3 ms·

Russia Today – Surprisingly Honest Mikhail Gorbachev Obituary

6 points by Normille 4y ago

Normille 4y ago
I think this is quite subtly done in a way. Given that we know Putin isn't Gorbachev's biggest fan, won't be attending his funeral and, in fact, seems to hold him responsible for USSR/Russia's loss of position as a world super power, it's interesting to see RT [working within the editorial constraints they must be under] producing quite a broadly favourable, albeit 'warts and all' biography of Gorbachev. I also wonder if there's a subliminal message here, or am I 'reading 'between the lines' a bit too much? There does seem to be quite a lot of emphasis on Gorbachev as a man of the people, contrasts with previous [and unstated 'current'?] dictatorial leadership. And the choice of accompanying photographs seem to also be contrasting Gorbachev, not only with what went before, but subliminally with what has come after; contemporary artwork depicting the leader in various non-official posters, rock concerts, mention of open and free debates on TV, smiling Gorbachev mingling with the people [including in Kiev!]. There's even a lengthy section, praising Gorbachev as a peacemaker, which pointedly mentions the withdrawal from Afghanistan, an "unwinnable war" where "...fifteen thousand Soviet soldiers died, hundreds of thousands more were wounded or psychologically traumatised"....Again, is this a subtle comment on current events? Another lengthy section emphasises how the Soviet Union was not one monolithic nation, but comprised of dozens of distinct nationalities and ethnic groups. Give it a read. If you can overcome your revulsion at RT's usual party-line towing output. I really didn't expect to find such a long, reasonably unbiased and almost nostalgic for pre-Putin times obituary on Russia Today.
- thriftwy 4y ago
  I think you are overthinking it. In Russia there is a strong tradition of writing "either good or none" about deceased people. Individual blogs and anonymous telegram channels are an exception, of course, but not state media. Jumping on the graves publicly just didn't catch up yet. If Kuchma, the creator of modern Ukrainian state, would die tomorrow he would get a very similar obituary, no doubt. Also, RT in general is not the crazy propaganda outlet. Its mission is to be boring and predictable. Russia has some dedicated resources for crazier kinds of propaganda.
  - Normille 4y ago
    >I think you are overthinking it. Possibly. But isn't there also a tradition [also seen in China] where, faced with high levels of state censorship, the press turns to historical or mythological figures to make allegorical comment on current events, that they can't express openly? >In Russia there is a strong tradition of writing "either good or none" about deceased people... We have the same concept in English. The saying is "Don't speak ill of the dead" But the obituary does make a lot of criticisms of Gorbachev's failings, as well as praising his successes. Having read it all the way through [and it's a lengthy piece!] I'm left with the message "He did some great things and he did some stupid things. But his heart was in the right place and he was a was basically a decent human being" Almost the last line in the obit recounts how Gorbachev choked up and left the stage in tears halfway through singing an old Russian song in memory of his dead wife. Somehow I can't but see that as a pointed contrast with Vladimir Putin who would never allow himself to be portrayed as the kind of man who cries in public.
    - thriftwy 4y ago
      The problem is, you can write virtually everything on the anonymous Telegram channels, so there is no much sense in trying to make allegorical comments on the news outlets. Nobody goes to news outlets for news anymore. They exist just to show the official stance (pretty much everywhere). Putin cried in public after his re-election in 2012 :)
  - NoPie 4y ago
    Of course, they are writing good things about deceased. But what kind of good things? Mentioning 15,000 killed in Afghanistan is quite daring at this time. I remember Afghanistan very well because I lived in the Soviet Union at that time. Every mother was worried that her son could be sent to Afghanistan and die there. But now about three times more Russians have been killed in Ukraine (and population of Russia is about half of the population of the Soviet Union at that time). Comparatively the death rate is 6 times greater in this unwinnable war. Whatever were Gorbachev's aims, he gets credit for stopping this blood-bath. I wonder if there will be another leader emerging in Russia who will stop the pointless war in Ukraine?
- trasz 4y ago
  Gorbachev was a tzar. You can’t criticize the tzar. https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1565348324831789056 https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1565348324831789056

