Journalists of Komsomolskaya Pravda list. “Marginality has become the general line. Why am I afraid of surgery

The seventh - the last - week of vision restoration according to the method of Professor Zhdanov. He did not relax, on the contrary, he increased the load! Exercise for the eyes - 7 times a day. I repeat the first FIVE exercises 10 times. Exercises 6 - 12 - ONE time. Palming (eye massage with palms) - as you get tired.

The finish

I already calmly read newspapers with the naked eye, texts on the monitor. I even print. And the hand is still reaching for the glasses. Looks like he's been around for 20 years. I see, I understand that these “crutches” are no longer needed, but I can’t part at all. I am looking for excuses to vilify for another day or two: I urgently need to submit an article, all of a sudden I won’t have time without them, I’ll slowly print. Another treacherous thought also spun in my head: maybe slightly extend the scheduled time, smoothly move from +1 to +0.75, and only then ... Professor Zhdanov explained the "strangeness" of my behavior. People who decide to restore their vision develop a psychological inferiority complex towards the end of classes. Especially the nearsighted. It seems that without glasses you will not see something very important in life. “Experience shows that at the finish line you must decisively take off your points. You suffer psychologically for a week or two, and then you forget about them. Vision will be restored.

I decided to "torment myself" away from my spectacled temptress - Claudia. Computer keyboards. I took a vacation for two weeks. And on Sunday, September 22, on the day of his 60th birthday, he waved to his small homeland 400 km from the capital. Left the laptop at home. And in order not to be tempted, I decisively broke the +1 points I bought quite recently. Although back in July it was problematic to read +2.5 prescribed by the doctor and I wore +3.

Why do I need them now? The experiment is over!

AT last years a hundred kilometers before his father's house, from the constant fixation of the situation on a difficult track, strong tension appeared in his eyes. I had to slow down, sharply break my eyes, rotate to reset the glazing. Now all 400 km eyes looked at the track tirelessly. No glazing. (Over the past three months, I have wound 400 km back and forth three times - the effect has been preserved.)

The second discovery was made the next morning in the village, going to the forest. I used to collect mushrooms without glasses. But now he noted with surprise that the grass, foliage, needles look brighter, more alive than before. I thought it was the night rain washed the forest. However, in the following campaigns, nature looked much more colorful. Not to mention the fact that he brought home more mushrooms than in previous seasons. (Although this fact, if desired, can be attributed to a rich harvest of boletus.)

It turns out that in just seven weeks I not only got rid of my senile presbyopia, began to read, work on a computer without glasses, as planned, but also improved my vision qualitatively. A pleasant surprise.

As Zhdanov predicted, in these two weeks I completely lost my spectacle inferiority complex. Returning to Moscow, he didn’t even remember about the eye “crutches”. As if he had not worn for two decades.

If I immediately took a vacation for a month, then in the countryside, deprived of the opportunity and DUTIES to print on a computer, I would have reached the goal of a week in 4, maximum 5. Law: the less you wear glasses, the faster your vision is restored! But I conducted the experiment in the real conditions of a big city. In working mode. Without changing anything in the schedule, lifestyle, habits, nutrition.

Don't waste your time!

Perhaps, main question beginners and those who are just planning to practice according to the Zhdanov method - where can I find time for training? So much, they say, written in the newspaper! Don't worry, friends. The professor and I specially gave detailed description training so that everyone understands what and how to do. It takes a little time to complete. If there is a passionate desire to get rid of glasses, is it really difficult to set aside several times a day for 5 - 7 minutes for palming, exercising?

Think about how much time you spend aimlessly every day at planning meetings, meetings, meetings, smoke breaks, in lines, commuting, etc. Use these lost hours and minutes wisely. Draw with your eyes on the walls, windows in meeting rooms, offices, savings banks, hospitals, shops, hairdressers, bus salons, subway cars ... One colleague reported the other day that in the gym he manages to train his eyes at the same time as his muscles.

