Rbk article. How RBC uses experts to manipulate public opinion. What came before
A draft of the article "Privatization under threat: why the authorities are in no hurry to sell assets" was published on the information site of RBC by mistake. This was noticed and published by the blogger vredina999 on his page.
In the draft of the text on the privatization program, the editor's comment was preserved, asking the journalists to find an expert who would express the “correct” opinion. In particular, the found expert was supposed to criticize Vladimir Putin's instructions on the privatization of state assets.
The surviving draft of the RBC article:
As a reminder, the President of Russia said that the assets of companies owned by the state should be sold only to Russian investors, and also make sure that the property is not then taken out of the country through offshore companies. The editor of RBC insisted that the selected expert explain that the privatization conditions indicated by the authorities have significantly narrowed the circle of investors and it will be more difficult for the state to sell its assets.
The article on the site, published on April 21 at 20:35, was promptly corrected to a clean version (although Google saved a cached version of the draft). In place of the editor's comment appeared the words of Yevgeny Nadorshin, chief economist at PF Capital, and an anonymous financial consultant. Both made a statement, which was "ordered" by an employee of the publication - the circle of buyers of assets of Russian companies has sharply narrowed, experts said.
Screenshot of the "clean" version of the publication:
The text also discusses the possibility of the state to sell the assets of the companies this year. The authors argue that there are only real chances in the case of Bashneft. With the rest of the assets, various problems may arise - the lack of buyers, the undervalued price, or disagreement with the privatization of the company's top managers.
On the eve of Vladimir Putin, during the forum of the All-Russian Popular Front in Mordovia, he made fun of the journalistic profession. One of the forum participants was going to ask a question to the President of Russia, and he asked about her occupation.
"Journalist," she replied, adding: "I was a teacher."
Have you been a teacher? Have you become a journalist? What a fall ...
After a pause:
Just kidding...
It would seem that the entire journalistic fraternity, including our entire creative team - the Military Review team, should harbor a grudge against the president. They say, what he allows himself - insults, you know, journalists, although he says that it was said as a joke ... That's just with the journalistic profession, and I think that colleagues from other means mass media, will not argue with this until foam at the corners of the mouth, some strange transformation is observed. And this transformation is often far from positive. And is it only with journalism? ..
Some publish reports about the "explosion of the air conditioner" and how "they set themselves on fire in Odessa", others publish interviews about the "crucified boy." Still others write about the "Altai armored militia", the fourth about "Yarosh's fireproof business card". However, against the background of some miraculous materials, even the report "about the explosion of the air conditioner" may seem like flowers.
As a truly enchanting example of modern "journalism", we find material dated April 21 of this year, published on the Internet site of a large information resource RBC. Not just an information resource, but a whole media holding, which is usually referred to among reputable economists and analysts. - A media holding that employs over a thousand professional journalists, editors, proofreaders, etc.
It's about the material that caused a serious discussion in the blogosphere. Moreover, the discussion was caused not so much by the material itself, but by the form in which it was originally published on the network.
So, in more detail about the work done by RBC specialists from April 21. We are talking about an article, to the work on which such people as Maxim Tovkailo, Ekaterina Metelitsa, Lyudmila Podobedova, Timofey Dzyadko put their hands and talents.
It would seem that it is quite an ordinary article for RBC, which once again kind of makes it clear that privatization (and the broadest) of state assets should become a panacea for the Russian economy. The article quotes the words of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, who stated that if the privatization of state assets is carried out, then it is necessary to admit companies with Russian jurisdiction to it and try to bypass all kinds of gray schemes and offshore companies that will not allow the state treasury to receive the planned profit, and the entire economy - the planned effect. It is this position of Vladimir Putin in the RBC material that is, as it were, subjected to the main criticism. Like, you give "free" privatization - so that everyone and everyone, including foreigners (apparently, such as William Browder or George Soros ...) could have a hand in it (and they do not even want to apply).
However, the article was not presented in this form immediately. Initially, a material was published on the Internet pages of RBC, in which the editor, in the middle of the article, asks the authors to "insert the comment of some manager and head of the analytical department themselves," who would criticize Putin's proposal. The readers of the material quickly got their bearings and managed to save the version of the RBC material, in which it is actually proposed to conduct a mini-interview in the way that is beneficial to the editorial office. The initial version is.
