The Petrov case, freedom of speech and the innocence of Hachiko

Alexander Baraboshko, Vasily Krutchak and long-term employee of Vladimir Petrov’s projects Alexey Durnev pose while zigging with the Nazis

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

Journalist of the publication Glavnovosti, and former editor-in-chief of the publication LKSMU “New Wave” Vasily Muravitsky spent a whole year in a pre-trial detention center on charges of high treason. The charges have not yet been dropped, only the preventive measure has been changed. The basis for the arrest was publications in Russian publications. More precisely, correspondence with editors, where future materials and their content were discussed, is routine.

Meanwhile, the investigation saw this as an “order” from Russian curators, of course from the FSB. Not the most reasonable approach, but that's not the main thing. For in jurisprudence, the universality of law enforcement practices is much more important than the specific interpretations of certain legal incidents. Because the rules are the same for everyone.

And here a strange collision arises. A whole group of Ukrainian journalists and media figures never leave Russian talk shows: Vyacheslav Kovtun, Vadim Tryukhan, Yanina Sokolovskaya, Olesya Yakhno, Roman Tsymbalyuk - their names are legion. And all of them, of course, also coordinate their speeches. They also receive huge sums for their performances - much larger than those for which Muravitsky is being judged.

In part, these people are even more dangerous for the authorities than Vasily. Opposition publications rather confirmed the thesis about following the principles of democracy, and the mentioned media figures, on the contrary, are used by Russian propaganda to incite anti-Ukrainian sentiments within the country. They also demonstrate the corruption of Ukrainians, who are ready to allow Russian TV presenters to shout at them for money, insult them and the country live on air, acting as decorative patriots for whipping.

And there are also plenty of opponents of Bankova in Russian shows - not like Muravitsky, of course - respectable, high-status, integrated into the official opposition. The SBU does not bring any charges against them either.

Journalism in Ukraine – a workshop, or a mafia

So what's the deal? Why are the rules of the game so different? The answer is simple - all the people mentioned above, regardless of their beliefs and their declared positions, are part of a close circle of the media elite, formed long before the Maidan, and according to the principle “hand washes hand.” Colleagues and former colleagues, drinking buddies, wives and ex-wives, lovers and lovers' lovers, small amounts of debt, "jeans", kickbacks, cuts, and even minor setups and betrayals create one close circle, called the "fourth estate" - monolithic, as befits power.

Recently, Ukrainian society was touched by photographs of deputies Mosiychuk and Novinsky having a pleasant conversation. Everything is exactly the same in this circle. And it was formed long before the events of 2014 - in the wake of the journalistic protests of 2001-2004, when the “fourth estate”, which was just getting its taste, was allowed to feel like power. And this power provides immunity, stronger than that of a deputy.

Even if a criminal case is suddenly opened against Igor Guzhva, this does not mean at all that his media project “Country” will be closed or blocked. And its editor Svetlana Kryukova, having been detained while drunk driving, can even turn this story into a show. And all those who just yesterday were loudly indignant at the Kharkov motorist Zaitseva, who caused an accident at an intersection, unanimously admire the “witty” lightboxes “I’m drinking,” which the journalist placed throughout Kyiv. Because Zaitseva is not Kryukova - she may be a “major”, but she is no one in the information world.

Like Vasily Muravitsky, who worked, albeit as editor-in-chief, but for a pariah party that never learned how to cut budgets with the “fourth estate.”

All this could last forever, but as follows from the basics of dialectics, for every cunning ass, sooner or later there is a gimlet. And in this case, his role is played by President Poroshenko, who managed to successfully bend the first, second and third authorities, but so far has not been able to reach the fourth. And he seems to be trying to do just that.

Not surprisingly, the unscrupulousness and omnivorousness of the media world, which ensured Petro Poroshenko’s victory in the elections, has now turned into a problem for himself. You can pump millions into the media, and the result will be like in 2004 with President Kuchma and his then protégé. Because no matter how much you feed a donkey, a handshake is more valuable. Working for the owner will end sooner or later, and looking for a new one is through colleagues in the journalistic workshop. And Pyotr Alekseevich, who with his Channel 5 was behind the journalistic revolt of 2004, knows this like no one else.