Watch your favorite movie in the evening, transfer - bam! - at the most interesting place, an advertisement popped up. Calm down, citizens! Do not click the remote - it's useless. TV bosses agreed to run commercials simultaneously on different channels. Rub your palms until warm, close your eyes and surrender to palming. Let your eyes rest from the flickering screen. In advertising telepauses, you can also do eye exercises.

Again, remember - eye training must be strictly performed in increments until you lose points. Don't stop halfway. After a seven-week experiment, to consolidate my success, I continued to purposefully do gymnastics for the eyes and other exercises for another month. Gradually reduce the time and number of classes. Now I don't really do it anymore. Tired eyes at the computer - a three-minute palming! I go to the subway, minibus - purely on the machine, I do Zhdanov’s exercises in order to keep my form, not to waste time. Not every day. The weather will be clear - I am performing solarization in the sun. I really like this main exercise for relaxing the eyes (alas, Moscow rarely indulges on sunny days now). That's all my current activities.

Today, on Victory Day, we remember our veterans. And, of course, Leonid Korobov, the legendary war correspondent who worked for Komsomolskaya Pravda. Many of today's journalists would do well to learn from people like him - not to be afraid of anything, to be at the forefront and do their job, no matter what.

At first, they did not want to take him as a correspondent - he was the secretary of the military department and had to “grow up”. But Korobov did not wait, and went to work. They searched the editorial office of the young officer. And a few days later, Marshal Voroshilov himself called the editorial office: - “Here your correspondent is interviewing me, don’t scold him.” Of course, the editors appreciated the act - it was almost impossible to get close to Kliment Efremovich. But our colleague did. After that, of course, he was hired.

Leonid Korobov was a unique journalist. It was he who, when the Soviet Union and Germany were still friends, interviewed Hitler in Munich. He first met with the writer Alexander Kuprin - immediately after his return from exile. He made reports about the rescue of the Chelyuskinites. When the first metro line was opened in Moscow, he jumped into the car where Stalin and Kaganovich were traveling. And, taking out a voice recorder, he began to ask the leader how he liked our metro. "Good work, comrade! How have you not been shot yet?" Stalin joked. And he forwarded the young journalist to Kaganovich.

He was indeed a brave journalist - it was not in vain that he was the first of the Soviet correspondents to receive the Order of Lenin. He accomplished a real feat - he took command of the battalion, replacing the killed commander at a combat post. These lines are written about people like him - "with a watering can and with a notebook, or even with a machine gun." Once he rented a secret camp. And then he told - if he was caught, then he had a way out. He put the photo cassette in his mouth. And, if anything, I would just gnaw it and eat it. 12 times he crossed the front line, putting himself in incredible danger in order to do his job well for the good of the Motherland. But, probably, his most important journalistic victory was the presence at the signing of the act of surrender of Germany. A few years ago, they wanted to give his name to a school in his native Yuryev-Polsky. And in 2013, an exposition of his memory was opened there.

Despite the fact that Leonid Alekseevich left us in 1971, he is remembered and honored by many in our country. His family is certainly proud of such a grandfather. We remember, we are proud of the exploits, we honor the memory of Leonid Alekseevich Korobov! Heroic warrior, talented journalist and writer and wonderful person, kind father and legendary grandfather! Congratulations to all on the Victory Day!” - said the son of a military correspondent, Maxim Korobov, to the Komsomolskaya Pravda.

I said that I did not trust the journalists of Komsomolskaya Pravda. In response, Komsomolskaya Pravda invited me to visit the radio to discuss my position. A CP military journalist, Colonel Viktor Baranets, was invited as an opponent. As a result - two hours of live broadcast with lies, substitution of concepts and personal attacks. But this, as usual, worries only me, because the next day, in the morning on home page website of the KP and all day on the radio sounded such an invaluable, excellent teaser for the final program, in which Chief Editor radio "Komsomolskaya Pravda" Victoria Sukhareva and colleagues discussed the evening broadcast with the following conclusion: "We have an honest Colonel Baranets and there is a provocateur and manipulator Ksenia Sobchak ...".

