PRESS: The Price of Word
The newspaper is responsible to society. And also to the JS company. Is not there a conflict of interests? The end of a war
By Alexander Pumpyansky

The warfare between the newspaper Izvestiya and the company LUKoil lasted for two months and three days and ended in the signing of a peace treaty bearing the somewhat pompous name "The Charter on mutual relations between the Editorial Board of the news paper Izvestiya and its shareholders". It was the first war of the kind, a show war, given the names and positions of the warring sides. All the journalists watched its progress and outcome with great interest.

It was a war without rules. LUKoil did not like a publica tion in Izvestiya and decided to replace the leadership of the newspaper exactly as Agitprop would have done. It became clear at once that, although new words and notions: private property, corporations and stock were used, the mentality of barons of new Russian entrepreneurship was indistinguishable from that of old party bosses. The former are as categorical as the latter; society does not exist for them, only bosses do. They are ready to crush an obstinate newspaper, forgetting that it is their own newspaper.

Evidently, they managed to forget the lessons of glasnost, being engrossed in their business. For which they had to pay.

The newspaper resorted to the weapon which was avail able to it: Words. It not only refused to display subservience on the contrary, it began crying out for the whole world to hear: help! censorship is coming back! freedom of the press in danger! Let us oppose the saturnalia of reaction and unmask the true face of our corporate owner whom we our selves chose. See what sort of people are in the Board of LUKoil their true place is somewhere else. If the news paper could, it would destroy the hateful corporation, for getful of the fact that, according to the Statute, the latter is its donor.

As it turned out, it was a war of yesterday against the day before yesterday. The day before yesterday the decision of the LUKoil secretariat to change the newspapers policy would have been fulfilled immediately (remember the famous slogan "Decisions of the Party into life!") without any sign of protest. Yesterday society would have risen to the newspapers call and (or) the President would have inter fered and the honour of Free Word would have been restored triumphantly. Today neither variant works. Of course, free dom of speech is essential, but why should every reprint be defended? Of course, the LUKoil Board behaved like troglodytes, but they have the majority interest.

Fortunately, they understood in the Editorial Board that they would never win the battle if they fought according to the principle "I struck him with a newspaper and he strucks me with a brick". The corporation must be defeated on its own field.

The decisive operation was carried out to a verbal can nonade. The Editorial Board found money and a strategic partner. Shares were bought in such a manner that 25 per cent (the blocking interest practically, the blanket policy) became owned by the Editorial Board itself. About as much went to ONEXIMbank, the newspapers new ally. Which totals 50,19% of stocks; at the same time, LUKoil has only 49,68%. The difference is hair wide, but this hair makes the difference: since the controlling interest does not belong to LUKoil, the latter can make no unilateral binding decisions.

So there remained no alternative to peace, and a peace treaty was signed. The "Charter on mutual relationships between the Editorial Board of the newspaper Izvestiya and its shareholders" confirms the fundamental principle of social responsibility of the press, which is interpreted ideally to mean that the press is societys partner and, in the final analysis, it is responsible to it through the readerships trust, its own authority and the authority of Truth. Henceforward the policy of the Editorial Board will rest on three pillars: freedom of speech, private property and the interests of its JS company. The first pillar is traditional. The other two have been erected only recently.

In practical life power belongs to those who appoint the staff. The charter confirms the principle of division of pow ers. The personnel policy in the JS company is formulated by its President. The same policy in the Editorial Board is formulated by Editor in Chief. Editor in Chief is nominated by the collective of journal ists of the newspaper and appointed by the Board of Directors.

Of course, this is a compromise. The signing of the peace treaty does not mean that all the prob lems have been solved and there is no more headache in the journalists community.

The journalists and the newspaper as a whole are respon sible to: 1) society and 2) the company. What if the interests of the former and of the latter diverge? Two days after the signing of the Charter, Vagit Alekperov, President of LUKoil (who, incidentally, did not sign the Charter which, on the contrary, was signed by President of ONEXIMbank Vladimir Potanin) departed to Iraq for business negotiations with Saddam Husein. Can you imagine now a commentary in Izvestiya casting doubt on the legality of a bargain with the Iraqi dictator? And, of course, the nightmarish question aris es which I am afraid even to utter: what if LUKoil and ONEXIMbank come to terms over some figure? How much will they give for freedom of speech then? Nevertheless it was a realistic and reasonable compro mise. It is hard to imagine a better compromise in the condi tions of poverty of the press and a legislation vacuum, i.e., in the conditions of the absence of economic and legal guaran tees of independence of the press. On the contrary, it could be recommended to lawgivers as exemplary. The main hope is that practical experience of cooperation will teach mutu al responsibility to the participants of this strategic compro mise the press, on the one hand, and corporate owners engaging in media business, on the other. In turn, this implies understanding of and respect for the specificity of a bargain.

It is to Adam Michnik, the legendary anticommunist insurgent and now the Editor of the most popular Polish newspaper Gazeta vyborcza which, incidentally, is published with the participation of an American press concern, that the most precise, in my opinion, definition of mass media belongs: a newspaper is a mission. And also an enterprise.

Forgetfulness of the mission and commercialization result in degradation. Commercial failure leads to marginal ization of a periodical and the loss of social influence. The end of the play is to achieve a balance, and each side uses its own means in this play. The duty of a corporate owner is not to interfere with the social purpose of a newspaper but to help it become a successful commercial enterprise.

In any case we must be grateful to our colleagues from Izvestiya. They were the first to stand to the battle and they fought for "our and your freedom".

"New Times" No.08 08-01-97