From: "William Dunkerley" <wd@publishinghelp.com>
Subject: Aslund Mischaracterizes Russia’s Media Milieu
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005
When Anders Aslund intones that "Independent media were reined in or taken over by Putin loyalists," (JRL 9220) he’s singing from the Berezovsky/Gusinsky hymnal. Those outcast media oligarchs would have everyone believe that they had been paragons of Russian press freedom. But, that’s all a ruse. There were no independent media throughout the Yeltsin years. Instead, the media outlets were consistently dependent upon corrupting forces. This was an inevitable consequence of a set of laws that precluded the kind of financial independence needed for press freedom. Those laws were finally withdrawn by the Putin administration following successful advocacy by the Russian Media Fund, a private sector initiative.
If anyone is tempted to believe Aslund’s contention, I recommend putting it to an easy and unambiguous test. Pick any Russian newspaper from the 90s. Count up the aggregate space that it devoted to display and classified advertisements. Compute what percentage of the whole publication that represents. If, over time, a newspaper was consistently carrying less than 40 percent advertising space, it was not profitable, and was likely being financially supported by someone for ulterior purposes. By comparison, Western newspapers average nearly 60 percent advertising content. Profitability, and thus independence, is not available to those with insufficient advertising content.
Putin's actions against oligarchic media bosses clearly have reduced the pluralism in the media. That's unfortunate. But, it’s hardly a diminution of press freedom. After all, none had existed. If citizens in a democracy are to make enlightened political choices, the mere presence of discordant voices is insufficient. Voters need truthful and reliable information. Otherwise, they would be left to make decisions based on erroneous input.
Comments like Aslund’s also further becloud perceptions of the current possibilities for the Russian press. Putin changed the Yeltsin-era laws so that true media independence is now finally achievable. Unfortunately, that did not bring about a spontaneous change in the media business culture. The old corrupt pluralism remains entrenched. Few people are coming to the realization that there’s a new deal.
Konstantin Remchukov epitomizes that misunderstanding. Upon acquiring ownership of Nezavisimaya Gazeta he told Kommersant, "A serious daily newspaper, as a rule, cannot be profitable" (JRL 9217). Remchukov says he plans to make up the shortfall by publishing topical weekly supplements. That’s no strategy for real success. Since Putin did away with those oppressive Yeltsin laws, Russia’s ad market is booming. The situation is not at all like Aslund describes. Opportunity is knocking. There’s more than enough revenue to support a serious daily that operates in the interests of its readers. Remchukov needs to understand this, and must learn the kinds of business strategies and techniques that will allow him to profit from the new opportunities.
(William Dunkerley (wd@publishinghelp.com) is a media business analyst and consultant based in New Britain, Connecticut. He has worked extensively in Russia and other post communist countries.).