TV Rain saw its Latvian broadcast licence revoked after a major hiccup on live television – the host said, clumsily and falsely, that the broadcaster was helping better equip Russian conscripts fighting in Ukraine.
He was fired, but the damage was done – one of the flagships of Russia’s independent broadcasters was forced off the air and had to relocate to the Netherlands.
In a follow-up interview months after the move in January, TV Rain’s editor-in-chief Tikhon Dzyadko talks about stereotypes surrounding Russian journalists in exile and what marks them different from their colleagues in the Baltic states and Ukraine.
How did your team handle the relocation to the Netherlands from Latvia?
We handled it well, but it wasn’t the best development for us, because firstly it was not so easy to relocate to Riga, Latvia, and then it was not so cheap. Frankly speaking, it was pretty expensive to relocate to the Netherlands. But we did not have any other choice.
You mentioned mostly financial aspects but did it make you feel resentment toward Latvia, the Baltic states?
I think it was a mistake [to withdraw our licence] made by the authorities, this decision did not do any good [...] for the Latvian authorities, nor the idea of civilised people fighting against Russian propaganda and this terrible war in Ukraine.
We think that this decision did not make any sense and that’s why we are in court. We are appealing this decision because we were called a threat to the national security of Latvia and that’s absurd. We're not a threat to the national security of any European country and this decision was made by a group of people behind closed doors without giving us an opportunity to speak. So that's why we are in court in Latvia. If we lose, we will go to the European Court of Human Rights.
And if you win, would you be thinking of relocating back to Latvia?
No, It's impossible. If we win, we will just not be called a threat to national security anymore. This is really important for us because we’ve been building our reputation for 14 years. [...] We left Russia in our homes because of our anti-war position and it's pretty strange to be called a threat to the national security of Latvia at the same time.
So it's more out of principle?
Absolutely.
I’ve heard, on a personal and professional level, accusations of ignorance or arrogance, or just not being aware of the local context enough, from exiled Russian journalists in the Baltic states. How would you respond to that?
I think there are a lot of stereotypes, and there are a lot of things that do not actually exist. I had a lot of interactions with my colleagues and colleagues from other media in Riga and I’ve never seen any arrogance towards Latvia or the Latvian culture and language.
A lot of my colleagues were starting to study the Latvian language, so frankly, it’s hard for me to answer anything because I don’t think that such a problem exists.
We're speaking a lot about journalism and activism recently, because, in the Baltics, we have crossed the threshold in terms of supporting Ukraine – and quite openly so. How do you see your mission – do you still see yourself as journalists?
We are journalists, but war changes everything. I've been asked about [neutrality] before and I say no, because there is no objective journalism, especially during the time of the war and the terrible repressions. Before we would say that we are not an opposition TV station. Now, of course, we're an opposition TV station because we oppose the war.
We oppose the killing of Ukrainian soldiers and Ukrainian civilians. We oppose the killings of Russian opposition leaders, we oppose the repressions in Russia. It is impossible to be neutral during such horrible sights.
You mentioned it’s impossible to be neutral. But the incident involving the support for Russian conscripts gave credence to the doubts that you are not taking this as a black-and-white situation. Do you feel there were some instances, which allowed some people to doubt your position?
No, I think our position is pretty black and white. That's why I'm sitting here in Amsterdam and not in my apartment in Moscow. And if you compare 26 seconds on air – because of which this guy was fired the next day – and our whole coverage of the war throughout the last two and a half years, I think it’s pretty clear that our position is black and white.
This incident was used by some people who were waiting for a mistake to be made by TV Rain. I remember how Oleksiy Arestovych said: “I know that TV Rain has a special department which helps Russian mobilised soldiers”. And since he had a huge audience, it became viral. Of course, it was a lie.
From your own experience, do you see any Russian exile journalists trying to maintain an ambiguous position towards the war? Not supporting the Kremlin, but attempting to remain neutral.
It's hard for me to say because I don't think that I know such journalists. But I think the problem could be that our blacks and whites are different from, for example, the Baltic journalists. They would like Russian journalists to become Ukrainian journalists and, to me, this is impossible. This would be a huge mistake because we would lose the Russian audience and we would not get a Ukrainian audience.
And how would you define “Ukrainian journalists”?
When I read, for example, the Ukrainian agency UNIAN and I see that “all Russians should be dead”, it’s not a position that has anything to do with me or TV Rain.
For us, it’s very important to understand and to tell our audience that there are Russians and ‘the Russians’, and we know that, for example, 20 million viewers from Russia do not support the war because otherwise, they would not watch TV Rain.
For Ukrainian journalists, they are at the edge of the existence of Ukraine – as a state or nation. It's understandable why they are not ready to distinguish ‘Russians’ and Russians and I’m the last person to blame them for that.
At the same time, I’m really sorry for the losses of civilians in [Russia’s] Belgorod region, for example. But I understand why it is happening – it is because of [Vladimir] Putin because he started this war on February 24, 2022. So I think it is black and white, but I think that our black and whites are a little bit different.
We hear the “good Russian” phrase quite often. What does it mean for you? Does it offend you?
I think there is a lot of hypocrisy in these conversations. A lot of Putin’s associates have bought houses, for example, in Latvia and have gotten resilience permits or Latvian passports, or they bought golden passports in Cyprus or somewhere else. They have no problems in crossing the Latvian border. But some other people, for example, a lot of my friends with an anti-war position are not allowed to go to Poland, Estonia or Lithuania because they have these [Russian] red passports.
My son has Georgian and Russian passports. Who is he? A good Georgian and a bad Russian, or a good Russian?
What is the psychological state among Russian exiles?
In the beginning, everyone thought that it was just for a short period, maybe a year or two. Now people understand that they have to somehow adopt the idea that this is not for a year, it is maybe for five or ten years, or maybe it’s for 25 years. They need to admit to themselves that they are probably not on a mission, but they are in emigration.
And, of course, for a lot of people, it’s very difficult, because, at the same time, we see the repressions at home, they see repressions against their loved ones, their families, or against themselves.
Psychologically, it’s a very tough time. But for a lot of people, it’s easier when they compare their, let’s say, suffering with the real suffering of Ukrainians under Russian bombs for more than two years. When you think about it, your psychological problems become less big.
Newsletter
Every Friday morning.