After the quotation of Vladimir Putin, the editor's note appears in the RBC material, which eloquently testifies to, to put it mildly, the specific methodology of the media holding. This entry (all typed with Caps Lock):
INSERT YOURSELF !!!
COMMENTARY OF A THREAD OF THE MANAGING OR HEAD OF THE ANALYT OF THE DEPARTMENT ABOUT THAT THE CONDITIONS SET BY PUTIN IMMEDIATELY REDUCED THE CIRCLE OF POTENTIAL BUYERS AND WHY. THAT TYPE VTB IS CONDITIONAL, IF B COULD BE THE ANCHOR INVESTOR IN THE SALE OF ROSNEFT CONDITIONALLY, THIS WILL GREATLY EASIER PRIVATIZATION.
The whole piquancy of the situation is not so much in the fact that this editorial comment was published, but in what its essence is. It turns out that RBC selects experts to comment on the material, outlining in advance what they should essentially say. And does he speak with these experts at all? That is, there is no question of any "live" expert opinion. Let them say what we need ...
The funny thing (if this is a reason for laughter at all) is that in place of this editorial comment there really appeared the "expert judgment" necessary for RBC. And, as it were, it is presented by the chief economist of PF Capital, Yevgeny Nadorshin. From RBK material:
As can be seen from the example of the privatization of RAO UES assets and the sale of YUKOS assets, the need to participate in transactions of companies with Russian jurisdiction is bypassed by the creation of structures like Baikalfinancegroup, recalls the chief economist of PF Capital Yevgeny Nadorshin. According to him, the sanctions not only limit the ability of Russian companies to attract financing in Western markets, but also sharply reduce the circle of Western investors interested in investing in Russian assets.
He said what RBC needs ...
And in order not to be limited to the "independent judgment" of one expert, RBC decided to add the opinion of the second. But either something went wrong with the creativity, or the expert really decided not to shine. In general, judge for yourself:
Since the sanctions, American and European investors have lost interest in Russian assets, even highly liquid and greatly depreciated, agrees another financial consultant who asked for anonymity.
Who do you agree with? With those who first explained to the expert what opinion he should present? And how many you can find the same "anonymous consultants" who disagree. Why not give their version?
But it was said: "INSERT YOURSELF!", So they inserted ...
In general, in the language of modern youth: burned! ..
And after this you don't even know: if the media writes about something, presenting an “expert judgment”, is it really an expert judgment or something from the series “insert yourself” according to the RBC method?
Alternatively, the specialist on the rights of anonymity agreed that we do not need such journalism ...
On Friday, May 13, RBC reported that virtually all top managers responsible for editorial policy are leaving the holding. "Lenta.ru" understands what is happening in one of the largest media holdings in the country and what preceded the departure of the editorial leadership.
What's happening
The holding has officially announced that the chief editor of the projects Elizaveta Osetinskaya, the editor-in-chief of the news agency Roman Badanin and the editor-in-chief of the newspaper of the same name, Maxim Solyus, are leaving RBC.
The general director of the holding, Nikolai Molibog, explained this by the fact that the opinion of the editorial heads about the future of RBC did not coincide with the position of their leaders. "IN recent times we talked a lot about how to further develop RBC, and in these conversations we could not come to a common opinion on some important issues, ”he officially stated. Therefore, we agreed to part.
Who will take their place - has not yet been reported. Following the departure of the tops, some of the employees of the united editorial office of RBC also announced their intention to quit in social networks.
After the announcement of the resignation of the top management, RBC shares are listed on the stock exchange.
What came before
In April, it became known that in the fall of 2016, Elizaveta Osetinskaya would retire while studying at Stanford University under the Innovation in Journalism program. It was assumed that the training will last one academic year, after which the editor-in-chief will continue to manage the editorial staff of RBC projects.
However, later, on April 20, the media holding announced that Osetinskaya would leave management a few months before her academic leave - after the May holidays. The holding's representatives argued that her absence would be just temporary. It was reported that editor-in-chief, including Badanin and Solus, would be in charge of editorial projects in her absence.
How Ossetinskaya's vacation was linked to searches at Mikhail Prokhorov's
The official news of the premature leave of the top manager appeared almost simultaneously with the reports of searches in the Onexim group - the structure that controls RBC and other companies of Mikhail Prokhorov. At the same time, inspectors did not come to RBC itself, a representative of the media holding told Lente.ru.
