Genre: Military / Weapons / Politics / Tech / Documentary 2020
Konstantin Dushenov on Medvedev's resignation, Mishustin's appointment and the president's message to the Federal Assembly. Why did this happen right now.
Genre: Politics / Social / Documentary 2020
When are Russians going to be fined for explosive mixtures like fermented wine? And why are there so many domestic explosions?
All about the real prototypes of the most memorable barrels from fantastic blockbusters!
Why did the daughter of the murdered General Soleimani predict dark days for crazy Trump? Should we expect a dangerous confrontation?
Forecast 2020: what do military analysts say? Wait for war or peace? Will the dollar crash? And what will happen to the ruble?
Genre: Politics / Documentary 2018
The devastating war in Syria, the crisis in Yemen and the ongoing chaos in Iraq. The violence in the Middle East is portrayed as part of an ancient battle between the Sunni and Shiite sects of Islam. The documentary shows how this dangerous feud plunged the Middle East into violence to unimaginable levels. The film uses exclusive footage filmed in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon.
Genre: Business & Finance / Politics
On December 21, Donald Trump put his signature under a package of sanctions against Nord Stream 2, which is 99% completed. Why are the Americans trying to prevent the launch of Russia's most important energy project? What are the options for circumventing US sanctions? And what strategic decision will Moscow make in the near future? The Swiss company Allseas, whose ships were laying the pipeline along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, has already demanded an explanation from the US administration. But will the Europeans have enough political will to complete the project and not be afraid of American sanctions? In the global energy market, the United States is playing in two directions at once. Experts are sure that the maximum plan for the Americans is to disrupt all the most intensive deliveries of Russian gas on the European continent. Who actually won and who lost from the new gas contract between Russia and Ukraine? And how does the US plan to capture the European gas market?
Exclusive! Found the hero of the military conflict with Georgia, who was considered dead? First interview after the incident!
A flamethrower weapon that is hard to imagine! What are the Pinocchio and Solntsepek complexes capable of?
Kremlin psychics. Sensational revelations by a participant in a terrible deed!
Why do they knock on neighbors and even relatives in the States? And why don't Americans feel sorry for their wives?
Genre: Politics
Genre: Politics
All these countries gained independence after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the socialist system. What national interests did they have to give up for the sake of friendship with America, what consequences has this already led to and more, perhaps, will lead to in the future? About this - in the series of documentaries "Limited Sovereignty".
Genre: Military / Politics / Social
On what motorcycles did the Red Army fight in World War II? And what is real extreme?
Why do Western stars work for private cooperatives of Russian civil servants? And what was their fate in the end?
Why do people play with death and how does such an extreme usually end?
How were military telepaths prepared in the USSR and the USA?
The story of the escape to Syria and the return of Moscow State University student Varvara Karaulova has spread not only in Russia, but throughout the world. The girl was convicted of trying to join a terrorist organization and sentenced to four and a half years in prison. In this confessional documentary, Varvara and her parents look back and rethink everything that happened to them.
25 668
"Square of Broken Hopes". Documentary movie
Four years have passed since Ukraine entered the Euromaidan. It is still not clear who opened fire on the protesters and who is responsible for the police casualties. The authors tried to find an answer to this question and came to sensational conclusions.
32 458
37 994
"Crimea. Sky of Motherland. Documentary about the military pilots
A film about military pilots who, after the collapse of the USSR, had to make a difficult choice when their regiment, along with Crimea, went to Ukraine. Take an oath to a new country or leave your native airfield to the north, leave your apartments and family? How to fight against former fellow soldiers? Recent events have again forced the pilots to think about these issues ...
1 114 374
fourth
Channel One presents a unique project by the famous American director Oliver Stone - the documentary "Putin" - about one of the most influential players in the world political arena.
1 401 149
Putin. Documentary by Oliver Stone. Part third
The famous American director Oliver Stone has been talking with Russian President Vladimir Putin for two years. Now Channel One viewers have a unique opportunity to watch the Putin documentary. Watch online on the First Channel website all episodes of Oliver Stone's film about Russian President Vladimir Putin.
1 761 601
Putin. Documentary by Oliver Stone. Part second
3 241 689
Putin. Documentary by Oliver Stone. Part first
Channel One presents a four-episode documentary by the famous American director Oliver Stone "Putin". Watch online on the First Channel website all episodes of Oliver Stone's film about Russian President Vladimir Putin.
