Dean of the Higher School of Television at Moscow State University Vitaly Tretyakov. Vitaly Tretyakov: biography, family and education, journalistic career, photo
USSR →Russia
Vitaly Tovievich Tretyakov(January 2, 1953, Moscow) - Russian journalist, political scientist, author and host of the television program “What to do? Philosophical Conversations" on the TV channel "Culture", Dean of the Higher School (Faculty) of Television of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosova, General Director - Chief Editor"Independent Publishing Group "NIG", editor-in-chief of the magazine "Political Class", general director of the Foundation for the Promotion of Education in the Field of Journalism "Medialogy".
Biography
Since 2004 - honorary professor at the Russian-Armenian (Slavic) State University in Yerevan, Armenia.
From to 2008, member of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for promoting the development of civil society institutions and human rights.
Member of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy (SVOP), Moscow.
Member Board of Trustees Institute of CIS Countries (Moscow).
Since 2005, member of the Editorial Board of the Journalist magazine.
Head of the Sociological Service “Vox populi-T”. Together with Professor Boris Grushin (d. 2007), he is the author and director of the long-term sociological projects “100 Most Influential Politicians in Russia” (monthly surveys from January 1993 to 2011) and “100 Experts of Russia” (quarterly surveys from May 2000 to 2005).
Many of V. Tretyakov’s texts are posted on the website of the Independent Publishing Group NIG, which belongs to him. There are also active links to the main sites with which V. Tretyakov works on the Internet.
Author of more than 2,500 articles in various collections, as well as in publications of the Novosti Press Agency, Moscow News, Nezavisimaya Gazeta and its supplements, Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Literary newspaper», « Komsomolskaya Pravda", "Izvestia", magazines "Political Class", "World Energy Policy", "Expert", "Journalist", "Profile", "Strategy of Russia", "Free Thought-XXI", magazine "Limes" (Italy), newspaper Le Figaro (France) and other Russian and foreign media.
Awards
Bibliography
- "Philanthropy in Soviet society." - M.: Publishing House of the Novosti Press Agency, 1985. - 80 p.- Released in English, French, German and Spanish.
- “Gorbachev, Ligachev, Yeltsin. Political portraits against the backdrop of perestroika.” - M.: Book Museum "A-Z", 1990. - 69 p. - ISBN 5-85030-012-0
- "Titus Sovietologists. Their struggle for power. Essays on the idiocy of Russian politics." - M.: Publishing house "Nezavisimaya Gazeta", 1996. - 192 p. - ISBN 5-86712-026-0
- “Russian politics and politicians are normal and pathological. Look at Russian politics 1990-2000." - M.: Ladomir, 2001. - 863 p. - ISBN 5-86218-410-4- Prize of the Ministry of Press and Television and Radio Communications of Russia for best book 2001.
- “How to become a famous journalist. A course of lectures on the theory and practice of modern Russian journalism.” - M.: Algorithm, Eksmo, 2004. - 623 p. - ISBN 5-86218-451-1- Prize of the Russian State Library and the Russian Biographical Institute for the best book of 2004 in the “Journalism” category.
- “Do we need Putin after 2008?” - M.: IIC "Rossiyskaya Gazeta", 2005. - 184 p. - ISBN 5-94829-017-4
- "Spineless Russia". - M.: "Rossiyskaya Gazeta", "Moscow News", 2006. - 544 p. - ISBN 5-94829-018-2
- “The science of being Russia. Our national interests and ways to realize them." - M.: Russkiy Mir, 2007. - 766 p. - ISBN 978-5-89577-109-9- Prize of the Russian Association of Political Science.
- "What to do?". - M.: Algorithm, Eksmo, 2009. - 304 p. - ISBN 978-5-699-34632-5
- “Scientific and educational notebooks of the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. Notebook No. 1, September – December 2009”, Compiled by V.T. Tretyakov. - M.: Algorithm-Book, 2010. - 256 p. - ISBN 978-5-9265-0767-3
- “How to become a famous journalist. A course of lectures on the theory and practice of modern Russian journalism.” - M.: Algorithm, 2010. - 560 p. - ISBN 978-5-9265-0768-0.
- “Scientific and educational notebooks of the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov. Notebook No. 2, January - June 2010”, Compiled by V.T. Tretyakov. - M.: Algorithm-Book, 2010. - 325 p. - ISBN 978-5-9265-0770-3
Interview
- Interview with Tbiliselebi magazine, August 2009, in Georgian Retrieved January 19, 2010
- Interview with the Rzeczpospolita newspaper, September 2009, in Polish. Retrieved January 19, 2010.
A television
- Vitaly Tretyakov’s journalistic program “What to do? Philosophical Conversations” is shown on the “Culture” TV channel on Sundays. The program start time varies in each television season, but is usually somewhere from 14:45 to 15:15 Moscow time. The duration of the program is 45 minutes. As a rule, in summer period, and also during the New Year holidays there is a break. Recordings of the program are regularly posted on the torrent tvtorrent.ru. Since the end of 2011, also on the channel in YouTube.
Family status
Married, has a son.