The media wrote that the searches in Onexim may have a political connotation: the authorities are allegedly trying to put pressure on Prokhorov to sell RBC. According to another version, they are trying to force the billionaire to sell the energy company Quadra. Shortly before the law enforcement agencies came to Onexim, a story about violations in the work of Quadra was shown on TV. The media also claimed that RBC, which publishes materials about Panamanian offshores and investigations involving large businessmen and high-ranking officials, ignores Prokhorov's energy company, which is also associated with offshore companies.
What they say in the Kremlin
The press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov has repeatedly denied media reports about the Kremlin's pressure on Prokhorov due to the allegedly annoying RBC articles. Peskov said that he communicates with Osetinskaya, as well as with many other heads of the media. Shortly before her departure, the press secretary of the head of state met with her, but, according to Peskov, they did not discuss the Ossetian vacation.
Is Prokhorov selling or not selling RBC?
At the end of April, the media reported that after the searches, Prokhorov seriously thought about selling both RBC and Quadra. The fact that a businessman from time to time negotiates the sale of a media holding is essentially nothing new.
It is known that he has been looking for a buyer since at least August 2014 (although representatives of the entrepreneur denied this information). Kommersant then wrote that Prokhorov needed media platforms when he was involved in politics: he was the leader of the Right Cause party, participated in the presidential race, and then headed the Civil Platform. But in 2014, the businessman retired from the affairs of the party, and subsequently spoke out for its complete liquidation.
Photo: Ekaterina Chesnokova / RIA Novosti
After unpromising attempts to make a career as a politician, Prokhorov's need for media assets disappeared, besides, RBC worked exclusively to cover losses, and the shareholder had to invest considerable funds in it. At the moment, the holding's debt is $ 220 million. However, the billionaire liked what the RBC journalists did.
How they tried to change the holding
A little over a year ago, RBC announced the "Strategy 360", within which the holding should continue to live. The initiator and ideological inspirer of the document was Nikolai Molibog. “RBC's goal is to maintain revenue growth rates at a level not lower than the market average in the future. To achieve this goal, RBC plans to combine organic growth and profitable acquisitions in the fastest growing media segment - the Internet. RBC sees its key operational goal as ensuring the high popularity of RBC's resources among the Russian-speaking audience in the CIS countries and around the world in general. The main task, from the point of view of financial management, is to increase the profitability of the business, ”the company's website says.
However, for two years, during which Molibog led the company, RBC generated only losses: 1.97 billion rubles in 2014 and the same amount in 2015. The holding kept afloat thanks to the sale of assets: the Salon publishing house, the RBC Money payment system and Utro.ru were disposed of.
Photo: Sergey Kiselev / Kommersant
There were also acquisitions. In 2014, the company bought the integrator Public.ru for 19 million rubles (and 200 thousand euros to diversify its revenue streams). The project was supervised by Dmitry Kharitonov, digital director of business projects at RBC. Subsequently, according to the source, all activities on the project were frozen. The losses of Utro.ru alone, sold for only 30 million rubles, amounted to at least 100 million rubles of revenue per year. At least, the publication brought this amount in 2013, and its daily traffic reached 400-500 thousand visitors per day.
RBC is not Prokhorov's first ambitious but failed project. In 2014, an entrepreneur to the state for 1 euro a project of an innovative "Yo-mobile", on which he had previously pinned great hopes and in which he invested 150 million euros.
To whom he sells if he sells
According to Gazeta.Ru sources, the most likely buyer of the media holding is Yury Kovalchuk's National Media Group. At various times, the media claimed that Arkady Rotenberg, Vladimir Lisin, the Gazprom-Media holding, the co-owner of the Ilim group Zakhar Smushkin and the owner of Komsomolskaya Pravda, Grigory Berezkin, claimed RBC.
Another version, refuting previous assumptions
A top manager of a large Russian media holding told Lente.ru that the sale of RBC had already taken place. This happened before it became known about the Ossetian academic leave. However, he did not specify whether it was her decision to leave on her own or the new owner insisted on it.
Recently, passions have been boiling over the dismissal of a number of leading RBC managers.
