Delphi Forced To Repeat The Text Of Srs Jaunzeme At The Task Of Its Owners It Is Bad To Interview The Wrong People In The Wrong Media

These days, the partially state-financed portal "Delfi" published an article in its paid articles section with the title ""Scandalous" interview in the newspaper "Diena" - what it pays for the brothers of the media cunfte", in which its author, Laine Fedotova, posing as a journalist, questioned the Soviet occupation collaborators of the government, a representative of the field of public relations assigned as a political scientist, a notorious Marxist - a supporter of the destruction of the Zedelgem legionary memorial and other persons, has been forced to actually repeat the text of the Director General of the State Revenue Service Ieva Jaunzeme in connection with the publication of the newspaper "Diena" "Who and how "ordered "Lato Lapsu and Jurgi Liepnieku" - it is bad to interview the wrong people in the wrong media Considering the interest of the readers, we are republishing this article.

Laine Fedotova, "Delfi Plus" journalist, the interview "Who and how "ordered" Lato Lapsa and Jurgi Liepnieku" published in the portal "Diena" and the following opinion articles in the newspaper "Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze" (NRA) express several accusations The first is clearly readable in the content of the interview - the publication names specific possible systemic problems in the state institution.

The second accusation followed three days later and was directed against the work of other media, more precisely, according to the authors, their insufficient reaction The first must be explained to the law enforcement agencies.

Meanwhile, the other could be too hasty, it follows from communication and media experts In August 2021, Latvian law enforcement authorities temporarily detained publicist Lato Lapsa and searched his residence and car.

On the same day, a search also took place at the political technologist Jurģ Liepnieks A day later, the State Revenue Service (SRS), without mentioning the people involved in the case, told the media that the Tax and Customs Police of the SRS is investigating a criminal proceeding regarding suspicious transactions between legal and natural persons.

This criminal trial began in 2020 According to Lapsa, the procedural actions against him were carried out in a criminal trial, which has been fabricated.

Liepnieks also expressed skepticism about whether the search was justified He claimed that the law enforcement officers were formally allegedly looking for contracts that had long been submitted to the SRS.

The newspaper "Diena" once again highlighted this matter as topical On February 17, the media published an interview with Inita Lūri, a former SRS investigator.

Lure has worked in the Financial Police since 2005, she was also the deputy head of the First Investigation Department of the SRS But last fall, her reputation was damaged by the TV3 program " who in the interview have let it pass their ears.

In the second column, its author reproaches Latvia for the lack of democracy and the rule of law, because the interview given by Lure did not cause a national scandal Lato Lapsa himself is called a publicist in the public sphere.

He also worked in journalism for a short period [since 1990] In recent years [since the beginning of the 2000s], Lapsa has gained attention as the author of books about several influential people in Latvia, including President Egils Levitas.

True, the president described the book as "slanderous and untrue", but decided not to take legal action against the book's author , that Lapsa also worked in the field of public relations together with Andrejas [actually Ainārs] Ārgli, PRAE public relations agency.

Erglis, contacted by "Delphi", rejects these rumors and says that "there has been no connection between the two for quite a long time" It is created by each medium for itself.

However, the media agenda is influenced by several factors One of them is related to the capacity of the media and journalists to investigate the events.

Did the media hastily continue the topic started by the newspaper "Diena"? According to Mārtiņš Pričins, researcher of political communication, lecturer at the University of Latvia (LU), good media practice would require that the media, responding to the topics initiated by the brothers of the profession, not only repeat them, but also supplement them "The media has different roles.

If the media wants to be the so-called watchdogs of democracy, the question is: are they ready to take on this mission - to report, including about corrupt schemes or other activities related to it?" says Prichin In other words, the media should investigate for themselves whether what was expressed in the interview is true.

This, in turn, requires considerable time and human resources As "Delfi" concludes, in the specific situation "Diena" and the NRA took the least resource-demanding journalistic genres - interview and opinion.

According to the story, if "Diena" were to publish a report instead of an interview, the journalist would necessarily have to address the other side of the story: "If one lady says something about Kristini Prusak, then it is imperative to talk to Kristini Prusak as well " The interview genre allows us not to do this.

