Anatoly Golja and its point of view. The program "the First channel in Moldova" "Point of view" became, perhaps, to one of the most rating on our TV. And its leader Anatoly Golja is considered one of the most professional and most successful our journalists. Eleven years ago together with colleague Alexander Tanasom it practically from zero has begun news agency "Инфотаг" creation without which production today it is difficult to present the media market of Moldova. A native child "Инфотага" the magazine "Banks and the finance" as experts speak, has turned to the desktop grant for people who work in this sphere. And, of course, "the First channel in Moldova" still remains among most "watchable" at our televiewers.
Today we treat coffee of the co-owner of news agency "Инфотаг", the general director "the First channel in Moldova" Anatoly Golia. TV - opium for the people - Anatoly that you, the former newspaper journalist, became television and was lighted on the screen, is a desire of glory or first of all aspiration something to change on our TV?
- Desires will become famous it was not exact, though say, that all journalists are arrogant. It is considered, if the person basically has gone to journalism, means, he wants popularity, wishes to be in the public eye, prove to another, that it something can. Probably, it so. Probably, in each of us - and not only in journalists is it is put in pawn. I, actually, very much like arrogant people who know that want and are able to achieve it. Very much it is pleasant to me, that young steels - in good sense of a word - are more impudent in this plan, after all we were in due time very shy and constraining. And they are much more liberated. In my opinion, it is very good.
But I have decided to do pass not so much because of ambitions, how many because, that have felt necessity to express, to show other people. We on TV really do not have similar projects. At us in general, we will tell so, insufficiently qualitative TV as a whole. I do not wish someone to criticise, and someone to hold up as an example, I speak about all our television channels.
Such picture has developed owing to the objective reasons - the limited market, the small country, absence - in global understanding - political elite, people who can speak well, convincingly, beautifully. Because of it, for example, a talk show "To a barrier!" In the Moldavian variant you will not make. Quantity of potential participants too ограниченно. They will end through two-three transfers... Though and in studio of channel "NTV" at Соловьева shortage of "duelists" too is felt. Zhirinovsky literally appears every month, through time...
- And still, you have decided to rush on an embrasure and to test on TV...
-Yes, I have decided itself to try in this field. It was interesting. It is immodest to speak, but, I consider, as the writing journalist I as though already has taken place - and as the political commentator, both in "Инфотаге", and in magazine "" I wrote Banks and the finance much enough. But TV it is perfect another. Absolutely other journalism, problems, other influence on a society. We want that or not, but the TV as someone from Americans has told is an opium for the American people. It becomes valid opium for a society as a whole, especially now.
You remember, in a film "Moscow does not trust tears" one of heroes argued that in twenty years there will be a continuous TV, books will not be, newspapers too... Fortunately, it has not occurred. At us is both theatre, and the people read books, but the TV all the same prevails.
- Where to you to work - "behind side scenes" when you write more comfortably, and the people you do not see, or on public?
- On a kind at all I for a long time because before I three with superfluous were year the press-secretary of the president, and am a post public enough. Therefore when "was lighted" on the TV screen, with star fever was not ill. Me and before learnt in streets. No, in studio I feel myself normally. But, probably, all the same, I feel myself in a press more comfortably. When you sit - would tell before a sheet of paper earlier, but already behind the computer - write, edit, do, that want, can distract, then return, renew work... You Can change paragraphs places... It is very convenient and comfortable - to depend only on itself, from the talent, ability, knowledge of a problem.
On TV you depend on many factors. From technics, from the interlocutor very much you depend, from own mood, at last! Because, when you write, and there is no mood, can postpone work though till the night (at me so happens). And on TV in transfer are involved, at least, the person ten and is at you mood, whether is not present, has slept or not, is healthy or the tooth aches - and record to make it is necessary.
Besides, "Point of view" is as a hobby at me, that is not the basic work. I head television channel. It enough the big collective, the difficult mechanism, is a lot of partners, contracts, negotiations. After all I now, first of all, the manager of the channel, and already then - the journalist. Weekly transfer is in addition. To tell the truth, I do not know even when I have time to do it. It - at the expense of time, to the detriment of a family and other employment.
Heroes of a broadcasting time
- By what principle you select themes and heroes?
- Initially задумка was to select following the results of a week. We will tell, there was any important event, we invite in studio of its participant or the person which could comment on it. But this way very difficult: first, significant events happen not every week, secondly, the person can refuse, still something can occur. And we cannot risk an aether. It after all not the newspaper where, as a last resort, one material you replace with another, and leaves tomorrow what has been planned for today. Therefore we from initial задумки have decided to refuse.
Now we, basically, try to march in step with events, but transfer can be devoted and to simply actual problems. Meanwhile, judging by reaction of spectators, on calls after each program, it seems to me, it was possible to us.
- Sometimes you look you, and the impression is made, as if you hardly restrain not to enter discussion. You in general can recede from the prepared questions?
- I prepare for myself the list of questions of which during transfer I adhere to percent on fifty because during interview quite often I become attached to any statements, I specify them and in general I depart from that that planned. To me always is what to object the interlocutor and very much it would be desirable to oppose. But it not always turns out, because at us not so many public people who can well keep in front of the chamber. And then already it is necessary to suppress in itself desire to "drown" the interlocutor. Because the person and so feels скованно.
By experience I can tell, that it is very easy to me to talk to deputies. With all deputies, irrespective of their political orientation. They have already become skilled at microphones. And the main task of the leader - to manage them to stop. It is uneasy, therefore sometimes it is necessary even to break the interlocutor sharply enough.