The recent Chief Editor of this publication, Elizaveta Osetinskaya, decided to join this story. On her Facebook, she denied the "economic version" of the reshuffle. Personally, I am not overwhelmed with reliable information about what caused the decision to dismiss, but what Elizvaeta voiced, I have serious doubts, for a number of reasons:
1) RBC as a commercial enterprise incurs billions of dollars in losses every year (see the article below), and in any commercial enterprise, if it incurs losses, they change managers.
2) RBC, over the past few years, has passed very strongly in terms of the audience, if you look back in 2010 rBC TV channel was considered a sign of an intellectual - now it is a chitsto opozitsky TV channel. And here is 100% of the fault of editorial policy, to which, incl. Osetinskaya herself is also involved.
3) And lastly, RBC did not become "anti-Kremlin" yesterday and not the day before yesterday. If they wanted to overclock it for THESE reasons, they would have done it before.
And now, in fact, the article itself about the financial difficulties of this media holding, and about "effective managers" who see the hand of the Kremlin in all difficulties:
The offices of the ONEXIM holding of Mikhail Prokhorov were searched with the participation of the FSB in connection with suspicion of tax evasion. Many media outlets said that the Kremlin wanted to force Prokhorov to sell his shares in the RBC media holding.
In this regard, the financial condition of the company is of interest and where it spent hundreds of millions of dollars of "sponsorship" by Mikhail Prokhorov, which follows from the company's documents that shed light on the true culprits of RBC's problems.
Background
RBC's first financial problems began in 2008 after the outbreak of the crisis. The company got carried away with investments in securities and could not pay off the creditor banks. In 2010, Mikhail Prokhorov's ONEXIM holding acquired a controlling stake in RBC OJSC.
Having received such an enviable owner and investor, the company immediately proclaimed itself "the largest Russian media holding", and the media included in it - the "leading business publication." Until recently, this was largely justified - RBC managed to gain a fairly large audience and authority.
However, with the 2016 elections approaching, the new "effective managers" of RBC, inspired by the unlimited financial support of the oligarch Prokhorov, decided to get involved in politics. “Journalists” came to RBC, using the media for PR for Navalny and other oppositionists. As a result, instead of a "business publication", readers saw the media with biased political assessments, open support of the non-systemic opposition. RBC has turned from a respectable publication into a haven for "Navalny's minions" and has become an instrument of anti-Russian, pro-Western propaganda.
"Business edition": violation of journalistic ethics and ridiculous mistakes
Headlines and news items like the one below have become the norm for the "business publication". 
Nobody bothered how such headlines relate to elementary journalistic ethics (the law is generally binding, what does Navalny have to do with it?). The purpose of the headline is not to convey information to readers, but to promote Navalny from scratch and present him as a victim of the regime. Such "news" from the "journalist" Rozhdestvensky and the company became the norm for the "business edition".
For reference: the official RBC document pics.v2.rbcholding.ru/rbcholding_pics/media/files/5/61/87967565871081435589638532615.pdf, in which the company assures that it refrains from political assessments:
This must be what the “conscientious journalists” call “living not a lie”.
RBC also systematically allowed direct distortion of information. A typical example is the story of the report on the Litvinenko case. "Business edition" in all seriousness called the report "a court decision" by which Putin was found guilty of the murder of Litvinenko, and showed complete legal and journalistic illiteracy. However, attentive readers quickly exposed the lies of the "conscientious journalists", as a result of which the editor-in-chief of RBC Elizaveta Osetinskaya had to apologize for the obvious lie. 
And quite recently, another embarrassment happened: readers saw a draft published on the RBC website with a commentary by the editor, who asks journalists to find an expert with the "correct" opinion regarding Vladimir Putin's instructions.
But maybe all this is just a series of coincidences, and we envy a major publication that, despite its political engagement and mistakes, was commercially successful?
"Greedy Team"
With virtually unlimited resources from the oligarch Prokhorov, RBC could become a commercially successful publication. As the director of RBC proudly announced in the annual report for 2014, “the RBC team meets two criteria - professionalism and greed”. If there are doubts about the first, then no one doubts the second.
The source of RBC's wealth is the multi-million dollar loans of the "generous investor" Prokhorov. At the moment, RBC's long-term debts alone amount to more than 17 billion (!) Rubles, which is confirmed by the company's fresh financial statements signed by the CEO. 