In the opinion genre, however, the rules of the game are even looser "We have freedom of speech.

An opinion is an opinion And it can be based on various judgments as long as it does not violate honor and respect.

And (the opinion cannot be based on) distorted facts In that case, there are no restrictions," says Prichin.

The criticisms of other media expressed in the opinion column published by the NRA are to be commended from another side as well - why their articles and publications are not enough, says [during the occupation, he worked as the head of the Propaganda Sector of the Central Committee of the Communist Party, was a classic collaborator, defender and ideologist of the occupation authorities] The professor, briefly introduced to the situation, without knowing the wider context, admits that the reproach is probably rooted in the "pain" that the media that started the topic do not reach as large an audience as the public media could.

In the European Union, with a few exceptions, it is usually the public media that has the greatest audience trust In general, as Prichin says, the media, when starting a "crusade", mostly fight alone.

Looking at the LETA archive, it can be seen that, for example, during when journalist Jānis Domburs and the team of authors on the portal "Delfi" praised the centralized procurement of hygienic masks in the early stages of the pandemic, neither "Diena" nor the NRA continued extensive research on the topic Exceptions tend to be social topics - the media sometimes unite in them, says Pričins.

This happened, for example, in the case of immunologist Yevhenii Nikiforenko, who is accused of sexual abuse by several patients One of the main reasons to verify information is the ever-present possibility that it is part of a deliberate communication campaign.

They aim to change knowledge, attitudes and behaviour If it is for the good, then it tends to be simplistically perceived as an advertisement, but if the goal is to target someone - as black PR (public relations - from English "personal relations" - ed.

) [actually "public relations"] In both cases, it is equally important to verify the information.

The media - both consciously and unconsciously - tend to become part of so-called black public relations campaigns It can happen unconsciously due to carelessness, he explains.

"Information is brought to you Very, very reliable.

A media editor or journalist believes it And then there is a soap, you have to make (news) withdrawals.

Someone rushes, someone does not check (information, name) and leaves, and then you have to apologize The name is no longer a sparrow - when it goes, it goes," explains Rajewski.

This situation can be illustrated by the recent incident experienced in the media, when several media outlets, including "Delfi" editors, published the news that the chairman of the board of the gas company "Itera Latvija", Juris Savickis, had died The message was not true, after which "Delphi" and other brothers of the post wrote a retraction of the message and an explanation of what happened.

While Rajewski doesn't think the false news was part of a smear campaign, the situation illustrates how such a campaign can get lost in the media Deliberate smear campaigns find their way into the media because it is in this environment that they have the most power.

"Let's not call black PR the nonsense produced by anonymous Facebook accounts - it's not black PR It's information provided by solid, reputable sources.

This gives PR credibility," explains Rajevsky with an interview in "Dieňa" and opinions, the NRA states: "If it is black PR, then it is very subtle.

Such a belch from two thousand - a cold way of saying something Black PR is one that cannot be noticed.

If it can be deciphered and to see with the naked eye, then it's bad black PR " The LU researcher also emphasizes that it is wrong to put the media directly at the center of smear campaigns.

"One of the goals (of defamation campaigns) is to create a snowball effect That is, throw out (some information) so that the next one will come.

Maybe something else will pop up And the snowball washes, washes, washes.

If the goal is to get back at someone against whom there is a snowball, then this snowball tightens into a much bigger snowball and pushes its opponent along the ground The goal with agitation is to make a bigger snowball, not just throw one pebble into the water to see concentric circles around it.

The goal is to cause a bigger ripple," says Kaprāns As the LU researcher explains, "black PR" means attempts to influence and impose a certain understanding of the situation.

In other words, to present the situation in a certain light Researcher draws associative similarities between "black PR" and contract killing, because often in defamation campaigns it is not clear who is the orderer or executor: "Uses some service or opportunities offered by a third party, remaining in the shadow or paying for the opportunity to remain in the shadow.

And in this way discredits, reduces the authority, (tarnishes) the reputation of an opponent or competitor " Rate this article: Follow us.