Notes
Presence in virtual space
Categories:
- Personalities in alphabetical order
- Writers by alphabet
- Born on January 2
- Born in 1953
- Born in Moscow
- Scientists by alphabet
- Political scientists by alphabet
- Political scientists of the USSR
- Russian political scientists
- Journalists in alphabetical order
- Journalists of the USSR
- Journalists of Russia
- Journalists of the 20th century
- TV presenters in alphabetical order
- Russian TV presenters
- TV presenters of the 21st century
- Graduates of the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University
- Members of the CPSU
- Chief editors
- Deans
- MGIMO teachers
- MSU teachers
- HSE teachers
Wikimedia Foundation.
2010.
See what “Tretyakov, Vitaly Tovievich” is in other dictionaries: - (b. January 2, 1953, Moscow), Russian journalist. In 1976 he graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University (see MOSCOW UNIVERSITY (MSU)). In 1976-1988 he worked at the Novosti Press Agency. In 1988 1990 political... ...
encyclopedic Dictionary - (b. 1953) Russian journalist. Since 1976, editor at the Novosti press agency. In 1988 90 political commentator, deputy editor-in-chief of the Moscow News newspaper. Since 1990, the editor-in-chief of the Nezavisimaya Gazeta...
Big Encyclopedic Dictionary General Director of the Independent Publishing Group since 2001; born January 2, 1953 in Moscow; graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University in 1976; 1976 1988 worked at the Novosti Press Agency (APN) in positions from... ...
Large biographical encyclopedia
- ... Wikipedia Vitaly Tovievich Tretyakov - Published in connection with the suspension of publication of the Moscow News newspaper from January 1. Vitaly Tovievich Tretyakov was born on January 2, 1953 in Moscow. In 1976 he graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University. From 1976 to 1988 he worked at the Agency... ...
Encyclopedia of Newsmakers
- (born January 2, 1953, Moscow) Russian journalist, political scientist. Owner and editor-in-chief of the magazine “Political Class” (since 2005), author and host of the weekly program “What to do? Philosophical Conversations" (TV channel "Culture", since 2001). Biography... ...Wikipedia Tretyakov is a Russian surname, comes from a Russian non-church male name
Please read the entire following rant from the “dean of the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University” Vitaly Tovievich Tretyakov. I don’t know what this old fart has to do with television (I haven’t seen a single show of his and I don’t even remember him working on any TV channel), but he went down in the history of journalism for the fact that on the first anniversary of his “Nezavisimaya Gazeta” in 1992, he brought 12 thousand oysters from Paris, which the then post-coup Russian elite gorged on:
Since then, Tretyakov has been shoving these oysters to everyone
And he himself became an oyster - a bivalve invertebrate mollusk. Only such a creature could write such a text, the quintessence of which boils down to the following: “Children? Orphans? Disabled people? Are you all crazy?! This is international politics! gas chamber all these children - the main thing, not an inch for the Pindos! ". Ordinary fascism, read:
Original taken from v_tretyakov in Once again about adoption and more
(too lazy to write something new. The day before yesterday I dictated the following commentary for the website of the Permanent Committee of the Union State. Yesterday this text should have appeared there. I hope not to return to this topic again. And in the morning something new will happen - then I’ll react.)
Vitaly Tretyakov: The practice of transferring Russian children for adoption to other countries must be stopped
Whether it is humane or inhumane, speculative or not, the so-called Dima Yakovlev law was adopted by the Duma of the Russian Federation. And I hope that it will be signed by the president.
One can debate for a long time about the law itself and the moment of its adoption. The law certainly has its weaknesses. And it was precisely these weaknesses that his opponents seized on. Only by narrow-minded or tendentious people, biased by internal or external motives international relationships in general, and Russian-American relations in particular can be viewed in a literal sense. Namely, there are orphans, among them there are sick people, in Russia for some reason they cannot be helped, but in America they can. And don’t touch it, because it’s inhumane.
But this is international politics, and not just a humanitarian action to save individual orphans, sick or healthy children. Therefore, I immediately discard all this humanitarian, and most often speculative pseudo-humanitarian argumentation. I view this problem as an international one, as a problem of relations between Russia and the United States. And in this regard, several aspects need to be emphasized.
I will start with the moment that is not the most important, but still relevant to Russian-American relations. It’s amazing, it’s simply amazing that journalists, public figures, politicians, who for many years no one stopped anyone from worrying about orphans, deal with this problem, raise the question - why is it bad for us with the treatment of children, with their adoption (however, this is so it is known: how much has already been said and written about this), suddenly, at once, in a concentrated, united front, they came out in defense of either American adoptive parents or sick children (whom they protect more is the question). All this very much resembles a coordinated action.
Moreover, on the eve of V.V. Putin’s press conference, I myself saw on Twitter the pages of many people simply direct calls that can be regarded as some kind of directive (in the sense of coordinating) instructions: “Let’s shower Putin with children. Let’s shower Putin with orphans.” I saw this with my own eyes, I repeat, on the eve of the press conference, before these instructions were implemented at the event itself.
