlana Pasti

This is a – but I think this is a – Russian Today is this – is successful with other countries, so – because they have professionals, very good professionals, from different – with different backgrounds. So, this is – and they provide, of course, the State policy, literal, because they got money – get money from the Government, and so – but I did not get…

Bridget Kendall

So, in some places, Russia Today has very successful audience.

Svetlana Pasti

Yes, hmmm hmm.

Bridget Kendall

Some places less successful. Is there a reason why, in some places, it does well?

Svetlana Pasti

In the world, in the world?

Bridget Kendall

Yeah, yeah.

12 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Svetlana Pasti

I think this is difficult to speculate because it – maybe this depends. If you compare and make research yourself where they’re successful and where not, maybe you understand better, because now it’s difficult to reply to your questions, because where this Russia Today is successful, what countries and what countries are non-successful?

Gabriel Barton-Singer

So, it’s probably non-successful in the UK, particularly, quite successful in the Former Soviet Bloc countries.

Svetlana Pasti

And America.

Gabriel Barton-Singer

To some. Fox News is Russia Today in America.

Svetlana Pasti

It’s successful, I think, yes. Maybe it depends. I don’t know, it depends on the Russian language audience or this is – hmmm.

Bridget Kendall

A couple of comments on that from my own experience. Number one, I was at a conference with a Russia Today Journalist, who was very loyal in public, but in private, he was quite interesting about how they work. And one of the things he said was that they have – that there are people who they put on, but some people who they’re told not to put on. And one of the people that they’re not allowed to have is , who is, he’s the, sort of, David Dimbleby of Russia, I suppose. Is that fair? So, he has a weekly, very opinionated, programme on Sunday nights, which tells the nation what to think. He’s the one who said that Russia could reduce the United States to ash. Do you remember? And it was very controver – but they don’t want him on Russia Today, because although this goes down very well with an internal Russian audience, it’s too provocative for the calibrated message that our team wants abroad. That’s one instance.

The other is an elderly woman I know in Toronto, British, very anti-American, as a lot of Canadians are, she loves Russia Today because it’s so anti-American, so that message goes down very well with her.

Svetlana Pasti

I think this is a good topic for research and this is if you dig deeply.

Bridget Kendall

Let’s go – some questions from this side of the room. We haven’t had anyone. Is anyone burning to ask a question? No, but there’s a hand at the back, yes.

13 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Geoffrey Hosking

Geoff – is this on? Geoffrey Hosking, UCL. You said that something like 10-15% of the Russian media choose to the pass of – path of dignity, or it was Simonov’s opinion. How do they survive in the circumstances that you have described?

Svetlana Pasti

Hmmm hmm, this is a – by different ways they survived. For example, this Novaya Gazeta. Novaya Gazeta has their own sponsors, rich guy – men. This is a media market in Russia, as the Russian economy is non-transparent and so the Journalists or media prefer, do not reveal their sponsors. For example, other areas, we take the independent journalistic start-ups. They produce online media, out – how – outsourcing, with some colleague Chief of the Journalist or the Authors and they do not get money, but they tried. They put some advertising, but this is the local market is narrow and the difficult to get and they make the journalism as a passion. So, this is another model.

The third model, for example, Aksana Panova, in Ural, Yekaterinburg, who sent her Journalist to organisation and they – her Journalist said that, “If you pay us – we want to make contract with you,” but for example, their organisation has guts, all this is different blanks and different. They know what organisation or enterprises have money and they ask to make contract. If you said no, they try to destroyed your reputation and so, they, “Okay, we pay money and you provide some advertising, positive coverage or nothing. This another model, the model is maybe I know, for example, they try to some – the – as is a hidden advertising, political advertising, some party, or pay independent media and they survive for this money.

Bridget Kendall

Could I ask you a follow-up on that, Svetlana? Do you think if you were an Independent Journalist in Russia operating with a blog or on the internet, that you are safer if you’re successful and well-known? I’m thinking about Navalny. Or that actually, if your head is above the parapet that’s when you become unsafe, because the Government notices you, but also, they then perceive you as more dangerous and then they’re going to close you down? Which – how – if you’re an Independent Journalist, how do you calculate this, whether – do you understand my question?

Svetlana Pasti

How you cal…?

Bridget Kendall

Is it good to be successful, is it protection, or is it dangerous to be successful?