75 371
Each of the major TV channels has several talk shows where social and political topics are discussed. On "Russia 1" he broadcasts "Duel" and "Evening with Vladimir Solovyov", the talk show "60 Minutes" with Olga Skabeeva and Evgeny Popov is also broadcast there. The talk show "First Studio" with Artem Sheinin became the flagship of the socio-political block of Channel One. He, along with Ekaterina Strizhenova and Anatoly Kuzichev, hosts the daytime talk show "Time Will Tell". On NTV during the day, “Meeting Place” with Andrey Norkin and Olga Belova is aired, and on the TV Center channel in the evenings they show “The Right to Vote” with Roman Babayan, as well as “The Right to Know” with Dmitry Kulikov.
It is enough to look at these and other political shows to notice: the same people wander from show to show. Moreover, some of them are experts on almost all issues. The structure of the show, themes, and techniques are also repeated. Afisha Daily decided to look into these and other features of discussions on Russian political talk shows.
Release dated March 27, 2017. Theme: "At the scene of the crime." The program is dedicated to Ukraine. Presenter Artem Sheinin appeals to the reaction to the murder of Voronenkov, US Senator John McCain. After that, a discussion unfolds.
Leonid Smekhov
Business coach, teacher of oratory at the MBA at the IBDA RANEPA, author of the book "Popular Rhetoric"
Thanks to the image of the presenter, a feeling is created: the program is being broadcast by a “man from the people”, a kind of boorish-rude native of the proletarian environment. Scheinin rudely devalues McCain as a speaker, citing the argument: "I understand that McCain spent a long time in a cell in Vietnam, where he was beaten regularly." This is labeling "not quite a mentally healthy person."
One of the participants in the program, Igor Drandin, agrees with McCain's words about Russia's involvement in the murder, recalling the example of Alexei Navalny: "As soon as you talk about Putin and corruption, you are immediately sent to jail." Other speakers begin to interrupt him, claiming that in America, Navalny would have been imprisoned for 15 years for rallies. This is a manipulative, unverifiable statement - a trick called "imposed consequence" when the chain of reasoning is hidden, and the emphasis is on the conclusion. The host labels the interlocutor “you are now talking like McCain”, ignores counter questions and uses an authoritarian trick - repeats the same phrase until the interlocutor gets tired and falls silent. The host also uses other tools to control the dialogue: gives commands to the speakers; lowers the pace of speech and increases the emphasis on words, which makes his speech more weighty; gets personal, directly accusing the opponent of lying.
When Drandin is already off balance, trying to outshout his opponents, he looks like a naughty child. At this point, the rest of the program participants begin to behave like educators who are trying to calm him down from the position of an "adult".
An employee of a socio-political talk show of one of the central channels
The expert wished to remain anonymous.
Opposition speakers are the biggest problem for these kind of talk shows. The leadership wants new faces, but at the same time you need to be absolutely sure that this “liberal light” will not say too much. Especially if the program is live. Of course, there is a stop list, and it is periodically supplemented, in particular, due to "tired, too much on the air." These "light liberals" can be counted on the fingers. They are all royalty, that is, it is their job to go around TV channels and portray enemies in a mode that is safe for the channel.
Artem Sheinin is generally a strange character. He could still be tolerated when he was the shadow head of the channel's political broadcasting. But after the departure of Pyotr Tolstoy to the State Duma, Sheinin apparently decided to demonstrate the height of professionalism in conducting political talk shows. Well, in his opinion, of course. This style of transmission is generally Sheinin's manner of communication. The appearance of Anatoly Kuzichev as a co-host in the show "Time will tell", in general, fits into the concept. Under the guidance of Sheinin himself, they were looking for someone who would resemble Sheinin without overshadowing him.
Release dated February 21, 2017. Topic: Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called on Europe to tighten sanctions against Russia because it recognized the documents of the DPR and LPR. Conversation with Vyacheslav Kovtun, who is presented as a Ukrainian political scientist.
Leonid Smekhov
The host sets the framework in advance in which the audience will perceive the video with Poroshenko. Immediately after watching, he once again points out the incompatibility of Poroshenko's statements with his status and religious beliefs. It is important that the statement of the President of Ukraine is taken out of context: neither the situation, nor the identity of the interlocutor, nor the background is known. It is also impossible to say for sure that Poroshenko uttered the insult - it sounds from behind the scenes. Kovtun is trying to clumsily justify Poroshenko, instead of shifting the focus or even transferring the game to the opponent’s field (the favorite speech device is “the fool himself”). He does this belatedly, recalling the remarks made by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during a press conference with a Saudi Arabian counterpart.
