The Kyiv Post editorial staff went on strike to protest censorship attempt by owner.
The Kyiv Post editorial staff reached an agreement with the newspaper’s owner on April 20 after a five-day strike over the chief editor’s dismissal, which journalists said was the result of him resisting attempted censorship.
The tentative settlement was made by creating an editorial board consisting of four persons, including ex-chief editor Brian Bonner with Roman Olearchyk, James Marson and Katya Gorchinskaya, to jointly run the newspaper and its two websites.
“This temporary solution allows us to continue working as normal while we continue clarifying the details of a long-term solution,” Kyiv Post journalists and the publisher Mohammad Zahoor said in joint statement.
This temporary solution allows us to continue working as normal.”
– Mohammad Zahoor, Kyiv Post publisher.
Zahoor, the British owner of ISTIL Group, also reaffirmed his promise of “non-interference in editorial policy by himself and his company” in the same statement.
Nataliya Ligachova, head of Telekritika media watchdog, said she couldn’t recall another public conflict between the owner and the editorial team of a newspaper in Ukraine that led to mutual concessions and praised both Zahoor and the Kyiv Post journalists for the outcome.
Kyiv Post owner Mohammad Zahoor (in sunglasses) on April 20 explains the agreement that ended his dispute with journalists over attempted censorship. (Joseph Sywenkyj)
It’s a very important precedent.”
– Nataliya Ligachova, head of Telekritika media watchdog.
“It’s a very important precedent,” Ligachova said.
Viktoria Siumar, head of the Institute of Mass Information media watchdog, said the incident and its resolution provides other Ukrainian media with a good example of how to solve similar problems in their newsrooms.
“A professional editorial staff, a public position and a joint position” helped the Kyiv Post journalists to stand by their beliefs, Siumar said. “This is an example that quality journalism is able to defend itself.”
Zahoor, who bought the Kyiv Post for $1.1 million in 2009, told the newspaper’s team on April 20 that he would be ready to sell them the newspaper for only $1 if the journalists could raise $2.4 million to pay off its debts.
Bonner said it is possible Zahoor will decide not to sell the Kyiv Post if it regains its traditional profitability, while the option of running the newspaper by the journalists themselves should also be considered.
“We have a lot of interesting challenges ahead of us,” Bonner said.
A professional editorial staff, a public position and a joint position helped the Kyiv Post journalists to stand by their beliefs. This is an example that quality journalism is able to defend itself.”
– Viktoria Siumar, head of the Institute of Mass Information media watchdog.
He added that both the publisher and the editorial team now need to leave the conflict behind and rebuild mutual trust.
“We give credit to Mr. Zahoor for reaching the settlement,” Bonner said.
Bonner was sacked on April 15, he said, after refusing Zahoor’s request to withdraw an interview with Mykola Prysyazhnyuk, the agriculture minister.
The minister had commented on controversial issues of state control over grain exports as well as the ownership of Khlib Investbud, a partly state-owned company with unknown private investors that was granted substantial grain quotas in January.
Bonner said Zahoor requested late on April 14 to see the story if the paper had already been sent to the printer.
Early on April 15, “Zahoor called me at home, expressing dissatisfaction with the story and asked me to not publish it,” Bonner told the Kyiv Post.
“And I refused,” he added, noting that it was the first time Zahoor ever interfered in the newspaper’s editorial work during the publisher’s nearly two years of ownership.
Later that morning, Bonner was fired. Kyiv Post journalists went on strike, demanding Bonner’s return.
Zahoor, on the other hand, told daily newspaper Kommersant that his request to kill the interview with Prysyazhnyuk came because he thought it was “raw, unprepared and flabby” and his decision to sack Bonner was also due to differences on editorial policy.
We give credit to Mr. Zahoor for reaching the settlement.”
– Brian Bonner, senior editor, head of the editorial board.
“I considered we needed more social themes and advertisement. The newspaper and website have to bring profit. But Bonner liked the hot political news more,” Zahoor said.
Meanwhile, Bonner said he believes his dismissal was sparked by the controversial topic of the interview.
He said he received calls from officials from Zahoor’s ISTIL Group, which owns the Kyiv Post, with concerns about the “hard interview” on April 11.
Vlad Lavrov, one of the Kyiv Post journalists who interviewed Prysyazhnyuk, said the minister told the journalists to “think” before writing the story.
Depending upon how it was written, the story could either attract investors, or do the opposite, he said.
Prysyazhnyuk later praised the published interview, in a statement posted on his ministry’s website, and denied pressuring Zahoor or the Kyiv Post newsroom over the story.
The dispute was widely covered by Ukrainian and world media. A group of U.S. senators and the Reporters Without Borders media watchdog were among those who expressed concern.
Meanwhile, both sides were busily negotiating a solution, reached on April 19, after Zahoor met with three Kyiv Post editors and agreed to let Bonner return as a member of the editorial board.
On April 20, Kyiv Post staff resumed work, ending a five-day strike. Zahoor met the editorial staff, answered their questions and called the conflict a misunderstanding.
Zahoor also said he hadn’t received any pressure from the Agriculture Ministry or the minister himself over the story.
Censorship is mainly carried out through the owners of the media.”
– Viktoria Siumar, head of the Institute of Mass Information media watchdog.
While the publisher and journalists still have different views of what happened, the incident sparked questions as to whether a publisher has the right to call for an article to be removed, and whether that amounts to censorship.
A number of Ukrainian journalists, speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear for their jobs, told the Kyiv Post that their editors would occasionally pull stories when asked by their owner or by the company management.
“No one would make much of a fuss about it,” one journalist said.
Media activist Siumar said that strong influence by the authorities on journalists through media owners is common.
“Censorship is mainly carried out through the owners of the media,” she said.
Siumar said that censorship, according to current legislation, only takes place if government authorities put direct pressure on a media outlet.
But she added that newly adopted laws that come into force on May 10 consider any kind of ban on publicly important information, regardless who applies the pressure, as possible censorship carrying criminal liability.
Читайте об этом на www.kyivpost.ua
Read also ‘Public airing’ editorial.
Kyiv Post staff writer Oksana Grytsenko can be reached at [email protected].