During interview to ministers or to military men, say, a situation other. They need to set more questions because they answer shortly enough and informatively. But it is always interesting to me, when debate turns out and it is possible to polemize. I always a priori try to put myself on other position, than the visitor of studio - on any problem, let it will be power, social questions, insurance medicine etc.
- All of us people, all человеки, at us are the liking and antipathies, but after all you cannot show them in a shot. It is difficult to be impartial?
- I in this plan have a good journalistic experience. I always worked in news agencies. Began in АТЕМе, МОЛДПРЕСе, ИНФОТАГе, was the staff reporter of the INTERFAX. And always, even during Soviet times, requirements to journalists of news agencies were the maximum impartiality and равноудаленность from the opposite points of view. And I always adhere to it.
The journalist should hold the emotions at itself. I the professional problem see in to imposing the point of view, the opinion and to bring up the reader, the spectator, the radio listener, to leave to it possibility independently to do conclusions. Correct they will be from the point of view of the journalist or not it is not so important. It is much more important to allow to get acquainted to the person the maximum possibility with different sights at a problem.
I categorically do not accept questions at press conferences in style of five-minute performance with a question in the end "you agree with me"? But, alas, at us such journalism in фаворе. And pure giving of the information, without estimations - about it still it is necessary to dream.
When the policy separates
- Well, at us the journalism, unfortunately, is engaged. It is known after all who pays, that and orders music.
- Unfortunately. Our press is substantially divided by a political principle. And the journalistic organisations too are very separated. What live basically on grants, protect as a rule, interests of a small part of representatives of mass media.
I some times was going to enter in due time the Union of journalists, and each time when I was ready to hand in the statement, СЖ acted with any political declaration on behalf of ALL journalists. Last example when before elections in Romania a part of journalists, including chairman СЖ Valery Saharnjanu have urged to vote on elections in Romania for Адриана Нэстасе. It is absurdity, in my opinion. It means, what all members СЖ divide this point of view? Yes at all, everyone has the right to the point of view!
Probably, as the form of disagreement with СЖ, has appeared League of professional journalists. Actually, it not to eat well as speak in Odessa because it divides journalists by any principles, but it from a hopelessness, that СЖ represents interests of a narrow circle of people.
Let's go further. The centre of independent journalism spends every year interrogation on revealing of 10 best journalists. And the same people, the same editions leaving in the Moldavian language annually get to this list, preaching certain political views for some reason. And thus complain, that the Russian-speaking press has influence on a society, all monopolised and oppresses the press in a state language.
So where logic? One is spoken, interrogations show another, prizes give to the third, and influence actually at the fourth. I against these interrogations have no anything. But it is necessary to be defined: or search for nominees not only in an oppositional press, or openly tell, that fulfil money, pretend, that struggle for a freedom of speech, and the rest you does not interest.
- By the way, about a freedom of speech. Fashionable now a question: it at us is?
- As to a freedom of speech, probably, it at us is limited, put in certain frameworks. But I am absolutely assured, that we anywhere do not have any censorship. There is a self-censorship, probably, there are lacks of the legislation, but the press free enough.
Among newspapers you can find communistic, anticommunistic, social democratic - any. And I would like to see more independent press. We have not enough of it. And it becomes more independent because forbids the power or someone has established censorship, and from economic feebleness, from a hopelessness. That newspapers which proclaim itself independent, actually very much even are dependent on someone's concrete interests. It is enough to open any number and at once it is visible - whose. Who most loudly shouts about the independence, that actually is the most dependent.
And about weather
- Give we will not be more about sad. Give about weather, that is about obligatory point of any interview: your creative plans? We will not take all spheres of your activity, the newspaper will not suffice. Me, as well as any other spectator the TV interests: whether there Will be something qualitatively new in New year?
-Joint-stock company "Analiticmedia-grup" has an exclusive on an announcement of the First channel (former ORT). We will relay this channel and further. On Wednesday the Coordination council on TV and broadcasting has prolonged to us the licence for next five years. And I have told in collective: "It does not mean, that we have with relief sighed. It means, that we have received the trust credit seriously to undertake work".
By the legislation we are obliged to place own programs in volume not less than thirty percent of an announcement. Unfortunately, this requirement is difficult enough for executing. Since October, 1st we broadcast on all republic for 17 hours a day. At us it is a lot of letters of thanks from people who live in villages where there is no cable TV that is why practically all the day they could not look TVs. Now the people are happy, and we, it turns out, have made to itself a minus: when we broadcast 6 hours per day could observe this тридцатипроцентный a barrier. If we and now try to observe it it will turn out, that we will be compelled to fill six hours of an aether with own programs. While it is unreal.
Nevertheless, we understand, that it is necessary to develop own announcement. Yes, there are problems, and there will be a discontent of televiewers, as quality of our programs, of course, more low, than Moscow. But, I repeat, these are absolutely different budgets. For example, favourite the people the project "Last hero", costs some millions dollars. And at us all advertising market of Moldova in a year is estimated approximately in the same sum.
I always speak: we not less talented, at us quite good journalists, at us it is simple conditions a little bit others. Other country, other TV, nevertheless, is not present other way, except how to go on a way of development of own TV. And we already go on this way. And, as is known, the road will be mastered by the going.
- "The Pessimist sees difficulties at each possibility; the optimist in each difficulty sees possibilities". In my opinion, this citation from Churchill here very opportunely.
Julia СЕМЕНОВА (Юдович) has written down
P.S. On December, 25th at 20 o'clock 30 minutes Anatoly Golja and all televiewers "the First channel in Moldova" learn the point of view of President РМ of Vladimir Voronina.