Alexander Gabuyev: We Think Very Locally

RIAC Web Portal presents a new Viewpoint column. The aim of the project is to learn what successful people not directly involved in politics think about international events and the challenges of their professions. A conversation with Alexander Gabuyev, deputy editor-in-chief of the Kommersant-Vlast magazine, opens up our series of interviews. In an interview with RIAC, Alexander Gabuyev noted the peculiarities of Russian journalism, revealed his magazine’s approach to covering current international problems, articulated his vision for a high quality analytical periodical, and gave some advice to aspiring international journalists.

RIAC Web Portal presents a new Viewpoint column. The aim of the project is to learn what successful people not directly involved in politics think about international events and the challenges of their professions. A conversation with Alexander Gabuyev, deputy editor-in-chief of the Kommersant-Vlast magazine, opens up our series of interviews.

In an interview with RIAC, Alexander Gabuyev noted the peculiarities of Russian journalism, revealed his magazine’s approach to covering current international problems, articulated his vision for a high quality analytical periodical, and gave some advice to aspiring international journalists.

You have worked for the Kommersant publishing house for 7 years, and journalism is your primary occupation. How has your perception of this work changed over time? Have your views on the way journalists should operate evolved?

I think that changes in politics have brought about major changes in the media landscape. In 2003, I was a sophomore and came into journalism as an intern in Kommersant’s international politics department. At that time, it appeared that the media was better placed than nowadays to exert influence on political processes. Today increased pressure from media censorship in general and on specific papers is obvious. As things stand now, the role of the media in Russia has been mainly reduced to either imitating informing people or supplying propaganda. There are only isolated islets where journalism is impartially carrying out its function of gathering and delivering information to the reading public, without adopting an attitude towards the described events.

Representatives of foreign media have repeatedly criticized Russian journalism, and the issue of freedom of speech has been raised more than once. Where, in your opinion, is the line drawn between robust criticism of the state's policies and open statements of opposition?

Criticism should not be the purpose of an article. Criticism per se cannot be the aim of journalistic work. A journalist's work is to ascertain the truth and report it to the reader. Certain details may be hidden from you, and you can have no physical possibility to find them out. But your job is not to criticize someone, but just to inform. It is the analysis and account of the events with due regard for all available facts that makes objective media different from opposition-oriented media. This is the first aspect. Then, be sure to cite the opinions of all the actors involved. If so, you are performing your reporting work properly. Opposition media often turn a blind eye to certain facts of an argument that they find rather inconvenient, while propaganda just ignores all criticisms in principle. It is necessary to maintain a proper balance.

RIAC / Anna Maslova
Awards for Young Foreign-Affairs Journalists

But now critical articles and columns with bold statements are surely enjoying high rating. Isn’t it tempting for journalists to go that route?

These are different problems. In my experience, high-quality and well-done reporting attracts no less attention than a catchy headline. In addition, it is important for whom you are writing for. If your target audience is a “quality” one, it is necessary to emphasize the quality of information. If your article “grabs” 200-300 thousand such people, this for you as a journalist can be far more valuable than a million clicks on a splash headline or provocative pictures. It depends, of course, on the goal of your publication.

In other words, you believe it is not worth it to trade the quality of material for Internet traffic?

Quality only attracts an audience. Economically, the model pays off due to this. If a respectable outlet digs up something exclusive, properly presents and analyzes the material without prejudice and impartially, decision makers, by all means, will read this publication. They need this information. You can be, for example, an investment banker and know a lot about economics, finance and transactions, but have no idea why Ukraine was hit by the crisis and what Russia’s interests are. You have to go beyond your immediate professional field. This audience attracts the appropriate advertising: luxury watches, cars, offers to chip in and buy a minority stake of the bank UBS. It makes no sense to advertise all of this in a large-circulation newspaper like the Komsomolskaya Pravda. Periodicals which are considered respectable in Russia live exactly on earnings from such advertising.

How significant is the share of quality analytical periodicals in the Russian media market?

I think that quality periodicals can be counted on one hand, especially after some media outlets have been transformed to such an extent that they, in my opinion, can no longer represent the quality segment in the true sense of the word. They have rather become news aggregators that make use of others’ materials and produce little of their own unique content. Quality media can, probably, be counted on two hands and their audience is small. The latter are the people who take an interest in not just daily events, but in the broader picture too. Kommersant’s circulation is about 115 thousand copies, Vedomosti’s is roughly the same. The middle class in Russia is not large. Should the middle class grow and become interested in politics and economics, circulations will be sure to follow suit and increase.

Have you noticed a decline in the print media market?

It’s reasonable to assume that our media market is developing in the same way the American market did, but with a lag of several years. Russian print media face the same challenges that the Financial Times and the New York Times faced a few years ago. Models for solving these problems already exist and are being tested on the Russian market with varying degrees of success.

Do you believe that a magazine should follow a single political line?