You can evaluate the broadcast with me and Baranets yourself, the morning final

For me, the “honest Colonel Baranets” really opened up when I asked him how such a patriot and keeper of spiritual bonds relates to the fact that his grandson lives in Monaco and posts wonderful photos of a military game in a suit with pink ears on Instagram hare?

Instead of an answer, I heard some kind of stream of consciousness, from which I could only understand that my father slept with heifers, and I was a prostitute. The "honest" radio KP turned off the microphone to Barants so as not to disgrace him completely. But God be with him. With a former military correspondent who says that being an unbiased journalist today is “a betrayal of the Motherland”, perhaps one can only talk about abstract and pleasant topics: for example, about his son’s work as vice president at Gazprombank or about climate in Monaco.

However, the “honest” KP journalists in the morning program explained the reaction of the colonel as follows: “Baranets realized that all the rules had already been violated, and something had to be done. He says: “Ksenia, dear, what does the grandson from Monaco have to do with it? Let's talk about journalism! ”, - which, of course, is not at all true! You can verify this by listening to this passage:

And here you can listen to how, on the most honest radio, aunts on the air funny shut up the mouth of a radio listener who called to say that he agrees with my position. This is about the fact that even after making a live broadcast, these people continue to lie, retelling it, and distort obvious things for everyone who heard our conversation with their own ears.

Now to the essence of our conversation with Baranets. Once again, I will briefly show with examples how exactly Komsomolskaya Pravda lies and "misses" unnecessary facts, and how the "propaganda technology" works.

Komsomolskaya Pravda does not cover the troubles taking place on the Ukrainian side, because its correspondents Kots and Steshin do not cross the front line, allegedly for “security” reasons. And to send a correspondent to the other side of the front for Sungorkin, apparently, it’s a shame. You can compare the reports of Komsomolskaya Pravda from the Donbass with Western media or Russian publications, which have not yet managed to become “the mouthpiece of state propaganda”. But I decided to compare the reports of the Russian Komsomolskaya Pravda with the reports of its “daughter” in Ukraine, which, under the license of the Russian publishing house Komsomolskaya Pravda, publishes the media holding of Sergei Kurchenko, who left Ukraine with Viktor Yanukovych, and lives in Russia. Given his location, he is clearly loyal to Russia and it is unlikely that his publications will publish outright slander against Russia.

The description of events by Komsomolskaya Pravda publications in Russia and Ukraine often differ in general. For example, the capture of the headquarters of the Naval Forces of Ukraine in the Crimea. The Russian edition writes that the building was seized by the wives of the Ukrainian military! “About three hundred people gathered at the checkpoint local residents. "Give us back our husbands!" - chanted the wives of the Ukrainian military. And they asked: "Do not shoot!" .... “And then the people rushed to the entrance gate….took them down in a matter of minutes…they pulled the flag of Ukraine from the flagpole and raised the Russian tricolor.”

According to Komsomolskaya Pravda-Ukraine, “Crimean self-defense launched an assault on the headquarters of the Ukrainian Navy. Masked self-defense demolished the gate at the headquarters checkpoint. Among the attackers, in addition to the militants, are women, portraying an "outraged population".

Exactly the same situation was with the capture of the airport "Belbek" (Russian version and Ukrainian version) and other objects in the Crimea.

If Komsomolskaya Pravda cannot figure out which of its publications is telling the truth, then comparing its information with other media does not make sense at all.

But back to technology.

Consider fraud on the example of Mariupol

1. Special correspondents Kots and Steshin do not go to Mariupol, but cover the events from the side of the militias. The data of the Ukrainian "Komsomolskaya Pravda" is not given. The investigation is published with the following text: “Who killed 30 residents of Mariupol? The civilized world community, as usual, hastened to conclusions and traditionally blamed the militias for the terrible tragedy.” And here is one of the excerpts from the report: “Now let's find this school on a satellite image ... In the first photo on the left in the frame we see a small extension in the courtyard, it is also visible in the image from space. There can be no mistake. Comparing these two pictures, we determine: the projectile came from the west, that is, from the center, that is, from the territory controlled by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, ”war correspondents Kots and Steshin conclude.