And so, exactly on the day of searches in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and its primate, Bishop Paul, the society was shocked by a scandal. The military prosecutor's office reports the arrest of political strategist and TV presenter Vladimir Petrov and journalist Alexander Baraboshko. Also, a search was carried out at the apartment of anti-corruption journalist and blogger Vasily Krutchak. The suspects are charged with:

violation of the confidentiality of correspondence in relation to government or public figures using special means;

illegal collection, storage, use or distribution of confidential information about a person without his consent or dissemination of this information in public speech or in the media;

illegal collection, storage, use or distribution of confidential information about a person without his consent or dissemination of this information in public speech or in the media;

knowingly false information to the court, prosecutor, investigator or investigative body about the commission of a crime; influencing a law enforcement officer in order to interfere with the performance of his official duties or to achieve illegal decisions.

Also, according to the military prosecutor’s office, the suspects had access to ARMOR, Gart, GRVP and the Safe City integrated video surveillance system, as well as traffic of telephone connections and wiretapping of telephone conversations.         

The reason was the accusation that journalists organized false correspondence on social networks and dating sites in order to discredit a high-ranking National Police officer, Alexander Varchenko, who allegedly aggressively demanded sexual relations from KPI student Natalia Bureiko.

Of course, the guilt of Vladimir Petrov and Alexander Baraboshko has not yet been proven in court, but their previous activities clearly indicate the validity of the suspicions of law enforcement officers. After all, this is not the first dirty campaign where the victims were completely strangers, “little people” like Natalia Bureiko, whose destruction became a technological solution on the way to fulfilling an order, and simply a reason to straighten your shoulders, pushing the falling one.

However, what is most interesting here is the composition of the group, because we are not talking about comrades-in-arms within the dichotomy of power-opposition, or Maidan-anti-Maidan, but about representatives of groups that at first glance are opposite and hostile.

Thus, Vladimir Petrov was never a supporter of Maidan, Petro Pororshenko, or any other pro-government or nationalist party. He always positioned himself as an independent skeptic, cynical and merciless towards the powers that be, never shy about reaching into his pocket for a word.

All-Ukrainian fame was brought to Petrov by the scandal about “BYuT pedophiles” introduced through his blog - later the charges were torn to smithereens in court, and the main suspect, Dmitry Polyukhovich, was released. Polyukhovich spent 9 months behind bars.

Dmitry, however, was also a journalist, but of the outdated “Kuchma” formation at that time. But ex-wife Elena Polyukhovich and her common-law husband Artem Degtyarev, who stirred up a scandal, were directly related to the “fourth estate.” The latter worked as Boris Berezovsky’s representative in Ukraine, and Elena worked in Berezovsky’s “Bridge” project. Polyukhovich himself explained the scandal by the internal struggle between Prime Minister Tymoshenko and President Yushchenko, and Boris Berezovsky, a master of information hoaxes, decided in this way to play along with the presidential camp.

At the same time, the scandal was not brought up at all from Yushchenko’s circle - the political speakers who “pumped up” the scandal launched through Petrov’s account were regional deputy Vadim Kolesnichenko and lawyer Tatyana Montyan - that is, figures distant and even hostile to the conventional “party of all Maidans”.

Poster from the campaign against “pedophiles from BYuT”, organized through the account of Vladimir Petrov

Another significant figure, Alexander Baraboshko, on the contrary, became famous for being the first to organize an online broadcast from Euromaidan, and after his victory he became an adviser to the Minister of Information Policy Yuri Stets.

One of the significant episodes involving Baraboshko was the scandal with a Kyiv taxi driver who gave the journalist a lift. During the ensuing conversation, the taxi driver said that he considers himself Russian, but does not intend to leave the graves of his ancestors. He also spoke positively about the personality of Joseph Stalin, argued that the residents of Crimea were happy with joining the Russian Federation, and even expressed moral support for the separatist republics in the Donbass. Baraboshko, in turn, recorded the conversation on a tape recorder, and then, through complaints and administrative levers, achieved the dismissal of the driver. He proudly trumpeted his victory over the “separatist” driver in the media.