The views of the participants in a creative process should not interfere with their reporting. Any magazine or mass media outlet should have the goal of delivering information to people and analyzing it impartially. If the task is to scoff at power or support it, then it is not so much media outlet as a magazine with a political stance. To me, I don’t think much of a magazine with a political stance. Ideally, the task at hand should be to inform people about what's really going on. Take my word for it, that's enough.

What position does Kommersant-Vlast magazine adhere to as a periodical in terms of presenting information about what is happening in the world, particularly in Ukraine?

There are a number of factors to take into account. Firstly, the format. Five years ago the magazine represented mainly the analytical sector of the media market. The newspaper reported the news, while the magazine explained everything in detail a week later, arranging it in orderly pigeonholes. Now we are getting our news from Twitter, Facebook or other news sites. And now the newspaper is performing the analytical functions and explaining what has happened. Identifying the problems the magazine should solve in the media market remains a big question. Who is going to read a week later just in greater detail what has already been described by the media dozens of times? Competition among daily newspapers and online publications is so fierce that within one week the event has been analyzed thoroughly from all possible angles. And what is the niche of a weekly? All of the world's leading magazines wrestle with this issue and are solving the problem in different ways. We have to work against to the trend and concentrate on the tendencies rather than the events.

Finparty.ru

Secondly, it is quite understandable that editorial boards and sources are facing certain censorship pressure. Very few well-known officials or businessmen will speak honestly about Ukraine for a news story. And the texts will often just refer to anonymous sources which makes the task even more complicated. It is therefore necessary to find stories about Ukraine that require reflection and take a deeper perspective to write them.

Kommersant-Vlast magazine is very small and only has a staff of six people. As things stand now, it is necessary to either have employees very mediocre stories write without a break, which will more or less present a topic, or to publish occasionally good texts on various subjects. Hence, the stories about Ukraine in Kommersant-Vlast magazine can be counted on one hand, and some of them are of very high quality. Of course, we sometimes get angry responses from readers. This is bad, and we are certainly falling short of our target in this respect.

Do you think that the Russians are not reading as much as they used to?

Reading what? If you mean books and long texts, then my answer is, probably, yes. I don’t know the statistics, but my personal contacts attest to it. Do Russians read Facebook more and keep up with the flow of information? My friends and acquaintances – definitely yes. Does it help people to better understand what is happening? You are in the stream of events, but it takes you away. It’s rather hard to poke your head out and look around to see what’s going on.

The number of young people who are getting increasingly interested in politics, including international relations, is growing. What would you advise them to read?

I am a historian by training, so it seems to me that historical works are very interesting to read, namely books of the French Annales School: Marc Bloch, Lucien Febvre. They present important information for international affairs experts too. They teach thinking and researching facts. As for the media, I would recommend reading Kommersant. I may be biased, but its department of international politics is objectively the best in Moscow. The best, in my opinion, international journalist in the country – Elena Chernenko – works there. By the way, she holds a PhD in History and is a graduate of the Department of Source Study – she has no rivals in meticulously processing the facts.

I would recommend reading Slon.ru – there are very good publications. Russia in Global Affairs magazine, the RIAC site. I would recommend reading newspapers and news that are not directly related to foreign policy, because the latter is inseparable from the economy. I read Vedomosti every day . Of course, it is necessary to read the major newspapers of the world, namely the New York Times and the Financial Times. Perhaps the main problem of the Russian elite and Russians in general is that we think very locally. Even intelligent people think in what could be called the Russian context. As a result, we have to respond to things like the “shale revolution”. Although the Financial Times wrote about it a few years ago, for us, including many people in the elite, these factors from the outside world come out of the blue.

We all know that Russia has signed an important gas agreement with China. Do you think that we are ready to cooperate closely with that country or are afraid of it?

I believe that we have been afraid for quite a long time, and for no good reason at that. The myths about Chinese hordes in the Far East and Siberia hold no water statistically. It makes sense to visit Vladivostok or Khabarovsk to see the reality. There has been a breakthrough and China has become our largest trading partner. But what I find somewhat worrying is that Russia went the length of it out of despair, as a result of a quarrel with the West, and it's not so much a sound strategy of integration with Asia, as a least-evil solution.

Nationwide Contest for Young Foreign-Affairs
Journalists

Can Russia trust China?

The Chinese are good at building relationships, and they understand that to make a quick buck and spoil the relationship is quite shortsighted. Russia is one of the few neighbors with whom Beijing enjoys normal relations. Therefore, the Chinese will be in no hurry and will try to get what they consider theirs systematically and over a rather extended period of time. This is normal: we have to learn to do the same.

We do not know how to do it yet?

From what I can see, we are not very good at it. We are not very good so far as thinking strategically, understanding what our priorities, as well as benefits and risks, are, and how to get from point A to point B. We zig and zag from situation to situation and there are many reasons for that. But we must learn and it is never too late to do it.

Prepared for publication by RIAC Program Assistant Maria Smekalova and RIAC Portal Coordinator Daria Khaspekova