2. According to the law of the genre, after this "reportage" excuses for the militias are needed. The next day, Kots and Steshin go to the village of Oktyabr, from where, according to Kyiv, Grads could have been fired at a residential area of ​​Mariupol, and they write an article: “Militiamen of the southern front of Donbass: “Tell the Mariupol people - we didn’t hit them. Let them deal with the Ukrainian army.”

3. On the same day, the OSCE published a report on the shelling of Mariupol, which indicated that the shelling was carried out from the territory of the Oktyabr village, controlled by the DPR. Many foreign and Russian mass media wrote about the OSCE conclusions. It was from the village where Kots and Steshin made their report (On the air, the military correspondents answered that they were writing the text in a hurry). The “truthful” Komsomolskaya Pravda writes “just about the village” of October, without mentioning that it is located on the territory controlled by the DPR.

The shelling of Kramatorsk was covered in the same way.

Later, Mr. Sungorkin, in an interview with Ekho Moskvy, explained: “Since she was very excited (and one can understand her: “I am a journalist, and they put me in prison”), she wrote a rather angry report. It was published in KP Ukraine, from where she worked. I did not put it in the Moscow [issue of Komsomolskaya Pravda], because I think this report is biased. And by the way, there were a lot of details that weren't objective."

"Forgotten" graves

In early 2015, Komsomolskaya Pravda published an article about Ukrainian military burials near Odessa with signs “surgical waste”. The link led to some bloggers. On the other hand, the scandal with the unmarked graves in Pskov of Russian paratroopers who allegedly died on the territory of Ukraine was simply not noticed. Amazing myopia!!! Sungorkin, when asked by Ekho Moskva whether the KP did an investigation or covered the funeral of the Pskov paratroopers, replied: “I don’t remember. True, I don't remember. It was quite a long story."

Russian paratroopers in Ukraine

Russian edition publishes

“... the speeches of the captives boil down to the following: they arrived at the exercises in the Rostov region and during the night march, lagged behind the column and, without noticing, crossed the border. “We were just driving through the fields. When we drove into the village, a tank with the Ukrainian flag had already passed, and then we understood. We began to look where our people were on the road, and then they opened fire on us. We got off the BMD, and a second shell hit it, ”the fighters admitted.”

The first time the Russian "Komsomolskaya Pravda" decided to write about our military in the Crimea, when Vladimir Putin spoke about "polite people." But Sungorkin replies harshly to the reproaches of his colleagues: “You also had a lot of situations when you stuck your tongue in a known place and kept quiet. Just like now, you all lie about what is happening…”.

Mercenaries

Komsomolskaya Pravda is very fond of writing about mercenaries: On NTV air, women shouted to me about mercenaries, who introduced themselves as residents of Donbass, and invited me to go to the war zone to see everything with my own eyes. But what a misfortune, Komsomolskaya Pravda war correspondents Kots and Steshin, who see the war with their own eyes, tweeted to a reader's question

At the beginning of the week, Uliana Skoybeda's column was published on the website of Komsomolskaya Pravda with the subtitle “Sometimes you regret that the Nazis did not make lampshades from the ancestors of today's liberals. There would be fewer problems." The text was about the words of the oppositionist Leonid Gozman, who in his blog equated the Soviet counterintelligence SMERSH with the Nazi SS troops. Gozman was outraged by the series about the valiant SMERSH employees, and Skoybeda, in turn, was outraged by the fact that "liberals are revising history in order to knock the ground out from under our country's feet."

