In a hostile Russia, investigative journalism flourished. The new outlets learned from Mr. Navalny’s example.
However, the lack of financial resources prevented them from reaching a larger audience.
This is a critical lesson for new outlets to remember.
The first step toward overcoming these obstacles is to create a strong and viable business model.
Investigative journalism flourished in hostile Russa
Investigative journalism in Russia has thrived over the past decade, but its future remains uncertain.
Despite the recent increase in political instability, the country has maintained high standards for its journalism.
The main obstacle to Russian investigative journalism is the lack of financial resources.
The need to find sponsors can pose a major threat to the independence of investigative journalists.
It can also lead to censorship. The state-funded media outlets are unlikely to face these problems, but they are subject to government control of their content.
The rise of probiv, a Russian tracking app, is a prime example of this trend.
Its name, derived from the Russian word “probiv,” means “to penetrate.”
People purchase it to spy on others, including jealous spouses, business partners, and criminals.
Journalists, activists, and politicians have also made use of the tool.
Probiv has been used to track the activities of Russian President Vladimir Putin and his family members.
In Russia, probiv and other independent media outlets have become key players in the growth of investigative journalism.
While many Russian media outlets remain under state control, a new wave of outlets is piercing the veil of power.
These outlets are largely online and have a growing audience.
Most major Russian television networks are state-owned and state-controlled.
As a result, most Russian investigative journalism takes place entirely on the Internet.
Some of the most popular Russian investigative journalism is largely done through YouTube.
The Russian government has a history of targeting investigative journalists.
The Kremlin has repeatedly painted these journalists as puppets of Western regimes.
The recent backlash against anti-corruption activists is evidence that their work is viewed as a real threat to the country’s stability.
The poisoning of Alexei Navalny, a former member of the Russian parliament, is a clear sign that the Kremlin views investigative journalism as a threat.
The poisoning and harassment that followed his death were the result of a Kremlin-backed campaign against his political freedoms.
Those linked to the Navalny movement have been arrested and are in danger of facing further legal retribution.
The end of the present period in Russia’s history is feared by many journalists.
A recent arrest of journalist Sergei Smirnov for re-tweeting a joke with a protest date is yet another warning.
Many wonder whether this was an error, or a deliberate warning to his peers.
While Russia’s population generally supports war and Putin’s reasons for it, polls do not provide any reliable evidence.
Moreover, mentioning the word “war” can land a person in jail for up to 12 years.
The propaganda serves two purposes: it strengthens the community and promotes a sense of “us” and “them” under attack.
It also helps explain a chaotic world and removes responsibility.
During the last two years, there have been dozens of detained journalists.
Among them are Kevin Bishop, a British reporter for the BBC and Anna Nemtsova, a Russian reporter for The Daily Beast.
Other prominent journalists include Simon Shuster, a US journalist for Time Magazine, Lucia Sgueglia, and Jan Lewenhagen of Sweden’s Dagens Nyheter.
New outlets learned from Mr. Navalny
One of the most exciting developments in investigative journalism today is the rise of independent media outlets in Russia.
These new media outlets are using traditional sourcing methods and online audiences to break through President Vladimir V’s veil of power.
The state controls all the major television networks, but new outlets are using the Internet as a medium to reach a global audience.
The rise of independent journalism in Russia is unprecedented since the 1990s.
After Mr. Navalny’s success, new media have imitated his style. Some have even launched YouTube channels imitating his work.
These new media are also benefiting from the homogeneity of mainstream television networks.
The emergence of new media has created a more diverse media landscape and allows investigative reporting to flourish.
The FBK investigative unit is an example of this. Founded in 2008, the nonprofit organization is not a traditional news outlet.
Its videos often feature mocking commentary. Its website also lists individual donors.
Despite its political nature, the FBK team is considered the most effective investigative media outlet in the country.
Its videos offer valuable insights to professional journalists working in other countries.
While the rise of cybercrime has caused many journalists to seek asylum abroad, many new outlets have learned from Mr. Navalny how investigative journalism flourished in hostile Russia.
One such example is the Meduza video, a two-hour video that revealed the shady dealings of Moscow city’s government.
It has gone viral on YouTube and is viewed by more than a hundred million people.
In the end, investigative journalism has remained a staple of media in Russia.
This growth has been fueled by the advent of the Internet.
Today, the Internet allows journalists to conduct investigations in a short period of time.
While this may be problematic in certain circumstances, the Internet makes it possible to conduct an investigation in any location.
While Russian security services are often hostile and uncooperative, there are some ways to avoid surveillance and spying.
The Anti-Corruption Foundation, for example, employs a ruse to track a cell phone signal.
It also uses the services of paraglider pilots to film corrupt politicians.
By using these methods, they have been able to remain anonymous while working on the story.
Investigative journalism in hostile environments is a vital part of democracy and a healthy democracy.
In a hostile country like Russia, free speech is not just an important component of a healthy democracy.
It also has the potential to foster civic responsibility and strengthen relationships between citizens.
This is why it is so important to promote and encourage independent media.
By doing this, journalists will be able to continue doing what they do best – writing about issues that matter to the people.
Lack of financial resources
The lack of financial resources for investigative journalism in Russia is a significant problem, which has made it difficult for journalists to report on the country’s most sensitive issues.
In this climate, journalists fear that the current period of freedom will not last forever.
The recent arrest of Sergei Smirnov on suspicion of retweeting a joke with a protest date is a stark reminder of the dangers facing journalists in Russia.
The journalist is facing a 15-day jail term, which has fueled debate about whether his arrest was an incompetent mistake or a deliberate warning to his peers.
Fortunately, the financial data leaks of recent years have made it possible for journalists and civil society activists to follow the money and influence of Russian political elites.
Investigations like the Panama Papers, the Troika laundromat scandal, and the Pandora Papers have shed light on the alleged wealth of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
These investigations have revealed how the kleptocrats in Russia use the global financial system and its intermediaries, such as banks in leading democracies.
Lack of funding for investigative journalism in hostile Russia is an especially serious problem, as it puts journalists in increasingly dangerous situations.
In addition, it also restricts their research and protection, which can affect the quality of the information they report.
And because the resources are scarce, many journalists have to quit their jobs to support their families.
Investigative journalism in Russia has become more exciting in recent years, as new media outlets have emerged with conventional sourcing methods.
These outlets are piercing the veil of Putin’s power and have an increasing online audience. Even though state-controlled television networks and newspapers dominate the media landscape, the number of independent outlets has increased to a record high since the 1990s.
Despite the fact that the United States intelligence community has concluded that Russian government officials interfered in the 2016 U.S. election, there has been relatively little legislative action to stop Russia from engaging in such activities in the future.
This lack of legislative action reflects the desire to wait for the results of ongoing investigations and the difficulty of legislating on such a politically sensitive topic in today’s hyperpartisan Congress.
Further, drawing a line at the level of hostile foreign interference is a deeply philosophical issue.
The crisis in Ukraine poses many challenges for journalists.
The Russian military invasion and its aftermath has made journalists and news organizations vulnerable.
Supporting journalists is vital in keeping the world informed about the crisis.
However, the latest news from Ukraine suggests that Russia’s eastern offensive is waning.
In the meantime, journalists are returning to the front line after the Russian forces withdrew from previously-occupied areas.
Proekt, a Russian investigative media outlet, was recently banned and its publisher and editors have been listed as “foreign agents” by the Russian authorities.
Proekt had published investigative reports on corruption, and exposed abuses by tycoons close to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Last month, police raided the Proekt headquarters.
They then searched its journalists’ apartments, and they were questioned for allegedly supporting a defamation case.