Svetlana Pasti

Yeah, again, I think it depends, because Alexei Navalny is special case. This is a special case. But if we take this same region, the Journalist, and each other – knows each other and so, this is a clearly, if you, the dissident in your mind and your – the State media, because State media is prestige media, every regional Government has only the holding, which include all types of the media, from press, magazine, including online media, television and radio. You do not get the job. But if you’re Independent Journalist

14 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

and you have start-up, they – it, again, it depends. If you do not touch the Government, if you do not make the journalistic investigations, but for example, Afanasyev, who make investigation, he was in prison several times and other journalistic beating. Yes, but this is different situation. It depends, again, from individual Journalist what he may make and what journalism and, for example, this is a different – a lot of the examples can be, but it depends. For example, this is a [inaudible – 58:08] in Saint Petersburg, they write very independent and very quality journalism, but they have again, some rich sponsors, maybe the [mother tongue], but they and they…

Bridget Kendall

Patrons, you need a patron.

Svetlana Pasti

Yeah, yes, you need, you need, hmmm hmm.

Bridget Kendall

Okay. There’s a hand up here, yes.

Stephen Diehl

Stephen Diehl, lifelong Russia watcher and yet another Former BBC World Service Journalist. Svetlana, your – I would say your closing words from your speech, and the sun has already gone down, I would say, on journalism, it’s not sunset. The sunset’s been and gone and I’m desperately trying to look for the first glimmers of a new dawn in the East.

I want to come back to the question of social media, because it seems, to me, that this is a two-edged sword for Russia. The Russian authorities have been using social media internationally to try and influence opinion in the West, but they seem to have ignored the fact that it does have an effect in their country and yes, the young people are not watching television. And I think the way, in fact, it is being used in a way the Russian Government doesn’t like, is the fact that when Navalny called on social media for protests across the country, on more than one occasion, there have bene thousands and thousands of people, particularly young people, going out and protesting. So, is there hope in social media that in fact, it’s not just a way of buying trainers or catching up on gossip, that in fact, it might be spreading news and giving the younger generation, who are – in many cases, they may support Putin, in many cases, they’re disillusioned already with Putin, after nearly 18 years, that actually, they may be able to use social media to bring about a genuine change?

Svetlana Pasti

I agree that this – we have to believe or to hope for the young generation and then use the social media, because this is a process that’s developing. But the question is, what happened – what will happen the next the term of the Putin? And the – because now, if the young generation – again, I think this is the country’s big and different. It’s not own one option. Maybe some young generations will support more Putin and then be anti-Western, to be a patriot, because this is a natural feeling to love your country. It’s impossible to live in the country if you hate country. Everybody wants and then the – now this – we have this – the crucial changes in the education, in the school, in the kindergarten, which is the [mother tongue], which this is same as was in the Soviet time. So – but in other – I believe that we have dissident

15 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

people, young, who will use social media and now if this – I think when I talk about the Russian model, it’s approaching the Chinese model. I think they will create, in social media, closed group, because this is safe and they’re agreed. And then how to, maybe, to make something, because if you have more totalitarian regime, they have to be very carefully and because they lose their, not only job place, but maybe their trouble in the school, at the university. Now, for example, Russian university, soft-shoe teach the investigation journalism, because no need in – now in Russia. So – but – or that we have the [mother tongue] Investigative Journalist, where they write about some ordinary, this is no reasonable, no urgent questions, so – and put this as the title, subtitle, investigation, journalistic investigation. So, it depends. I think this – the fight will be, because I know in Novosibirsk some – these young 14/15-years-old their, young people, support Navalny and their power is terrible. Wow, they grow up and then come against us.

So, this is – but the bad thing is that democracy now is a bad word in Russia. They – do you know how they talk, do you know, or not, in Russia?

Stephen Diehl

Yes, it is very well documented.

Svetlana Pasti

[Mother tongue] This is – and in different ways and so, this is a – if you come from abroad, this is a suspicion to you, and now this, when we have the law about the forbidden political activity and foreign agent, this is very dangerous, because political activity means to influence on public opinion. And if you make research, you can opportunity to influence on public opinion in Russia. So, this is dangerous.

Bridget Kendall

We’ve time for another question. Yes, gentleman here.

Andrew Marshall

Yes, I understand that Sobchak’s…

Bridget Kendall

Would you like to say who you are?

Andrew Marshall

Oh sorry, Andrew Marshall, Cognito. That Sobchak’s daughter, whose precise name I forget, is standing…

Svetlana Pasti

Ksenia.

16 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Andrew Marshall

…thank you, for the Presidency, but somehow as a spuriously independent candidate. For us, that’s quite hard to understand. Will there be some spuriously independent media that will be giving her some backing to perhaps crowd out more genuinely independent contenders?