"Evening with Vladimir Solovyov" on "Russia 1"
Issue dated May 16, 2017. The topic of the program: “The ban on social networks in Ukraine. Medicine in Russia. Cultural extremism". Vladimir Solovyov and the guests again oppose the Ukrainian political scientist Vyacheslav Kovtun.
Leonid Smekhov
Solovyov acts in the habitual image of a cynic intellectual, increasing the persuasiveness of his statements by listing names and facts. He responds to Kovtun with manipulative tricks: sometimes he sticks a label, reducing the authority of the interlocutor; sometimes appeals to other people - Shoigu, Zyuganov and Zhirinovsky and their supposed reaction; then goes to direct accusations. In the future, even antics are used against Kovtun to devalue his words and seize the initiative. He is eventually hammered again with a series of accusations. Under them, he temporarily drowns.
TV show employee
The TV shows really played with the topics of Ukraine and Poroshenko. The viewer has long been unnerved by such a statement of the question, because it resembles a transfusion from empty to empty. When foreign policy topics are a priority on the Zvezda TV channel of the Ministry of Defense, this is at least somehow understandable. In the case of the first button and "Russia" - no.
Topics for talk shows (especially daily ones) are formed from the current agenda. Editors regularly offer interesting moves and twists, but from time to time it ends with the topic being canceled and the command: “Making Ukraine”. If some time ago this was interpreted as “Ukraine-actual”, then at the moment the actual is not forged with such frequency. Therefore, the topic, as well as the program, are out of thin air.
Issue dated April 6, 2017. Topic: "What is expected from Russia?". They discuss "unsubstantiated" accusations from the West of Russia's involvement in a chemical attack in Syria. Igor Korotchenko, a member of the Public Council under the Ministry of Defense, opposes American journalist Michael Bohm.
Leonid Smekhov
Korotchenko's statement is a typical sifting of facts: he omits something quite significant, but, on the contrary, brings something to the fore. He gives additional persuasiveness to his statement with a low rate of speech, harsh voice delivery, and accentuation. When Bom tries to interrupt Korotchenko, he immediately begins to insult him, as he would insult a criminal who has already been discovered, but is still trying to interfere with the course of the investigation. In the end, everything negative is attached personally to Bohm, as it usually happens on such programs.
Here it is worth noting the volume imbalance as an additional means of influencing the listener: in this dialogue, we hear Korotchenko's remarks much more clearly and better than Bohm's remarks. But how could it be the other way around? The opinion of the American is secondary here.
TV show employee
With Bohm, as well as with Kovtun, the situation is the same as with the fee oppositionists. It's just their job to go on talk shows and portray enemies (NTV dedicated a series of programs to foreign stars of Russian television: here it is. - Note. ed.). As for the fees, Bom, for example, received fifteen thousand rubles for the air two years ago. Kovtun was initially paid five, but soon the fee was raised to ten.
"First Studio" on Channel One
Release dated March 29, 2017. Topic: "Protest actions: how society should react to them." The guests talk about why the youth came out to protest on March 26.
Leonid Smekhov
Putin recognized the collapse of the USSR as the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, which means that such an interpretation of the events of 1991 can be recognized as the official and main one. Gennady Zyuganov, for obvious reasons, develops this theme, linking the events in Ukraine to it and using recognizable Soviet propaganda cliches: "orange provocateurs", "under far-fetched slogans" and so on. But this does not sound archaic: modern media often use the tools of speech influence from the past.
The image of Navalny instantly transforms into the image of the enemy thanks to the label "Fuhrer". In general, the event under discussion is presented by Zyuganov as something illegal, dangerous for the country and inexperienced youth who do not understand anything. But, thank God, there are law enforcement agencies that protect the country and do not allow it to fall apart. They, according to the leader of the Communist Party, smarter than the protesters.
The next speaker is Olga Timofeeva (member of the Russian Federation Council Committee on International Affairs. - Note. ed.) develops the image of an unthinking young Russian who can be drawn into a dangerous game by conscription. There is an appeal to a probable future, the topic under discussion is inflated to a global scale, and the organizers of the rallies immediately become enemies of the country, encroaching on its future. Bursting into a dialogue with sharp questions and claims of Sergei Ivanenko (member of the Yabloko party. - Note. ed.) the host neutralizes with such an argument: “Are you a democrat? Are you saying you respect the law? So respect the laws of our studio. The host says this with a disparaging tone, which weakens the statement and the oratorical image of Ivanenko.