Words about lampshades from the ancestors of the liberals caused a scandal on the Internet, which resulted in calls to boycott KP. Later, the provocative statement was removed from the site. Editor-in-chief of the newspaper Vladimir Sungorkin named the phrase “ugly”, however, he referred to the fact that Ulyana Skoybeda blurted it out in an emotional heat. Sungorkin added that he would reprimand the journalist, but at the same time noted that the words of Gozman, whom he called "an ideological madman", still seem offensive to him. The State Duma has already dealt with the statements of the oppositionist, Komsomolskaya Pravda has so far gotten off with a warning from Roskomnadzor for violating laws on the media and on countering extremism.

Lenta.ru asked several well-known journalists who once worked for Komsomolskaya Pravda to talk about how a column with anti-Semitic statements could have appeared in the newspaper, what has changed in the newspaper in recent years and how it stands out from the rest of the Russian press .

Olga Bakushinskaya, columnist, worked for Komsomolskaya Pravda from 1995 to 2006

When I started working at Komsomolskaya Pravda, such things could not even come close. But the newspaper gradually changed - it became especially noticeable when Yeltsin resigned. The press began to change in principle, but Komsomolskaya Pravda, in my opinion, especially. It was in the early 2000s that people of extreme right-wing nationalist views came to it. I cannot say that this has never been felt in Sungorkin. Another question is that he would never give out his views with the words of Skoybeda - simply because he is a good journalist and a rather smart and cautious person.

The readership has also changed a lot in recent years, because what kind of food to spread - such consumers will come. I think that the person who is now reading Komsomolskaya Pravda likes everything, and he fully supports Skoybeda's position. In this sense, the newspaper satisfies its reader. Sungorkin is also a very good businessman, and partly he does it now because it is profitable.

Komsomolskaya Pravda always had a lot of journalists' emotions, and this was its big plus. Your opinion, if you knew how to express it well, was very much appreciated. But before, at least, it was necessary to confirm your emotions with actual events. I'm afraid the balance has shifted now.

I cannot say that Komsomolskaya Pravda was or is now in any special position. The point, rather, is that now you can print something like this in any publication and there will be no big scandal - marginality is not just allowed, it has become a kind of general line. Look what statements deputies allow themselves. In any normal coordinate system, this is a criminal case and rejection by society. And here you can say whatever you want, you will also be given an order. So Sungorkin is not the only one here - he is like everyone else.

Many journalists who once worked for Komsomolskaya Pravda do not really like to talk about the modern edition. Frankly, we are quite hurt that this happened. Previously, when you said that you worked at KP, everyone understood that you had a strong school and that you were a real journalist. And now it's getting more and more embarrassing to mention it. But I'm still proud that I worked at KP - it was a good newspaper.

Aleksey Sinelnikov, editor-in-chief of the newspaper My District, worked at Komsomolskaya Pravda from 1995 to 2007, at the time of his departure he headed the editorial office of the site

I don’t really follow what Komsomolskaya Pravda writes now, but I can’t say that I’m very surprised. Uliana Skoybeda by nature is such a woman who waves her saber on every occasion. In addition, a biting manner is, in principle, cultivated in Komsomolskaya Pravda - it is important that the articles are sincere and reach the audience. Sungorkin is generally careful about the possibility of journalists to splash out what is on their minds. "Komsomolskaya Pravda" is valuable for the mass reader because it is so unkempt.

But, in my opinion, there was a bust with this column, as well as with some of the previous columns of Ulyana. Unfortunately, this story reflects the state of the whole society. We do not know how to stop in time, we do not know how to negotiate - the nature of the discussion has acquired sick features on both sides. For me, both points of view are unacceptable: Ulyana committed indecency, but Gozman with his position is just as disgusting to me. My grandfather ended up in a penal battalion, probably behind him were the same machine guns of people from the NKVD. I have no complaints about them, it was a war, there were completely different conditions.

There is an opinion that a lot is forgiven for Komsomolskaya Pravda. But in the case of this column, I would not speak about power, but about society. Most people won't rebel against a newspaper, won't boycott it, no advertiser will refuse to cooperate. If such a story happened in Europe, there the state would not even have to intervene in the situation - there ordinary readers would say to the newspaper: "That's it, goodbye." We ourselves are quite inert, so we - the Internet community as part of the inhabitants of Russia - can be ignored. We will now shout about it on the Internet and switch to the fact that the Americans beat us 8:3.

