Victar Malisheuski: Whining as a trend of Belarusan non-state journalism

The famous blogger assumes that criticism in the “alternative Belarusan society” has long ago developed into whining, while most of the non-state media are trying to prove the axiom.

Victar Malisheuski’s open lecture “Unbearable easiness of whining” (the pun: Russian “bytija” (existence) is consonant to Russian “nytija” (whining) – EuroBelarus) that took place on December 3 within the frames of the “second season” of open lectures under the general name “The main question” quickly developed into a two-hour discussion. All the nuances of the lecture can be found at the webpage of the Flying University. Let us recall that the International Consortium “EuroBelarus”, the Flying University, and the “Belarusan magazine” were the organizers of the round of lectures.

The thesis about the two countries – one Belarus in state media and another Belarus in non-state media – is famous thanks to the joke “I want to live in the Belarus that is described at the Belarusan State TV”. And it is very uncomfortable to live in Belarus described by the independent media. According to Victar Malisheuski, the whining about “the alternative Belarus” appears to spite the image of the country promoted by the state media, especially at the TV as the most popular source of information.

At the lection Malisheuski proved that whining and negativism takes place due to assignment of “proving an axiom”. “Alternative society has used to looking for the proof of an axiom. The country is in the situation of dictatorship, journalism is impossible in such situation, neither are elections. Thus, we are going to make such journalism that is possible”, - claims Malisheuski.

After the lecture Victar Malisheuski answered several questions of the “EuroBelarus” Information Service.

- Do the problems discussed are only peculiar to Belarus? In Poland, for instance, the scene of the day will differ when presented by a liberal newspaper and a right wing one.

- Well, yes, in general it is only peculiar to Belarus. Outside Belarus one understands the difference between right wing and left wing newspapers; while here we have state media and non-state media, and the latter is absolutely impossible to understand. In Poland one knows for sure that this source belongs to some political force that lobbies something. Whereas here it is impossible to understand what the edition is lobbying. Indeed, this is the source of problem – media are confused with this system; they believe that the fact that they are struggling is already a feat. In Belarus to be a hero one only needs to be an independent journalist with no need to do anything further.

- We can’t expect the market to regulate the situation, as we don’t have one, do we?

- Well, we have a sort of market, but no one is working on it yet. Internet has more resources, but mostly is formed by the aggregators – and it is unclear where their content comes from. In result it turns out that all aggregators look alike and prevent each other from development. The market is transparent: you see how much, who, and for what is paying; while when we talk about donor aid you only do everything for reports about circulation, etc. And all these articles are written for being an opposition to authorities; when the article calls for changes. In result, the dialog between the authorities and some media happens.

- At the lecture a lot was said about positive versus whining. Does the whole problem lie in this?

- When I talk about positive I mean one of the mechanisms: abstaining from constant criticism, new ways to present the topic. The journalist always has the choice of whether to write about positive things (which is bad when there is dictatorship in the country) or not. It is a question, how to present it in a media somethingthat has always been writing about the need to change the existing authorities.