Why Gazprom Digs into Belarusian Independent Mass Media?

Recently, AAT Bieltranshaz (OAO Beltransgaz) which currently belongs to Russian monopolist Gazprom, start sending independent mass media very unusual offers. At first sight, it looks like a request for possible advertisement placement.

However, usually advertisers either buy some media space or not. But not Bieltranshaz: it requires to give surprisingly detailed information on the founders and proprietors of a mass medium and even on the final beneficiaries —people who receive dividends. The need for some information is explained by the internal rules of its new owner — Gazprom. Still, why an advertiser needs to know the founders of some edition?

The request signed by A.V.Kurzau, one of Bieltranshaz top managers, offers to fill in a special form and mention the names, home addresses, phones of mass media shareholders and beneficiaries.

The request also suggests providing a copy of organisation’s statute and a copy of CEO appointment decree.

This goes far beyond several documents usually requested by an advertiser to place ads in media. But why?

Commonly in business world, such deep digging out is followed by a takeover offer. In the case of Belarusian mass media and Bieltranshaz (which is fully controlled by Gazprom) such a scenario is bolstered with a whole row of additional circumstances.

Highly ramified business of monopolist Gazprom is actually not just extraction and selling gas. Thus, holding Gazprom-Media has been operating since 1998 and possesses dozens of audio, audio-visual, internet and printed media in Russian and some post-USSR countries. NTV, NTV+, Echo of Moscow are among them.

The only existence of such a holding makes Gazprom expansion on Belarus possible.

Kremlin-controlled Gazprom’s strategy also fits here: to enhance its influence in foreign countries. And this may become the main driving force for takeover attempts.

If consider profitability, Belarusian independent mass media are not really lucrative and tempting for investors: most popular ones’ breakeven is around 5–10 per cent.

Many still balance on the edge of bankruptcy and survive only due to subsidies from sponsors and founders. But acquiring independent mass media — the most trusted by voters — will make the Kremlin’s dreams on controlling Belarusian minds come true. The goal is definitely worth several million dollars.

It seems, there will be those independent mass media owners who will eagerly sell their “buckets of problems” to a rich Russian merchant. And Gazprom is able to pay good money: last year only Gazprom-Media revenue reached $1.5bln.

Some editions that value ideas the most are unlikely to be sold to Gazprom — which equals treason, but many TV and radiostations, newspapers, magazines and news portals prefer mundane money to high ideals.

Several years ago, Belarusian officials warned some influential mass media owners they would hinder such takeover attempts by Russians, but today much has changed and the Kremlin has never had such influence on Minsk it has now and readiness to protect the mass media is much weaker.

The outcomes are not hard to imagine: bigger influence, less anything Belarusian.

NTV channel is used to showing footages from Belarus without saying it actually is Belarus. The local residents are called “Russians...”

Russian elite does not want Belarus to be an independent state and it does not conceal it.

To satisfy its “empire ambitions”, Russia is ready to spend much.

The motto of Gazprom-Media — which reads as “to supervise business not content” — should not mislead anyone: the editors and top managers are always replaceable if the content is a bit wrong, and then everything will be fixed. The situation with Echo of Moscow editor-in-chief Alexei Venediktov proves the assumption.

At some meeting in July Lukashenka said that some foreign banks acted like spies collecting data on Belarusian enterprises for unclear purposes.

It seems to be the same in mass media market.

• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0