TV show employee
Did the choice of topic have been influenced by the fact that the central channels were criticized on the Internet for hushing up the protest action? Usually they react selectively to criticism on the Internet, there is no system as such. It was rather the gravitation of the leading Sheinin. It cannot be argued that the program management is constantly offended by criticism of the Internet and they run to give "our answer to Chamberlain."
The presenter appeals to the words of director Alexander Sokurov, without saying a word about the fact that this phrase was taken, and also without mentioning that Sokurov has repeatedly criticized the actions of the Russian authorities.
Leonid Smekhov
The presenter undertakes to assert that on his program a decision is formed on the correct reaction of society to rallies. And again a statement about the dullness, stupidity of young people: if you go to a rally, it means that the wind is in your head.
Look: even such worthy and recognized people as Sokurov were able to join. He proposes to divide the protesters into those who cannot be touched under any circumstances, and the rest who can be touched. And now we will prove that everyone should be touched. Here is a video of cute girls. Here they are sitting. But a building in Odessa is on fire. This type of insinuation is called a "sandwich". We take a well-known fact - the girls at the rally, we take another well-known fact - the burnt house of trade unions in Odessa, and between them we put an unknown and unverifiable fact: the assertion that the house was burned, including these girls. The trick is usually persuasive.
TV show employee
The system of taking phrases out of context, unfortunately, is practiced all the time. Those who make the broadcast are aware that the person whose statement was distorted will never come to the program. And if he wouldn’t have gone anyway, then his hands are completely untied.
"Time will tell" on Channel One
Release dated July 21, 2017. Topic: "Why don't we give birth?". The program about the decline in the birth rate in recent years begins with a discussion of the recent vacation of the presenter in the Crimea.
Leonid Smekhov
Again sifting the facts: we talk about one thing, we omit the other. There is an interesting point in the discussion of Crimea: childhood memories of the hosts about the taste of peaches. Firstly, these memories should cause the same reaction in the target audience of the program - consent, warm memories, nostalgia, and at the same time a desire to agree with the position of the presenters. And secondly, these memories are presented with an emphasis on the kinesthetic channel of perception: taste, sensations of flowing juice from a ripe fruit. This is done so that the viewer's imagination draws the right pictures, and does not deal with issues of prices and congestion of the beaches.
The national television award TEFI has exactly two nominations for information and analytical broadcasting (a program in this genre and its presenter), and through and through the political with its "Sunday Evening" is forced to compete (as it was at TEFI-2016) in the category "Evening talk show "With the shows "Revizorro" and "Let's Get Married" that are very far from politics. In this situation, however, there is nothing extraordinary - and after the update, TEFI has not yet figured out its categories (they change almost every year), and the politicization of domestic television - especially in prime time - leaves much to be desired.
Of course, there is news broadcasting: various "News", "Vesti", "Today" and "Events" go on the air several times a day, followed by final releases on the main events of the day.
But with the news, almost everything is clear, they are also in TEFI in separate nominations, and their format has remained unchanged almost since Soviet times. In addition, they enjoy constant success with the audience and regularly occupy almost the entire top 10 most popular programs of the week according to Mediascope (formerly TNS Russia), and only Eurovision or Voice can move them from the first places. Political talk shows, on the other hand, are not in the highest places in the ratings, which does not exclude rivalry between them outside of television awards.
Popular and not so popular
Vadim Takmenev with figurines after the TEFI award ceremony (2014)
Ekaterina Chesnokova/RIA NovostiPolitical talk shows should not be confused with copyright programs - like the show, which goes back to the program of the American TV presenter. Invented back in the 60s by Phil Donahue, the format of communication with the audience (and invited experts) to discuss topical issues is more often used for any social topics (for example, “Let them talk”). Extended newscasts that usually come out at the end of the week (such as "Sunday Time") still play in a different field than talk shows, although they can be similar to them.
The most popular talk show in the genre of politics has long been "Sunday Evening with Vladimir Solovyov", which airs late on Sunday evenings on Rossiya 1.
In the week from February 13 to 19, this program received a rating of 4.6%, and a share of 18.9%, took first place among social and political programs and became thirteenth overall (Moscow, audience 4+).
Also, two more Solovyov's programs often fall into the top ten of this section - the Evening, which is released on weekdays, as well as the Duel, in which the viewers make the politician they like the winner.
