VZCZCXRO4348
PP RUEHDBU RUEHLN RUEHPOD RUEHSK RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHMO #1223/01 1341318
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 141318Z MAY 09
FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 3258
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MOSCOW 001223 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PINR RS SOCI
SUBJECT: RUSSIA - "TO THE BARRIER" NO MORE 
 
¶1. (SBU) Summary.  The decision in late April to pull 
Vladimir Solovyev's program, "To the Barrier," from the 
airwaves stirred controversy among Moscow's commentariat, 
reflecting the often conflicted attitude toward the host and 
his contradictory role as both regime advocate and critic. 
The reasons for shuttering the program, as always, are 
unclear, with NTV network maintaining "business reasons" 
drove the cancellation. Others saw Solovyev's activity as a 
hired gun in the murky elite politics as a more convincing 
explanation, pointing to his attacks on Medvedev's legal 
reforms and his choice to head the Moscow Arbitration Court, 
as the trigger for the Kremlin backlash. The program was 
canceled only weeks before the Kremlin proposed a new system 
for selecting judges to the Constitutional Court by 
Presidential appointment (with approval from the Federation 
Council) -- indirect vindication of Solovyev's accusations 
that Medvedev was seeking to put the courts under his 
control. Whatever the reason, closing the show removes the 
last rare bit of spice from Russian television's menu of 
politically-managed, plain vanilla programming.  End summary. 
 
To the Barrier! 
--------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) On April 28, the management of the 
Gazprom-controlled NTV channel announced without explanation 
that Vladimir Solovyev's program, "To the Barrier," would no 
longer be aired as of May 1.  The program pitted two 
opponents in usually vociferous debate on a specific topic, 
while a counter tolled the number of callers, phoning in to 
support one or the other of the participants (the one who 
garnered the most "won" the debate).  The last program on 
April 23, which set the mercurial pit-bull of Russian 
politics, Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, against the more 
mild-mannered, liberal former Deputy Head of the Federal 
Agency for Environment Oversight Oleg Mitvol on the issue of 
political party development in Russia, typified the program's 
style:  flashy, contemporary, yet strident. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Behind the scenes, the show was carefully managed to 
hew to an approved Kremlin line. Center for Journalism in 
Extreme Situations head Oleg Panfilov described to us the 
careful message management that Solovyev and his production 
team used to massage the final production, shown to Moscow 
and other central Russian viewers.  As a participant in one 
of the shows, Panfilov noted that the director gave careful 
instructions to the audience (mainly students) as to when to 
applaud -- usually in support of Solovyev's commentary. 
Moreover, he claimed that the "points" system was manipulated 
to show support for one particular point of view; the show 
was shown first in the Far East; edited (to remove 
particularly "offensive" material"); and then the call-in 
tally was re-formulated to tilt in favor of the Kremlin line. 
 Thus, Panfilov noted, a participant could "win" the popular 
vote in Vladivostok, but would lose when the show aired in 
Moscow.  Panfilov alleged that Solovyev took direction from 
"the Kremlin" even during the course of the filming. 
 
The Reason Why 
-------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Solovyev has publicly explained NTV's closure 
decision as reflecting "business considerations" -- a claim 
he made on his radio program on station "Silver Rain" as well 
as on his blog.  Yet, in Russia's media culture, the 
financial bottom line matters far less than the political 
line, leading many here to look for hidden, political motives 
to explain the program's cancellation.  Perhaps the easiest 
answer is that Solovyev's polarizing personality and penchant 
for getting enmeshed in political controversies (with 
allegations that he profited well from taking particular 
stances) created enemies who finally managed to shut him down 
-- at least on television. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Given Solovyev's close connections to Putin and his 
team, our contacts surmise that the decision to pull the plug 
on "To the Barrier" could only have come from within the 
tandem.  The prevailing theory is that Medvedev and his team 
were the driving force behind the decision, perhaps as a 
warning to Solovyev.  Ekho Mosvky Editor Aleksey Venediktov 
said that shortly before NTV announced the program's closure, 
President Medvedev had had a conversation with Gazprom Media 
CEO Nikolay Senkevich about Solovyev's inquiry in connection 
with Valeriya Adamova's nomination as the chairman of the 
Moscow Federal Court of Arbitration in mid-April. 
(Medvedev's classmate, Adamova was confirmed as chairman of 
the court in early May, replacing Lyudmila Maykova, who had 
been dismissed for ethical violations because of an 
investigation also initiated by Solovyev.)  Following 
Adamova's nomination, Solovyev sent a letter to the Judges' 
Supreme Qualifications Board questioning the sources of her 
 
MOSCOW 00001223  002 OF 002 
 
 
income and housing property.  Venediktov said that Solovyev 
made inquiries both on Maykova and Adamova in the interest of 
another, unnamed candidate for the chairmanship. Solovyev 
knew Adamova enjoyed Medvedev's support, but he could not 
step back because he had already made commitments and perhaps 
accepted money from the candidate.  Whether this is true or 
not, Venediktov insisted that "To the Barrier" was shut down 
hours after Medvedev's phone call to Senkevich.  According to 
Venediktov, if NTV wanted to close it down for commercial 
reasons, there was no need to this now because Solovyev 
contract was expiring on July 1 anyway. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Center for Political Technologies analyst Tatyana 
Stanovaya, like Venediktov, also sees Medvedev and his 
supporters as likely culprits in the decision to cancel "To 
the Barrier."  She notes that Solovyev's blog took a 
particularly nasty tone in discussing the President on April 
15, making negative comparisons to Putin and poking fun at 
his penchant for fat neckties.  Solovyev also raised concern 
that Medvedev sought "to bring the judiciary under the 
control of himself and his friends" -- allegations that 
preceded the Kremlin's announced proposal this week to have 
the President appoint judges to the Constitutional Court. 
Moreover, she notes that Solovyev's attack on Adamova may 
also have ruffled feathers within the NTV management and its 
parent company, Gazprom-Media, since Adamova's husband, Oleg 
Adamov, was the first deputy general director of NTV and an 
advisor to the general director of Gazprom-Media.  In short, 
Solovyev may well have bitten the hand that kept him so well 
fed. 
 
Admirers and Detractors 
----------------------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) Amongst the more liberal-minded commentators, the 
reaction has been mixed between lamentations about the 
closure of the last vestige of television pluralism and a 
certain schadenfreude over the perceived setback for one of 
the regime's unabashed public advocates.  New Times Deputy 
Editor Yevgenia Albats essentially gave "good riddance to bad 
rubbish," dismissing Solovyev as a lobbyist for hire and his 
program as a public farce.  She questioned his motives and 
professional integrity, citing Solovyev's "award" from the 
Russian Media Watch as Russia's "most corrupt journalist." 
(In his defense, Solovyev's blog claims that the Media Watch 
is funded by players connected to Yukos, noting that none of 
the journalists that Khodorkovskiy bought to promote his 
agenda in the early 2000s were on the list.) 
 
¶8. (SBU) Others, however, are less categorical about Solovyev 
and his program.  Even Oleg Panfilov -- clearly not a fan of 
Solovyev himself -- decried the loss of "To the Barrier" as 
the last mainstream television program that aired views from 
across the political spectrum (within certain limits, of 
course) and gave liberals an opportunity to criticize the 
government, even if the playing field was tilted to favor the 
state.  Few here deny Solovyev's talent for framing current 
issues and providing a rostrum for sometimes-sharp political 
disagreement. 
RUBIN