Such attitudes are expected from businesspeople and officials schooled in the Soviet Union or even in modern-day Russia, where Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has throttled real journalism – especially on the national TV airwaves – during his 12 years (and counting) of authoritarian rule.

But sources from Western Europe and America should know better, unlike the Ukrainian oligarchs, politicians and government officials who still enforce a loyalty code before granting interviews.

Even these tame interviews are often followed up by press secretaries or PR spin doctors who want to airbrush out remarks that they think will harm their client-bosses. About a year ago, a Ukrainian opposition leader who fashions his image as a modern democrat, refused to give an interview to the Kyiv Post because we wouldn’t submit the questions in advance or let him edit the answers.

At other times, some sources try to select which journalist they will allow to attend an event or try to limit attendance to a photographer only – expressly so that no journalist shows up to ask pesky questions.

The Kyiv Post refuses to attend such events under these circumstances. The editors will decide who gets the assignment, not the sources.

Unfortunately, too many press outlets in Ukraine give in to these unreasonable demands to the detriment of independent journalism, which is a cornerstone of democracy

The Kyiv Post does not. Consequently, we have paid a short-term price through lost interviews and lost advertising revenue.

But we believe that independent journalism is best for business in the long term, as well as our advertisers and our readers, in the long run.

What is the reason for the Kyiv Post’s policy?

It’s simple: We want what we write to be trusted by the public. That requires, at a minimum, a clear separation between advertising and news stories. When it comes to news, journalists are paid to make judgments about what the story is and where the truth lies.

We are not stenographers who exist to dutifully take down notes and unquestioningly write one side of the story.

A newspaper’s policy, editorial direction and budget are set by its owner.

Ours is Mohammad Zahoor, a British citizen from Pakistan who spends considerable time in Kyiv. Zahoor has decided that the Kyiv Post will practice independent, fair, ethical and non-partisan journalism, a fortunate circumstance since probably every journalist at the newspaper would not work under any other conditions.

This can and does make life uncomfortable for the newspaper’s owner, CEO, lawyers and advertising managers on occasion – as well as the journalists, since we seem to be constantly swimming upstream.

Sometimes sources ask to see all questions before the interview. We do tell sources why we want to interview them. But a true interview is a live exchange and, often, we don’t know where it’s going to lead or what questions we might follow up with.

One argument sources make for seeing our stories before publication is to ensure accuracy.

This is not a good argument, since Kyiv Post journalists are encouraged to either record the conversation, or go over the information with sources if they have any doubts about what was said or whether it was on or off the record.

But again, this is the journalist’s call. In the online age, mistakes can be fixed quickly and easily.

But we have found out from painful experience that the quotes often land in the hands of PR experts or press spokespeople who want to do more than verify accuracy – they want to change the interview.

Sources sometimes argue that, under Ukrainian copyright law, they are co-owners of the story and, as such, must approve the content and publication. This is not true, especially for public officials or stories about public issues, according to what media lawyers have told staff writer Vlad Lavrov.

Moreover, we can’t force people to talk to us. We are told “no comment” every day. But if people want their side of the story in a Kyiv Post article, they have to play by the same rules practiced by the world’s best and most reputable newspapers.

There are still many ways, however, to influence coverage. After all, journalists and sources are human and we’ve all said things that we regret and would like to retract. What’s the best way to influence journalists’ decisions in these cases?

Threats, payoffs and gifts don’t work with us. A persuasive argument does. It helps if the source has a direct, cordial and professional relationship with our journalists or editors.

Kyiv Post chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected].

Читайте об этом на www.kyivpost.ua