Some false articles on the version of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia

[Alex Him]

Excerpts from Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 22, 2017



Launching a special section dedicated to fake news on the Foreign Ministry’s official website



To develop the initiative I mentioned during the press briefing on February 15, I direct your attention to the new section of the Foreign Ministry’s official website, which will feature examples of published materials that contain false information about Russia. Today we are launching this section, which will be available on the website.

The first collection of such “news” has already been published. You can read them on the website in the Press Service section – Articles and Rebuttals – Published materials that contain false information about Russia. The section will feature bogus propaganda stories by various media sources and provide links to them.

Unfortunately, this section will be updated regularly. Of course, not every fake news story will be published there. The objective is to show the main trends in publishing fake news about our country and to try to stop their spread.

We work with foreign correspondents on a permanent and regular basis. You know where to find us and how to reach us by phone or email. If foreign correspondents have any suggestions for this section, or if they want to provide proof of their news stories so that they are removed from the website, please send us your additional materials. Please call, write, visit. We will address the information you publish.






Anti-fake news section on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s website



Question:

Why has the Foreign Ministry decided to create an anti-fake news section on its website?



Maria Zakharova:

First, we have to speak at nearly all briefings about materials that include or promote unreliable information or information that is published again and again even though we have refuted it some time ago. Second, in addition to making comments on the situation at large, we consider it necessary to say that this or that topic is an example of stovepiping as part of an anti-Russia information campaign and to cite concrete materials in this respect. I believe the public must know its “heroes”. It is one thing to comment on a situation, but it is quite another matter when we provide the names of media outlets and journalists who are involved.

We fully respect media freedom. It was a choice of principle made by our country. We have a legal framework regarding this, and we not just respect media freedom but also journalists’ opinions even when we do not agree with them. Unfortunately, it is a fact that information campaigns are waged to promote false information planted for this purpose. There were elements of information warfare and information aggression last time I checked. Fake news has become a global trend. Paradoxically, Russia is regularly accused of engaging in this. I am referring to government agencies and media. All international media outlets use the same method when providing unreliable information about Russia – they do not provide facts. This is the saddest and probably the most paradoxical element. A great deal of information is published, but never concrete facts.

On top of everything, a focus on entirely anonymous leaks represents a new component of this narrative. We are unaware of who is behind them, so no one can be held accountable. Meanwhile, the media tend to make major and far-reaching conclusions based on this information.

There’s another angle to it. Look at what’s happening: first, some information is put out there in the form of leaks coming from unnamed high-ranking sources, or they even go as far as publishing official opinions without providing any reliable information. All of that trickles down from major to smaller media, and from print media to television. After that, everything spreads across the internet at breakneck speed. Public opinion is formed. Two to three months later, a correction is published. However, the damage caused by this unverified information or misinformation is enormous, because the information has reached everyone through print and online media. The correction is therefore pointless.

I often cite an example that you are familiar with regarding Russian submarines in Northern Europe. This is a very similar approach where information is published citing anonymous sources in several countries about Russian submarines surfacing someplace and threatening to do something awful, and so on. No data or facts are provided, and no one can be made accountable for that. Six months later that same publication, in order to legally absolve itself of responsibility, publishes a one-line correction to the effect that it was not a submarine, but a fragment or the debris of a ship or a regular boat. However, no one is interested in the news any longer. No one is anxious to spread it. Probably, only Russia is interested in it telling everyone that they are issuing a correction now. But the effect is zero. All of that goes on and on. This submarine scare has lasted for decades. Talk about a sustained trend.

We started this section in order to provide specific examples. We're not pioneers in this regard, nor have we come up with anything new. I reiterate that we are open to a dialogue. If a publication, an editorial board, or reporters decide that their article was posted there without grounds and provide us with the information which would corroborate their assertions, we will certainly take it into consideration. We are open to communication. However, things like what happened in Montenegro simply cannot be. After all, we are constantly refuting the information. With more planted stories making their way to the press, our rebuttals, which we made many times, were not even noticed.






Fake news



Question:

Will the Russian Foreign Ministry’s site post Russian articles, for example, about a boy crucified in Slavyansk, in its “fake news” section? There are frequent situations when the positions of our, your and other correspondents differ a lot. For example, three years ago I was told in Crimea that the “green men” are Russian troops but the official stance was different. Or, for example, that a Russian Buk shot the Malaysian Boeing.



Maria Zakharova:

When were you last in Donbass? Tell me, who has ever been to Donbass? You are speaking about the situation in the south of Ukraine, but those foreign colleagues who were there can be counted on the fingers of one hand.



Question:

I’ve been there many times, as long as I was allowed to enter. Alexander Zakharchenko promised that if I called him, they would let me in. I called him three times and they didn’t.

If there’s a report that has me stating our opinion and proving that this is indeed the case, but you say that it isn’t, that it’s fake news, what about it then?



Maria Zakharova:

Look how everyone has sat up. Frankly, I didn’t even expect this kind of furore. This only goes to show that we’re doing everything just right. I didn’t even think that everyone would be so concerned. If you don’t publish fake news, why then does it worry you so? This means you have no chance of winding up there. I don’t see what the problem is.