In addition, the repeated owner of TEFI with the Saturday Central Television (3.4% rating and 9.8% share), as well as two shows on the channel "" - "The Right to Know!" and the right to vote. And, of course, the gaining momentum "60 minutes" on "Russia 1" and "First Studio" on the First.
By the way, it was Takmenev and his program who won TEFI twice - in 2014 and 2016.
Discord Slot
Olga Skabeeva and Evgeny Popov (program "60 minutes")
Frame from the program / Russia 1The seven-hour slot is traditionally considered the very beginning of the evening prime - not the most prestigious, but already popular. On weekdays, part of the domestic channels assigned it to news programs: the 40-minute release of Segodnya did not start at 19.00, and the half-hour "Events" on "TV Center" and "News" did not start at 19.30. Since 2013, Rossiya 1 has been broadcasting Live with Boris Korchevnikov, who, in terms of the intensity of passions and the topics raised (scandals in show business and social issues), was a worthy rival of the Let's Get Married show, which goes on First since 2008. For a long time, this distribution seemed to suit everyone, but at the beginning of the 2016/17 season, Rossiya 1 decided to change the concept.
The new talk show 60 Minutes opened the evening prime time.
The show airs daily on weekdays at 18.50 and goes - including advertising - until the 20-hour issue of Vesti. It was positioned and is positioned as a socio-political one and is dedicated to the main topic of the past day, which is discussed by the hosts (spouses and) and invited guests of the program - political and public figures. As for "Live", he did not go anywhere, but simply moved along with Korchevnikov an hour earlier. Beyond prime.
The main competitor of "Russia 1" for about half a year did not notice changes in the grid of the neighboring channel.
And only in January 2017 it hit back - at six in the evening, the almost two-hour talk show "First Studio" with host Artem Sheinin began to air. The format turned out to be approximately the same as that of 60 Minutes - a discussion of the topics of the day with invited experts (but in the legendary Ostankino First Studio), but perhaps a little more detailed than that of Skabeeva and Popov. Due to the longer run time.
It's about the ranking
Artem Sheinin
First channelThe ratings of their programs on TV channels are treated very carefully. And even if for the First or "Russia 1" fluctuation in percentage is not fatal, any change still requires attention. So, according to the data, at the end of 2016, the Russia 1 channel became the leader with 12.9% (the previous year it was 12.7%) of the audience share, and the First became the second with 12.7% (in 2015 it was 13, 7%). The former, by the way, was the first to take not the most popular measures to take off the air shows that did not live up to expectations, such as, for example, the series The Other Side of the Moon - 2 or its own hockey cup.
The idea of "Russia 1" with a socio-political talk show at the beginning of prime time did not at first look like a serious attempt to turn the tide.
At the start, "60 Minutes" showed 3.2% of the rating and 12.4% of the share - indicators comparable to "Let's Get Married", and therefore not dangerous. In the end, "Live" had about the same numbers: for example, exactly a year ago, in February 2016, Korchevnikov's show had 2.8% and 10.3% (and television matchmakers - 4.0% and 13.1%). And during the release of "60 Minutes" there was no direct competition: television actively covered the elections and there was no time for possible weddings.
By the end of the year, however, the situation had changed: “60 Minutes” entered the top 3 best socio-political programs aired on weekdays (according to data), and at the beginning of 2017 they were already clearly ahead of “Let's Get Married” - 5.4 % and 17.2% versus 4.0% and 12.7%.
Now "First Studio" and "60 Minutes" compete almost on an equal footing. The program of the First Channel in the week from February 13 to 19 had a rating of 4.1%, and a share of 13.8%, the show of Rossiya 1 had 4.2% and 13.7%, respectively.
The parity between the two similar programs will apparently continue in the future. “Russia 1” is helped by the fact that after “60 minutes” “Vesti” begins and it is possible to maintain the continuity of the news and analytical agenda. The First has Andrei Malakhov's scandalous talk show “Let them talk”, which has been going on for a decade and a half and looks completely unsinkable. The audience, perhaps, only benefited from this rivalry: you can choose the presentation of relevant material to your taste - aggressive from 60 Minutes or calmer from First Studio.
The main victims in this struggle of ratings were the fans of the Let's Get Married show, which suddenly found itself in an unusual place (it now airs at 17.00) - not all viewers have time to get to the TVs from work by this time. True, the protest that swept through social networks was not paid attention to the First.