At the same time, in 2014-2015, RBC's loss amounted to one and a half to two billion rubles. 
In this regard, the “effective managers of RBC” do not pay even a ruble of income taxes.
How much did Prokhorov spend on the fun of "conscientious journalists"?
It follows from financial documents that Prokhorov invested about $ 300 million in RBC.
Here is a loan to Prokhorov's company for $ 140,000,000, which was supposed to be returned in 2015, but the company received a deferral until 2020 (section 2.3.2 "Credit history of the issuer"):
The same section contains information about the second loan agreement for the same amount.
As you can see, over 6 years RBC managed to pay out only $ 16 million out of $ 140 (just over 10%). And also interest should be added to the debt. An elementary mathematical calculation shows that under no circumstances will the company be able to settle accounts with Prokhorov for the remaining 4 years and is inevitably doomed to bankruptcy if it is left to its own forces of "effective managers".
Exchange rate difference as an excuse
What are the reasons for such unfortunate failures? The latest RBC report says that the exchange rate difference is to blame for everything: RBC borrowed in dollars and has to pay back in them too. However, this does not stand up to elementary testing.
First, exchange rate fluctuations began only in mid-2014. So what has RBC's management been doing for 4 years? What prevented him from paying off most of the debt and why before any fluctuations in the exchange rate began, only 10% of the debt was given?
Secondly, let's imagine that the dollar is worth half of what it is now (pre-crisis rate). Then the debt of RBC is not 17 billion, but “only” 8.5 - RBC is also unable to pay this money.
There is one more unpleasant news for RBC. In 2015, the amount of the company's net assets turned out to be negative, the company went into minus 500 million, as a result of which RBC violated the legislation on joint stock companies. The 2015 financial report clearly states this:
Clause 11 of the Federal Law "On Joint Stock Companies" reads: "If at the end of the second reporting year or each subsequent reporting year, the value of the company's net assets turns out to be less than the minimum authorized capital specified in Article 26 of this Federal Law, the company no later than six months after the end of the reporting year is obliged to make a decision on its liquidation ”.
Thus, by the end of next year, RBC will be obliged to find somewhere half a billion rubles to increase its net assets (which it does not have) or be liquidated.
In the meantime, as you can see above, the “effective managers” have only one recipe: to run to the close-minded investor Prokhorov and spread him to defer debt and new injections.
The Kontur-Focus system also gives RBC a negative financial rating on all indicators. And he says that a company with such indicators can not count on a loan.
Why was the bottom broken?
To assess the quality of RBC's governance, let us turn to the Corporate Governance Code adopted by the Central Bank. This document establishes financial transparency in companies, accountability of management, control over expenses for the management apparatus and other measures to improve management efficiency. www.consultant.ru/law/hotdocs/33172.html
The standards of efficiency at RBC must be at their best, because its "conscientious journalists" are very fond of exposing "ineffective" state corporations and institutions. Let's go back to RBC's 2014 Annual Report:
Translating from legal into Russian: in RBC, shareholders are deprived of the opportunity to ask questions about the company's activities to "effective managers", and minority shareholders are deprived of the opportunity to exercise corporate control.
Anti-corruption policy is absent in RBC as a class! But it’s great to expose a “corrupt regime” without starting with yourself.
Do you still have questions, why are the management costs at RBC and, accordingly, the losses enormous?
Diagnosis from auditors
And finally, having collected the patient's anamnesis, we can safely diagnose. Wait, though. We completely forgot about the audit! Such an efficient company should have a brilliant audit report.
Here it is for the past 2015. Signed just a few days ago.
It says in black and white:
1. “Effective managers” of RBC carry out incomprehensible actions with receivables (this is the money that other companies owe RBC). It suddenly turns out that the majority of RBC's "debtors" are persons connected with the company. Apparently, in order to increase the amount of net assets, the company is inflating a bubble of accounts receivable through the persons under its control.
Definitely, this is worth the interest of law enforcement agencies.
2. And the best thing: “the Company's ability to continue its activities depends on the willingness and ability of shareholders to continue to provide financial support”.
RBC's auditor seems to be hinting that as a result of the actions of RBC's “effective managers”, the company is already close to death, and the question of its existence depends solely on the goodwill of wealthy investors.