As for reports in the Russian media, as you understand, the Foreign Ministry is involved in foreign policy. We are the agency that, under Russian law, works with foreign correspondents. We issue accreditation and actually work with foreign reporters. Our task is to refute information that is published in foreign media outlets. This is part of our job description. I can tell you – maybe you were not present in this room – it’s a subsection of a large section that is related to rebuttals. If you click on it you will see that we regularly refute materials that, in our opinion, in one way or another are untrue and were published in Russian media outlets. Don’t worry about your Russian colleagues. An appropriate spot is always allotted to them there.

Now you’ve taken this news too close to heart. Tell me, did you react in the same way to the reports that such sections were launched long ago in the media resources of European agencies that are overseen by Brussels? Do you ask them the same questions when they post information about the Russian media? Have you asked them about the criteria they use in selecting materials for publication? We asked this question and were told there are no criteria. We asked them to provide information or to substantiate these sections, materials and conclusions with concrete information. We received nothing. I can tell you more. It’s unfair to rebuke me over the fact that Mr Zakharchenko did not respond to your call three times in a row. However, I believe that when they hear today about your difficulties in communicating with people in Donbass who are in charge of contacts with the press – and we are live on the air – they will pay attention to you. So come more often and get it off your chest. You’ll be heard.

How responsive everyone always is to foreign correspondents’ concerns! How sensitive they are! In particular, yesterday a question was asked regarding the investigation into the case involving Swedish reporters. Foreign Minister Lavrov provided exhaustive information. The Information and Press Department could have provided all details to the Swedish correspondent but she decided to do so at the news conference, not in the regular course of work, as is common practice with many. How acutely this pain is felt when foreign correspondents are concerned! Don’t put it into the “fake news” section. Don’t strip them of accreditation. Of course, investigations are necessary. Why are you not just as sensitive and responsive to these problems where your Russian colleagues are involved? You don’t consider them your colleagues? You don’t regard people who have worked for years in Syria, where there is not a single Western correspondent, as professionals? Do you think all of this is fabricated? Every time we report on what we find in Aleppo. Why is this information reported only in the Russian media, but does not get through to you?

And another point. Look how many Russian correspondents were expelled from European countries. They are denied admittance to events they plan to cover. They have accreditation problems. A large number of TV channels in a number of countries were blocked due to their disagreement with the official position in these countries. Is this information reported in your media? No? Why? These are your colleagues. This is still about freedom of expression. It’s indivisible. There can’t be more of it or less of it. If you judge us, why don’t you judge yourselves?

Finally, a very important aspect. Today we sent a letter signed by the Information and Press Department director to OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatović enumerating and specifying our concerns related to the infringement on Russian media rights. We not only lodge complaints but we also provide her and her institution with information about her concerns. For example, she asks us how the investigation of a particular case is proceeding, and we provide her the required information.

I’d like to give you one example. More than a year ago, we sent an official note from the Russian Foreign Ministry to the EU permanent mission in Moscow requesting information about the procedure for the accreditation of Russian correspondents abroad. Do you think we received an answer? No. When Russian correspondents are expelled or denied entry to European countries, we are told that they violated accreditation rules. We officially requested information about the accreditation procedure and visa requirements for foreign correspondents, in particular from Russia, so that they could work in EU territory. There was no response. And there is a whole foreign mission working here! How’s that? We constantly hear and there’ve been a number of materials written by your colleagues alleging that Russia has a non-transparent and undemocratic accreditation system for foreign correspondents. Well, well! All documents on the accreditation procedure are posted on our website. This law has been “at work” for many years. It was signed under President Yeltsin and has not been amended once. It’s available. What’s more, we reply to all questions practically in manual mode. Only once did we request the necessary documents from the EU to know the accreditation procedure for our correspondents so that they are not expelled. You see what I mean? These are not even double standards. This is simply playing on another chessboard.

I will say for the third time today what if some media outlets, which find their materials in the new section, have any questions and they provide us the relevant information, what problems can there be? We will look into their situation. The problem, however, is that the exact opposite is happening. When we see fake news (it is not our term; we did not make it up; we did not launch this campaign; it was a “mainstream” word in the presentations of all of our Western colleagues at the Munich conference), we write or try to get in touch with a corresponding media outlet and state our position. Unfortunately, very often no one wants to reflect Russia’s official line. Let’s try doing it in reverse. If you have complaints, write and we will simply change something. Let’s swap places and you will see how hard it is to prove that you’re right.



Question:

Will you please repeat that. If a journalist or correspondent says he thinks the Malaysian Boeing was shot down by a Russian Buk, will the journalist be posted on that site section or not?



Maria Zakharova:

You are perfectly aware that journalists and media outlets are responsible for what they publish. This is not something seen in a dream. Surely, if you claim something, there must be some materials and data to support the claim. We are not speaking about social media accounts owned by individuals, we are speaking about the media. I just can’t wrap my head around the idea that such an article will come out and there will be no arguments. Can this happen?

We have already launched the section of the website. We are awaiting your response. Please write, call, provide information, we are ready to work with you.





The source of information - http://www.mid.ru/en/press_service/s...ent/id/2656004