Svetlana Pasti

This is a…

Bridget Kendall

Did you understand?

Svetlana Pasti

No, this person…

Bridget Kendall

Ksenia Sobchak, so, she’s announced her candidacy. There is some suspicions about it, whether she’s a real candidate, or what is called in English, a stalking horse, a [mother tongue], a kind of, pretend opposition candidate. So, will there also be a pretend opposition media to support her to create the impression of a conversation of a choice with Putin, but actually, this is all controlled and staged? What is your opinion?

Svetlana Pasti

Of – according to…

Bridget Kendall

Is that clear enough?

Svetlana Pasti

…independent media, according to independent media?

Bridget Kendall

So, if – the question, is Ksenia Sobchak a real opposition candidate or not?

Svetlana Pasti

No, no, no, no, I do not believe, because if we look at the background of Ksenia Sobchak, where from? She’s grow up with Putin. So, this is, I think, as this informally belong to the Putin family, to the [inaudible – 65:28] group. So, I think the – and the Putin, if you remember, maybe several years ago, he said that “We need a new President in a woman, a young woman.” This – I think he planned, as the tactical and to this – there – strategical. So, I do not believe this – there’s – the opposition and independent media support the Sobchak, no. That…

17 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Bridget Kendall

Another question, one final question, yes?

Yaroslav Vagieri

Hi.

Bridget Kendall

Just wait for the microphone and tell us who you are.

Yaroslav Vagieri

I’m Yaroslav Vagieri. I’m an intern here at the Russia Eurasia Programme. Some Analysts have tried to drawn parallels between the Soviet era misinformation tactics and today’s propaganda, whereas, others have said that these parallels are a little bit not that accurate, because actually, compared to – whereas during the Cold War era, you know, there was this ideological purpose, you know, by [inaudible – 66:39] or global order, today there’s much more scattered, kind of, international system of alliances and so, they say that propaganda is much more, like, cynical, if you want, and more, like, tactic. And so, I – what is your opinion? Do you see more parallels between the Soviet era type of misinformation, today’s propaganda, or more differences, because of that, sort of, underlying purpose?

Svetlana Pasti

I think this is on this – the – if take the basic level, this is propaganda the wars. This is the main function of the Soviet media and now Putin and us, their similar said this is all Gusev – Pavel Gusev talk with this and David Benn. This is their mentality to use media as instrument for propaganda, for promotion, own ideas. So, I think this – I see this as a similarity. I think the – because – and Putin belonged to the Soviet generation and he – his approach to the media are the instrument for the political aims. So, I think this is a – but, of course, in the – now, in the digital area – era and this as well, we use the internet, propaganda is more sophisticated.

Before in the Soviet era, we had only hard propaganda and now we have soft propaganda. So, it is a plus hard propaganda, so – and this is a – this, I think that this is maybe this terrible that the young generation adopt this, no matter where they work, only to make career to go to abroad, this is a bad thing. So bad this is a – you have to be very courage and brave to go against, to be dissident. So, this is a – and the – and again, we have – this is a different climate. For example, in Moscow, more alternative than regions, the same as China, for example. Beijing is more free city as a capital and different than the region, some – the local media. So, I think this is – of course, you are right, the propaganda different, but in the – its essence of this is the propaganda is the same. But the question is when the mentality change and take this media work as independent. But they remember this experience of the 90s, as this has happened, and nobody was prepared to this. They remember these lessons and it’s difficult to say when this new dawn comes, but maybe this is suddenly, because Russia is [mother tongue]. It’s maybe happen quickly, so, if this is elite, we are fighting each other and something happen. But again, according to Levada, this is who will be President: the Putin, the first, Zhirinovsky? And now this – they discuss in the State Duma, maybe we organise only two parties in Russia: the Universaly and Liberal party, Liberal Democratic, Zhirinovsky. Well, I don’t know. But they – this aim, again, two party be, so…

18 David Benn Memorial Lecture: the state of Russia’s media

Bridget Kendall

Thank you very much, Svetlana. You’ve given us a very sobering picture. But I think we need to remember David Benn and his long association with Russia and where the country was when he began his career, and where it was and what he saw through his career, which underlines exactly what you’ve just said, that Russia is a very unpredictable beast and you can’t actually quite tell what’s going to happen. So, that, I think, is our note of optimism on which we end, that we don’t know when that new dawn will be, but with Russia, you never can tell. But in the meantime, let us all thank Svetlana very much indeed, for the first memorial and for coming today [applause].

And thank you all very much for coming. There’s a reception upstairs to follow.