OPINION: Blowing Up of the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Station and the Crisis of ‘Journalistic Standards’

I’ve just returned from the Kherson region. What I saw with my own eyes will be etched in my memory forever. But I read in the news feed how the blowing up of the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Power Station is covered abroad, and to be honest, I was a little confused.

It turns out that only we – Ukrainians – understand that there is a maddened aggressor who, out of fear of the attack of the Armed Forces, committed terror and ecocide. But what is absolutely clear to us, in Ukraine, for some reason looks “a little different” in the presentation of the world mass media.

It turns out that “not everything is so clear-cut.” It’s not yet known who is to blame? The Russian side is quoted on an equal basis with Ukrainian sources. And such an approach currently dominates not only in the media of countries that, until now, have been far from unconditionally supporting Ukraine.

I am far from accusing them of “betrayal.” But in the future, we simply do not have the strength to endure such an insult to common sense. And besides, it’s very dangerous. Because the chaos in the evaluations leads to dullness in politics. And all this, in the end, plays in favor of the aggressor, because it tolerates his crimes. And, in fact, encourages the next ones. What we see, after all.

It’s easy to write off such “twists” in modern practice. When everyone agrees that there is no truth, and everyone has their own truth. And everyone has the right to bring it to the world.

Other Topics of Interest

EXPLAINED: What We Know About Russia’s Oreshnik Missile Fired on Ukraine

Putin said it had been deployed "in a non-nuclear hypersonic configuration" and said that the "test" had been successful and had hit its target.

But during the war for survival, the reality is a little different. And it doesn’t get along well not only with tolerance by people in general but also with the “standard standards” of journalism.

It’s in a domestic conflict that it makes sense to give the floor to both sides. And is the pluralism of opinions expedient, under the conditions of a war of annihilation? And why, in the presence of international criminal proceedings for the most terrible crime – genocide (illegal deportation of children), the suspect has a podium, as if nothing had happened?

How can the aggressor and the resisting side be placed on the same board? Why does Kremlin propaganda have the same status as a source of information as official reports of Ukraine?

Something I don’t remember is, during the Second World War, conscious media allowing themselves to refer to Hitler’s opinion as objective testimony. However, now the mass media are full of references to the assessments of the criminal Putin and his actions.

Oleksiy Leonov. PHOTO: Facebook.

A clear and extremely dangerous paradox emerges. Thanks to the standards of a free press, the Western world risks becoming the slave of a regime that it itself has recognized as criminal. And if nothing is changed, the situation will only worsen. After all, an honest person always loses to a manipulator, because he is limited in the choice of means.

So maybe it's time to make some adjustments to the standards of journalism. At least give up the “objectivity game” in cases where there are qualified definitions.

In our case, it is an accusation of unmotivated aggression, genocide, and spreading the criminal ideology of “racism.” And these definitions are not our invention, they are found, in particular, in the decisions of the International Criminal Court and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

A democratic world should grow stronger through freedom of speech, not be weakened by wandering between three trees.

And let’s remember that if Russia’s manipulations win, not only will Ukraine lose, but all of humanity. Because “racism” is terror, and terror poses a threat to all who value freedom and life.

The views expressed are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post