6 points by Normille 4y ago

I think this is quite subtly done in a way. Given that we know Putin isn't Gorbachev's biggest fan, won't be attending his funeral and, in fact, seems to hold him responsible for USSR/Russia's loss of position as a world super power, it's interesting to see RT [working within the editorial constraints they must be under] producing quite a broadly favourable, albeit 'warts and all' biography of Gorbachev. I also wonder if there's a subliminal message here, or am I 'reading 'between the lines' a bit too much? There does seem to be quite a lot of emphasis on Gorbachev as a man of the people, contrasts with previous [and unstated 'current'?] dictatorial leadership. And the choice of accompanying photographs seem to also be contrasting Gorbachev, not only with what went before, but subliminally with what has come after; contemporary artwork depicting the leader in various non-official posters, rock concerts, mention of open and free debates on TV, smiling Gorbachev mingling with the people [including in Kiev!]. There's even a lengthy section, praising Gorbachev as a peacemaker, which pointedly mentions the withdrawal from Afghanistan, an "unwinnable war" where "...fifteen thousand Soviet soldiers died, hundreds of thousands more were wounded or psychologically traumatised"....Again, is this a subtle comment on current events? Another lengthy section emphasises how the Soviet Union was not one monolithic nation, but comprised of dozens of distinct nationalities and ethnic groups. Give it a read. If you can overcome your revulsion at RT's usual party-line towing output. I really didn't expect to find such a long, reasonably unbiased and almost nostalgic for pre-Putin times obituary on Russia Today.

thriftwy 4y ago
I think you are overthinking it. In Russia there is a strong tradition of writing "either good or none" about deceased people. Individual blogs and anonymous telegram channels are an exception, of course, but not state media. Jumping on the graves publicly just didn't catch up yet. If Kuchma, the creator of modern Ukrainian state, would die tomorrow he would get a very similar obituary, no doubt. Also, RT in general is not the crazy propaganda outlet. Its mission is to be boring and predictable. Russia has some dedicated resources for crazier kinds of propaganda.
- Normille 4y ago
  >I think you are overthinking it. Possibly. But isn't there also a tradition [also seen in China] where, faced with high levels of state censorship, the press turns to historical or mythological figures to make allegorical comment on current events, that they can't express openly? >In Russia there is a strong tradition of writing "either good or none" about deceased people... We have the same concept in English. The saying is "Don't speak ill of the dead" But the obituary does make a lot of criticisms of Gorbachev's failings, as well as praising his successes. Having read it all the way through [and it's a lengthy piece!] I'm left with the message "He did some great things and he did some stupid things. But his heart was in the right place and he was a was basically a decent human being" Almost the last line in the obit recounts how Gorbachev choked up and left the stage in tears halfway through singing an old Russian song in memory of his dead wife. Somehow I can't but see that as a pointed contrast with Vladimir Putin who would never allow himself to be portrayed as the kind of man who cries in public.
  - thriftwy 4y ago
    The problem is, you can write virtually everything on the anonymous Telegram channels, so there is no much sense in trying to make allegorical comments on the news outlets. Nobody goes to news outlets for news anymore. They exist just to show the official stance (pretty much everywhere). Putin cried in public after his re-election in 2012 :)
- NoPie 4y ago
  Of course, they are writing good things about deceased. But what kind of good things? Mentioning 15,000 killed in Afghanistan is quite daring at this time. I remember Afghanistan very well because I lived in the Soviet Union at that time. Every mother was worried that her son could be sent to Afghanistan and die there. But now about three times more Russians have been killed in Ukraine (and population of Russia is about half of the population of the Soviet Union at that time). Comparatively the death rate is 6 times greater in this unwinnable war. Whatever were Gorbachev's aims, he gets credit for stopping this blood-bath. I wonder if there will be another leader emerging in Russia who will stop the pointless war in Ukraine?
trasz 4y ago
Gorbachev was a tzar. You can’t criticize the tzar. https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1565348324831789056 https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1565348324831789056