The third person involved in the investigation, Vasily Krutchak, was also traveling in the same taxi; no case has been brought against him yet. Krutchak is primarily known as a journalist-whistleblower, or as it is called in the professional community - a media killer. He has a number of striking campaigns against Ukrainian politicians and businessmen: Vadim Rabinovich, Pyotr Dyminsky, Mikhail Gavrilyuk, Oleg Lyashko, and others. And if Vladimir Petrov from the pages of his blog constantly insults “garbage”, acting as almost the last bearer of street morality, then Vasily Krutchak and Alexander Baraboshko are only engaged in writing denunciations, appealing to NABU and the prosecutor’s office, and the victims of their “Robinhood” It turns out not only the powerful of the world, but even ordinary taxi drivers.

It is obvious that such different people can be brought together into one group only by financial interest. Moreover, the unprincipled methods of organizing campaigns and the indiscriminate choice of clients and speakers are turning into a real danger for the authorities on the eve of the elections. After all, the administration remembers well that it was the journalist Mustafa Nayem who brought people to the Maidan and organized the overthrow of President Yanukovych.

And Petro Poroshenko, especially after the declaration of martial law, simply has no choice but to try to put in place the “fourth estate” that has lost all fear, accustomed to acting with openly mafia methods, and which has long ago turned into the most dangerous mafia, without defeating which it is not worthwhile even hope for re-election, or stabilization of the political course.

Constructed reality as a source of strategic destabilization.

However, it is not at all a fact that Petro Poroshenko will be able to deal with the “fourth estate” as gracefully as he did with the executive, legislative and judicial powers. After all, if you dig deep, he will definitely have to step on the tail of himself, his confidants, allies and even foreign curators. The mafia is strong precisely because anyone can turn to its services - even your partner, driver, or family doctor - and remain obliged to the grave. After all, any solution to the issue through the mafia is a deadly compromising evidence on the client himself. Therefore, it is not surprising that not only a friendly choir of fellow workers stood up for Petrov and his comrades, but also multimillionaire Garik Korogodsky, who vouched for Vladimir Petrov.

The question of whether the same friendship binds the eccentric businessman and political strategist is far from the only question that arises within the framework of the case. And not the most important one.

Garik Korogodsky guarantor of Vladimir Petrov

The campaign against Alexander Varchenko was not even built on a false interpretation of facts, but on the construction of a parallel reality, where a fake account on a dating site communicated with an SMM specialist who gained access to the pages of a fictitious victim.

This approach, however, did not at all prevent the organization of a very real campaign in the media, which even managed to bury Natalya Bureiko and her entire family in the public consciousness, and pinned the corpses on law enforcement officers. At the same time, even Bureiko’s fake friends were involved in stirring up the scandal, publishing a lengthy and alarming letter on the Nihilist website exactly one day before the whole story surfaced. Anatoly Shariy, let’s pay tribute to his professionalism, did not communicate with Bureiko’s “friends”.

And here it’s worth thinking about what other high-profile scandals were falsified from beginning to end, like the Bureiko case and the Polyukhovich case?

Here, for example, is the story of the alleged beating of Channel 5 journalist Olga Snitsarchuk and her friend, photojournalist Vlad Sodel, by an opposition rally security guard, Vadim Titushko. In reality, the situation looked like this: during the march of the united opposition, there was a clash between security from BYuT and radicals from Svoboda. During the scuffle, one of the security guards pushed away a journalist who had dangerously approached him at a time when stones and water bottles were flying towards him. Olga Snitsarchuk, of course, politicized the story by declaring an attack by “Yanukovych’s bandits” and providing a video recording in which the attack was not recorded. Meanwhile, the media community, which unanimously sided with the injured colleague, did not require evidence. The athlete-security guard was persecuted in the press, and as a result, he made a deal with the investigation, admitted unsubstantiated guilt, and received a suspended sentence.

