“This spring National Media Group offered Alexander Rodnyansky, the president of STS channel, a job on its Fifth Channel. Rodnyansky accepted the offer and left STS. However, the Kovalchuk brothers (the NMG owners and old acquaintances of Vladimir Putin) failed to employ Rodnyansky. The recruitment had to be coordinated with Dmitry Medvedev. According to sources in the Kremlin, Medvedev has not forgotten the fact that during the “orange revolution”, the Rodnyansky-owned Ukrainian television channel “1+1” unexpectedly denied its support for Viktor Yanukovich at the time when Medvedev was the Kremlin Administration’s member responsible for activities related to the presidential election in Ukraine. Now Rodnyansky is simply denied access to the Fifth Channel.”

Runewsweek.ru

At the first glance, it looks just as a regular item in a newsletter. But if this article on the “Russky Newsweek” site, created by a whole team of authors, is examined closer, still more facts about the Kremlin’s real interest in the mass media business becomes revealed. Even here in Latvia, it is known since long how the television company NTV was taken over at the very beginning of 2000s, when Boris Berezovsky began to support the Kremlin opponents by the means of television resources. However, this time, too, the Kremlin has failed to manage the situation without unwelcome publicity. Mikhail Lesin offered Rodnyansky a position in NMG without coordination with Presidential Administration, and Rodnyansky started to fulfil his functions secretly. But that was not a secret for a long time. And Medvedev got angry. Next Medvedev’s anger was caused by Lesin’s behaviour when he persuaded NMG to change the ad sellers on the pretext that “Video International” had suffered fewer losses in the crisis than “Gazprom – Media”, the NMG’s previous cooperation partner. Medvedev used the assistance of Mass Communications Minister Igor Schegolev. Lesin was fired in 15 minutes. Even Putin was surprised.

However, it is clear that these are not just internal disagreements, the seemingly hidden truth is much deeper. First, this spring Medvedev announced that the public media were working for the wrong parts of the market. Medvedev was dissatisfied with the fact that majority of the audience of the pro-Kremlin television channel “Rossiya” were in the age group over 55. Of course, that is a quite loyal part of the electorate, it is not active enough. Same as Hitler’s and Stalin’s expectations, related to the youth organizations of Hitler Jugend and Pioneers, Medvedev’s idea, too, was that young people had to play much more important role than pensioners. Not only the choice of audience and accents in the mass media are the decisive factors, but the main point is that for more than 70 years the Kremlin has been maintaining its idea that by raising of patriotic and correct young generation whose representatives are by far more active than old people, it is possible to win a strong and sustainable support, considering also the future. The First Channel demonstrated the fastest reaction. Even now it is allocating weekend prime time to youth broadcasts. It was followed by the abovementioned channel “Rossiya” which closed the Sport channel replacing it by “Rossiya-2” fully dedicated to the younger audience.

The second important thing is that Medvedev and the Kremlin Administration as a whole stick to their allies. That is, in case anybody wishes to avoid the Kremlin, resolving issues related to its general sponsor “Gazprom” or companies connected with it, he/she is doomed to failure. Such situation was just after “Gazprom-Media” complained to Medvedev that somebody else was trying to decrease its role in the spacious enough advertising market, when Medvedev’s reaction was very sharp, even inadequate to his position. “Gazprom”, being now according to the Kremlin’s instructions the main sponsor of the activities related to the upcoming presidential election in Ukraine, cannot allow change of the public opinion inside Russia. Besides, “Gazprom” and the allied companies consider that they deserve a much larger piece of pie of the advertising market than they would get if “Video International” took over a number of major clients.

The third important point in this story is related to the next presidential election in Russia to be held only in 2012. I.e., at the moment when Putin announced the possibility of his running, Medvedev responded appropriately. In this regard, it became clear that Medvedev was aware that the election would be won by the candidate keeping control of the mass media. Medvedev has initiated “cleaning” of the leading positions in the major media from the Putin supporters. The newcomers will, of course, be obliged to him. Experts of the Russian mass media have various opinions – some of them consider that the Putin – Medvedev tandem has become shaky, the others think that Medvedev has just reconsidered the role of television in the future. However, all of them agree that Medvedev‘s wish to maintain control of television is stronger than that of Putin. Medvedev has issued a decree stipulating that, while introducing the digital television in Russia, the free package is to include only state-sponsored channels. Thereby those who would not pay for the other channels, will be forced to watch only the ones offered by the state representatives. Whoever has control of the public media, will be able to control the public opinion in Russia.

Finally, it should be stressed that the situation in Russia is becoming increasingly similar to that characteristic for totalitarian regime. The control of the mass media, propaganda and hidden censorship are not the first steps in the direction of a total control of the public opinion any more. Russia, same as its friend China, may even start introducing control of Internet. Fight for the presidential seat has begun in Russia – who will succeed?