At the same time, I do not think that Sungorkin is completely indifferent to the reaction of the public. It is not bestial people who work at Komsomolskaya Pravda, they can apologize, they can explain how it happened. But it seems to me that a newspaper with such a huge audience still needs to be more careful.

Valery Simonov, worked at Komsomolskaya Pravda from 1988 to 1997, went from the first deputy editor-in-chief of the newspaper to the chairman of the board of AOZT Komsomolskaya Pravda, and then the editor-in-chief of the publication

I do not want to comment on this scandal, because I do not consider it particularly outstanding. In my opinion, this is the situation recent times often happens in different media, so I don’t want to stand up and judge an individual journalist or publication. There is already such a genre in journalism - the excitation of a scandal. In Komsomolskaya Pravda, this story just sounded so loudly, because it suddenly touched on such a sensitive topic.

When I headed the newspaper, there were other laws of journalism. Then the responsibility of the publication for publications and the personal responsibility of the journalist for his words were incomparably higher. Of course, there were scandals and high-profile materials in KP - without this, the newspaper could not exist at any time, and Komsomolskaya Pravda, frankly, was always allowed a little more than the rest of the monsters of the newspaper market. But those scandals were more significant, interesting, or something. The current "Komsomolskaya Pravda" has retained many generic features, including a penchant for outrageousness, a desire to be a pioneer in those topics that are usually not discussed aloud in society.

During my time creative biography my attitude to the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper changed a lot. I have probably experienced the whole range of feelings that exist between people and newspapers - from great love to hatred. Now I treat my colleagues from KP with quite benevolent interest. I will not say that Komsomolskaya Pravda is the publication with which I start all day, but I follow it. There are a lot of names from the old guard that I'm interested in.

Azer Mursaliev, editor-in-chief of the Kommersant publishing house, was a correspondent for Komsomolskaya Pravda in the 1980s

I have not read the article by Ulyana Skoybeda, so it is difficult for me to judge this scandal. Now I hardly read Komsomolskaya Pravda, because our publications and KP occupy completely different niches. The newspaper I worked for was completely different - it was designed for what is now called the elite, for the smart reader. She was, of course, a mass newspaper, even got into the Guinness Book of Records as the most circulated edition. But now mass publications have become different, they suggest a different level of audience development. Now its readers are people who watch NTV and TNT channels. Perhaps the fact is that society has changed a lot over the years, stratified.

I have worked for a newspaper in recent years Soviet Union and early years new Russia, then she did not strive for such scandalousness. But in general, Komsomolskaya Pravda has always published polar opinions, sharp, high-profile articles. In Soviet times, Komsomolskaya Pravda really was in a special position: it was allowed a little more than other major publications, or it allowed itself what others could not afford. But what happens to the newspaper now, I don't know.

I have a good relationship with Vladimir Sungorkin, I think that he is a talented and successful media manager. I worked with him for many years and I think that he is an intelligent person with a balanced position. He never adhered to radical or extremist views. I do not think that Sungorkin gave the task to write such a column, but the fact that he later removed the phrase that caused outrage from there speaks rather in his favor.

Vladimir Mamontov, President of Izvestiya Publishing House, worked at Komsomolskaya Pravda from 1990 to 2005, at various times he held the positions of first deputy editor-in-chief, editor-in-chief, and then editor-in-chief of the publication

I don't think Sungorkin saw this [Skoibeda's article]. In any case, this is unacceptable and needs a clear explanation for the public. There can be no two or three opinions. I remember that I myself wrote that many critics of Russia would not exist in the world if the Russian and Soviet "muzhik", "cattle" had not saved Europe. Some he just pulled out of the oven. Managed. But here is something else: here is mockery. As well as Gozman's comparison of Smersh with the SS. Ulyana succumbed to a provocation, but this is impossible. Yes, and without provocation it is impossible to write like that.