RBC. Outcome
Let's summarize the results of the investigation. What happened to RBC - illustrative example what can happen to a company if it is entrusted to its management to "effective managers" of liberal views. For them, there is simply no concept of "profitability" and audience interests. The media is turning into a media service for Navalny and other “protest leaders” with a 2% rating. Personally, I do not believe that this PR is carried out free of charge, out of ideological motives. Although mediocre managers work at RBC, they are far from being fools in life.
But what about Prokhorov, you ask, why does he continue to pour huge amounts of money into RBC and does not demand a return? There can be two explanations for this. Either Prokhorov has long come to terms with the fact that he will not receive a return on investment and made a stupid mistake, or he has a commercial interest in squandering hundreds of millions of dollars. For example, thus minimizing the tax base of ONEXIM.
According to media reports, Prokhorov insists on compensation for the money invested in RBC and is ready to sell it only on these conditions. Quite an amazing approach for a supporter of the "free market": if you yourself have invested money incorrectly and have not followed their use, this is solely your entrepreneurial risk, not the buyer. The company is bought to make a profit, and not to compensate for other people's unjustified expenses.
So, today any potential buyer of RBC should know about the "largest media holding" that it:
1) brings a loss of up to 2 billion annually;
2) has accounts payable of more than 17 billion, which he will never be able to repay;
3) does not comply with basic corporate governance standards and does not want to limit the appetites of management;
4) has a negative amount of net assets, which in a year may lead RBC to liquidation;
5) carries out incomprehensible actions with accounts receivable and cannot exist without the multi-million dollar support of investors.
On Friday, May 13, 2016, the management of the last largest independent media holding in Russia, RBC, resigned. Elizaveta Osetinskaya, editor-in-chief of RBC, Roman Badanin, editor-in-chief of the united editorial office of RBC agency, and Maxim Solyus, editor-in-chief of the RBC newspaper, were dismissed by agreement of the parties. Following this, several key editorial staff announced their resignation. The dismissal took place against the background of news about pressure on the owner of the holding - the Onexim group of Mikhail Prokhorov and the company's management.
Elephant.Ru: "The ten best investigations of RBC" - slon.ru/posts/67997
During the presidency of President Putin, the Russian media market lost many publications and entire journalistic teams: all major media either came under state control and became an instrument of propaganda, or ended up in the hands of obedient businessmen who impose restrictions on the publication of materials criticizing the authorities. RBC looked like an exception against this background.
Kommersant: Fired editor-in-chief and chief editors of RBC - kommersant.ru/doc/2986828
Recently, RBC has published several materials that, according to market participants, could cause irritation in the Kremlin: an investigation into the activities of Yekaterina Tikhonova, whom Reuters called the president's daughter, and detailed publications on the use of offshore companies by businessmen close to power based on the so-called Panamanian files in early April.
"Jellyfish": RBC management decided to fire after an article about oysters at the "Putin's palace" - meduza.io
“The Kremlin appealed to the owners of RBC with a demand to dismiss the management of the holding after the article“ Oysters will be bred in front of the 'Putin's palace' near Gelendzhik ”. This is reported by Reuters, citing a source. "
"Jellyfish": The day RBC passed away From the editorial board of Meduza - meduza.io/feature/2016/05/13/den-kogda-ne-stalo-rbk
“Osetinskaya, Badanin, Solus, dozens of RBC editors and journalists have performed a real miracle in the last two years. They did what is impossible, unrealistic - it does not happen. In the past two years, independent journalism has been dying in Russia; and RBC over the past two years has become the main independent publication in Russia - with first-class investigations, with an impeccable reputation, with a multimillion audience. Without any reservations, without any discounts for hard times. "
Radio "Echo of Moscow": “Orekha's replica. I feel sorry for you" echo.msk.ru/blog/oreh/1764908-echo
“With every day, with every such dismissal, with every crushed or completely liquidated editorial office, your window into the world is closing more and more tightly. This is no longer a window. This is not even a window. This is some kind of gap. A keyhole through which you somehow try to see what is really going on around us in the country and on the planet. However, you can easily turn your head the other way. Where something shines and shimmers very brightly. This is also a window. And it seems to be also a window to the world. But an intelligent person, looking closely, will understand that this is not a window - but a crooked mirror. "
In contact with