At the center of the scandal is the would-be resignation of a controversial journalist
A scandal over freedom of speech is brewing at Ukraine’s Channel 5 ( 5 Kanal), which earned a reputation for objective reporting during the Orange Revolution of 2004.
At the center of the scandal is the would-be resignation of a controversial journalist, news commentator Ihor Slissarenko.
According to news reports, Slissarenko wrote a letter offering to resign at his own will and alleged he had been pressured by the channel’s management in response to criticism over his reporting. Citing sources at Channel 5, Intenet news site Ukrainska Pravda reported that the criticism originated from the administration of President Viktor Yushchenko. The Presidential Administration has denied the allegations.
Nevertheless, the case has taken on political overtones, as the Party of Regions of Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych has accused the Presidential Administration of cracking down on freedom of speech by allegedly masterminding the ouster of Slissarenko.
In an 11 a.m. Channel 5 news broadcast on Sept. 1, Slissarenko cited a UNIAN news agency report saying Yushchenko’s children would attend Kyiv’s Pechersk International School. In the report, he also said that the presidential family would have to pay “not little” for tuitions, pointing out that the cost would run $12,000 a year per child.
Slissarenko declined to provide comment to the Post regarding the situation. Slissarenko cited as his reason litigation that he and the parent company of the Post had been tangled up in before. The litigation was sparked by articles that pointed to his role in a university and publication that have been accused by Jewish groups and the Anti-Defamation League of spreading anti-Semitic views.
Slissarenko told the Institute of Mass Information, a media watchdog, that Channel 5’s management suggested he write an application to resign from the channel of his own will.
Head of the Presidential Secretariat Viktor Baloha said the secretariat itself, and personally Viktor Yushchenko, were not connected to the situation surrounding Slissarenko.
Channel 5 chief editor Oleksandr Narodetsky told the Post in a telephone interview that the channel’s “management has a low level of trust toward him [Slissarenko].”
He said the trust was lost not only due to the tuition report, but as a result of other incidents of unbalanced reporting by Slissarenko, as well as a range of other reasons, which forced the channel’s management to come to its conclusion regarding Slissarenko, said Narodetsky.
As to whether Slissarenko was pressured by the channel, Narodetsky said: “It is not pressure, it is the conclusion that the management made.”
“I informed him [Slissarenko] about the catastrophic decrease of trust on the part of management toward him. He [Slissarenko] said that meant that he needed to write an application for resignation. I told him that he could do that. That’s all.”
Narodetsky said that the flaws in Slissarenko’s work accumulated over time, leading to Channel 5’s conclusion.
“We are not talking about the news broadcast about the president. We are talking about a range of cases that violate journalistic standards of maintaining a balanced and unbiased coverage of events, and correctly citing and correctly referencing sources,” he added.
Narodetsky emphasized that the entire situation “is not about the fact that he [Slissarenko] reported [about the cost of tuition], but about how he did it.”
He said that Slissarenko cut short the UNIAN news agency’s information about the tuition, and added information from other sources without referencing those sources. Information regarding tuition at the Pechersk International School is available on the school’s website.
Channel 5’s editorial board met on Sept. 4 to discuss the situation surrounding Slissarenko. According to Channel 5, Slissarenko was invited to the meeting, but he didn’t show up. Channel 5 said that the editorial board recommended that the channel’s management not satisfy Slissarenko’s application to resign, but to express their dissatisfaction with him for violating certain clauses of the channel’s editorial policy.
The board said that in the Sept. 1 news broadcast, Slissarenko provided only a part of the information that was available without referencing sources, incorrectly cited information from a news agency and with bias.
It also said that it had asked Slissarenko to meet with the channel’s management and the board itself to finally settle the matter. In addition, the editorial board said that it appealed to political parties and politicians not to speculate with the issue surrounding Slissarenko.
Slissarenko had worked at Channel 5 since April 2004. In the past, he has also served as vice president at Kyiv’s Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, and as an editor of the school’s publication, Personnel. Both have been accused of spreading anti-Semitic views by the ADL. In a 2002 interview with the Post, Slissarenko denied such allegations. He said that neither he, nor the leadership of the academy are anti-Semitic, rather, he and some academy leaders openly opposed what he described as unfair, aggressive and expansionist Zionist-Israeli policies in the Middle East.
Slissarenko served as a news anchor on 1+1, one of Ukraine’s top two television channels, but told the Post in 2002 that he was fired from his position at 1+1 due to his ties with the academy and its publications.
