The past television week provided additional evidence that the national network is getting increasingly professional, and also that it is under growing pressure from the authorities. Put together, this causes a phenomenon known as imitation.
Take Sunday week's UT-1 program “Seven Days” with Oleh Zavada's report from the Russian capital, reporting the financial crisis. Even if not sufficiently analytical, it offered a professional selection of opinions and first-hand news broadcast live from Moscow, followed by a rather dynamic and outwardly relaxed dialogue in the studio with Serhiy Tyhypko. The Vice Premier was his usual self, anything but camera-shy, radiating confidence in himself and the Cabinet, with casual critical remarks about the Ukrainian economy. Most viewers must have been under the impression that all problems being discussed were approached in an unbiased manner and could find no fault with the whole thing. Except that on UT-1 (the government-run channel), one is not likely to come across stiffly edited and rehearsed programs like Soviet Central Television's “Vremia” evening news. Which means that imitation technologies (“impersonality” and “critical approach”) are at a sufficiently high level. In this sense Dorenko's lessons (he is known as the greatest simulator on Russian television, being the most affiliated journalist while effectively posing as the most incorruptible hunter for truth in the eyes of thousands upon thousands of politically inexperienced viewers) are being quickly educated on Ukrainian television. For example, few if any will wonder about the absence of expert opinions expressed by representatives of different political and economic forces. Or about the absence of such influential parliamentary faction leaders as Petro Symonenko, Pavlo Lazarenko, Yevhen Marchuk, etc., expressing their views on the crisis and ways out of it. The bad thing is not that all political TV programs are “sponsored” by certain political figures, with journalists using increasingly refined techniques to conceal this sponsorship. The bad thing is that different political “sponsors” handling different channels are, in reality, all on the same team. What team? Naturally the presidential one (except for NDP and Mr. Pustovoitenko as both consider themselves to be playing independent roles). The only differences they may have concern their own tactical interests, but by no means the principal guidelines. And so, varying in competence, professionalism, or using “silent figures” (e.g., 1+1 channel and its program “Vikna” (Windows) which is unrivaled in its skill to say much and tell nothing), Ukrainian television invariably gives the viewer only one truth, although on a very broad scale.
Perhaps the only exception from this rule is STB which, despite its current institutional changes bringing it close to the upper echelons, is continuing to strike a discordant note in this harmonious soft-singing choir on the Ukrainian air. Maybe the reason is the presence of extremely skilled battle-hardened professionals like Vitaly Portnykov. The man plays only by his own rules. He either speaks his mind from the screen or remains silent. As a political observer, his comments are not only competent, non-standard, but always have a touch of irony. He speaks fast and to the point and watching him and listening to him is always a pleasure, especially when he hosts a matching professional, as was the case with Deputy NSDC Secretary Oleksandr Razumkov, although under the circumstances the latter was at a disadvantage, since Mr. Portnykov could afford his own view on the crisis, while Vitaly Razumkov, being a top-level bureaucrat, had to stick to the official version. Moreover, he had his own interests to protect. Hence his noticeably overstated optimism about the situation becoming stabilized in Russia and its crisis playing into Ukraine's hands. His allegation about Ukrainian goods increasing on the Ukrainian market was bold, but Vitaly was quick on the uptake and showed his wit. Among other things, the Deputy Secretary said the hryvnia devaluation was not deep. The host immediately countered that a man drowning in a puddle or in the ocean would not care much for the difference afterward.
There is, however, another aspect to the problem of imitation on Ukrainian television. At times, it turns into mimicry. Now this is a different story. For example, Inter in its “Week in Detail” presents Denys Zharkykh with his very positive report from the Haiovy Pit (allegedly a very advanced mine) on the occasion of Miners' Day. Suddenly there are miners talking sentimentally about their profession and how proud they feel about it, and one asks oneself, What is it? Something from the Soviet archives? And then one of the miners mutters off screen, “No, not my pants,” obviously addressing the cameraman, but the camera shows him and we see that this miner is dressed literally in rags. After this journalistic trick the whole thing looks burlesque and everyone understands who ordered this report and why. Regrettably such tricks are becoming increasingly necessary on Ukrainian television, although very many in the audience lost the knack of reading between the lines during glasnost.
Many must have been interested to watch Olha Herasymiuk's interview with Vladimir Pozner (TSN's “Special View”). Although her usual intoning comments (they even pall some) sounded somewhat out of place, Pozner's deep perception, his special tolerance, non-aggressiveness toward man, society, and civilization, combined with his own clear-cut stand, were captivating, as always. One of the most pressing problems is modern happy-go-lucky television, its obvious complicity in the outburst of cruelty throughout the world (in Pozner's own words). “Television could change all this, because it affects emotions, yet it does nothing of the kind.” And television journalists must be responsible for what they do onscreen and how. “Of course, there is a degree of pressure on journalists. Here one can go with the current or act as one sees proper. And we do have such journalists.”
Last week TET-A-TET came up with a rerun of 1996 “Dmitri Kharitonov Presents” about Hitler's coming to power. The Fuhrer once exclaimed: “How fortunate that people do not think!” He was a genius of unrestrained, absolutely unprincipled propaganda that stopped at nothing. He used this quality of man to pursue his own political goals and personal ambitions. There must be such “hostages of the idea” on Ukrainian television as well. Although they usually proceed from what Vladimir Pozner described in his own words: “So long as we have enough people, everything will be fine.” On the air this tactic looks much more transparent and shallow.






