Search This Blog

Attack on Reporter Reveals Controversy and Contradictions, 11/9


An attack last week on Russian reporter Oleg Kashin, leaving him in a coma with several broken bones, has led to much debate in Russia. The beating is one of three recent assaults on journalists, and may have connection to a much-disputed development project in the Khimki Forest.
Oleg Kashin – well-known in Russia, for use of provocative language on online sites as well as for his reporting prowess – most recently was involved in protesting the proposed highway through the Khimki Forest, a plan which would involve razing entire sections of this natural habitat. Some authorities believe that this was what led to the attack, citing a similar attack on a popular environmental activist also against the project two days previous as proof. Another theory is that the attack was meant simply to intimidate independent journalism, using Kashin as a symbol in a tirade against freedom of the press. Freedom of expression has been a matter of some contention in Russia lately: just last week Medvedev vetoed a law that would restrict organized protests and rallies severely. A government paper, Itar-Tass, quoted him saying that “without the emancipation of the people, the human potential, nothing can be done.” On the other hand, many other repressive measures are still in place and Russia is still considered one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a reporter.
As of yet, the police still do not know who organized the attack or why – despite the aid of several international journalism organizations, the protests of the U.S. embassy, and Medvedev’s personal proclamation that whoever was in charge will be punished, no matter who they may be. In the meantime, students show their support in constant one-man picketing (all the demonstration they can legally do), and the Russian journalists’ union has advocated a protest column in all Moscow papers on the 5th of each month until the case is solved.


From the Moscow Times:

From ITAR-TASS:

From the New York Times, on the veto:

No comments:

Post a Comment