Former European junior kickboxing champion Vadim Titushko was captured on video in a fighting stance, but no video of the attack was presented. Later, his name was used as a political technology

During the Euromaidan, the term “titushki” began to be used both in relation to participants in the Anti-Maidan movement, and in relation to incomprehensible hooligans coordinated by no one knows who are wreaking havoc. Later, the same “titushki” attacked protests in Donetsk, and the term was picked up by future “separatists.” Obviously, behind the introduction of this term there was political technology aimed at dehumanizing the opponent if he found the courage to give physical resistance.

By the way, political strategist Vladimir Petrov was in close proximity to the conflict between Titushko and Snitsarchuk. He drove a rented armored personnel carrier with a carrot in his hand, allegedly discrediting Arseniy Yatsenyuk, whose pages on social networks he previously managed.

Today it is difficult to say whether Petrov was involved in organizing the provocation and launching the term “titushki”, but it is obvious that the principle of constructing an alternative reality has been worked out 100% here - Vadim Titushko had nothing to do with Yanukovych and his “bandits”. And the bandits themselves, allegedly hired to disperse rallies and protests, also turned out to be a myth.

Or, here’s another story - a boy from Zaporozhye, who, according to numerous media publications, was refused a funeral service in the chapel of the UOC-MP. It was from this episode that a large-scale campaign against the “Moscow priests” was launched, which threatened to develop into a new round of civil confrontation.

Let me remind you that the suicide allegedly fell on the boy’s head, and on New Year’s Eve at that. Agree, the story looks very suspicious and resembles a story from a trash magazine from the 90s. Today, alas, it is no longer possible to confirm or refute it. None of the arguments will be accepted as evidence. However, it is obvious that if we are talking about media provocation, the UOC still could not talk about it out loud, since the argument “there was no boy” further undermined its image. Eventually, the child's parents were introduced to the public. And although they behaved somewhat strangely for a grief-stricken family, cursing the Moscow Church in vain, political technology was launched, and the idea of ​​​​seizing the Kiev-Pechersk and Pochaev Lavra, a year later, no longer seems like an absurd nightmare.

Alternative reality as a way of control

The above episodes, alas, indicate that the president himself is not averse to using the technology of constructing an alternative reality. This means that even in the conflict with the “fourth estate,” he set the goal not to completely destroy the mafia of those executing dirty orders, but to take it under his control.

It is not surprising that less than a week passed before bail was posted for Alexander Baraboshko, and he, following Petrov, found himself free. Thus, Petro Poroshenko is trying to pacify the “fourth estate” in the same way as, according to the description of the fugitive people’s deputy Onishchenko, he has already pacified the executive - to hang them with criminal cases and force them to work for himself: “He has criminal cases brought against almost all the deputies, he has hung everyone on a hook . This is the way he communicates in politics.”

And this, in my opinion, is a huge mistake by the president. Because deputies, burdened with business and responsibility to sponsors, can be intimidated, but for the “fourth” power, the biggest risk is to fly out of the community. And if it (the community) says “must”, the media figure will bluff to the last. Because he has nothing other than his workshop affiliation.

However, it seems that Petro Poroshenko does not understand this. And on the eve of the release of his colleague Baraboshko, Petrov broke his silence and reappeared on social networks. He declared the criminal case to be the revenge of the “finished” for the fact that he “did not hesitate to call them finished,” and promised to do so in the future. However, without indicating the circle to which this characteristic was addressed. Which, accordingly, means variability in the choice of this circle.

Petrov also thanked his colleagues who came to court, promised to help everyone, and for some reason remembered Hachiko. Strange mention. Because the Ukrainian media is anyone: provocateurs, informers, criminals, Nazi thugs, Mustafa Nayem and Bohdan Butkevich, but certainly not Hachiko.

Or is it Hachiko? However, in this case, every Ukrainian should remember that not only Petro Poroshenko, the US Embassy, ​​and radicals with cookies, but above all the “cute” Hachiko are to blame for all his troubles.