In this regard, I have very strong suspicions that these children are used primarily to fight Putin and his regime, and this activity is essentially a political weapon, and not at all a humanitarian action to protect orphans.
Now about the international aspect of this problem. There have been repeated assurances from our Foreign Ministry and senior officials that the United States will soon repeal the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, a reset will begin, and everything will be great. And all this went on for several years. People who know, even superficially (including me) American foreign policy, and domestic policy as well, who follow the course of events related to the United States, have repeatedly said: Americans never do anything to their own detriment. If they cancel the Jackson-Vanik amendment, it will be only because it interferes with themselves in connection with Russia's accession to the WTO and for a number of other reasons. Which was actually confirmed. Those who justified the need to cancel the amendment in the US Congress spoke openly, and the US Ambassador to the Russian Federation M. McFaul directly wrote that it was canceled because it was unprofitable for American businessmen. Not because Russia has become more democratic, has become better. Not at all.
Further. People with even a superficial knowledge of American politics, including me, said: something will definitely come to replace the canceled amendment. And so it happened - the Magnitsky list appeared, and things began to spin.
During the press conference, Putin was repeatedly asked questions about Russian-American relations, including the issue of adoption. And answering these questions, Putin gave several examples concerning children adopted by Americans, from which it became clear that every time the Americans deceive Russian diplomacy and Russia. An adoption agreement is signed between the Russian Foreign Ministry and the US State Department, and suddenly it turns out that families cannot be checked, that the State Department has no control over the situation, that this can only be done by local authorities, who in turn declare that they have not signed any agreements with Russia. The situation is similar with missile defense. And every time it turned out (apparently under the pressure of the internal opposition, including our liberal loudmouths) this is what happened: one step by Russia towards the United States, another, a third, and there were no reciprocal steps from America. Even what is presented as some kind of counter-movement, in fact, gives Russia nothing. America sacredly guards its interests and does not want to give up even an inch of it.
The United States is a superpower that continues to largely control all international politics through economic, political, military and other levers. And Russia, like other countries, is forced to reckon with this. It’s just that others obey unconditionally, and Russia tries to kick up periodically. But if Russia really feels like it is at least to some extent an independent state, and even more so a great power, then it cannot constantly endure the humiliation that other countries endure. Naturally, I mean the methods and means of implementing American foreign policy.
Degree of corruption among Russian officials, and not only among them, is known. Where they keep their money is also clear. And the fact that they are on the hook from the Americans because of this is also understandable. And many of these people probably wouldn't want to quarrel with Americans because questions might arise about their foreign accounts and their trips abroad. But we are not talking about the specific interests of specific people - corrupt or non-corrupt officials. We are talking about the national interests of Russia, about the self-perception of our country - either independent or completely dependent on America.
A successful step with Dmitry Yakovlev’s law or an unsuccessful one is a step of the Russian parliament, Russian foreign policy. Even if it is unsuccessful, Russia cannot shy away from side to side, especially under pressure from the Americans and those who sympathize with them or want to overthrow Putin. Moreover, it does not matter whether such people have grounds for this or not, they act as a typical fifth column. They simply play into the hands of the United States and its interests, and increase constant American pressure on Russia in general and on the Russian leadership in particular.
I, like many Russians, have a lot of complaints against our government, the State Duma, and Putin. But I don’t want to play out these claims through the State Department or the US Congress, through a direct appeal to them - punish Putin. Who doesn’t like Putin, who is dissatisfied with him, with the Duma, “ United Russia", have every right to fight against them inside Russia using legal means. But without relying on the United States and, especially, without helping them pursue their own policy of subordinating Russia.
It doesn’t matter at all for what reasons this law was created. It doesn’t matter where - in the Kremlin or in the Duma. I can’t even imagine how the president can’t sign it!?
If he does not sign it, it will become clear to everyone that this was done either under pressure from the Americans or a small group of opposition-minded (and in one direction - pro-Western) people in relation to the majority of the population. Mainly representing the Moscow crowd. This fundamental point. Even in sports there is a rule: if the arbitrator has made a decision, even if it is obviously wrong, he should not change it, since this undermines the very institution of sports arbitration.
How can you demand that Russia, under pressure from some group of people or the US State Department or any other foreign Ministry of Foreign Affairs, change its positions and decisions!? This is completely excluded in international politics if we are talking about a self-respecting state.
And one last thing. In my opinion, there is no doubt that the practice of transferring Russian children for adoption to other countries must be stopped. This shameful practice should have stopped long ago. We can only talk about exceptional cases - about sick children who objectively cannot be helped in Russia. But then it will not be a search for a family who may or may not help with treatment, but a search for a specific medical institution without any connection to adoption.
- ... Wikipedia(born January 2, 1953, Moscow) - Russian journalist, political scientist, author and host of the television program “What to do? Philosophical conversations" on the TV channel "Culture" (from 2001 to the present). Dean of the Higher School (Faculty) of Television of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosova (from 2008 to the present), General Director-Editor-in-Chief of the Independent Publishing Group NIG (from 2001 to 2013), editor-in-chief of the Political Class magazine (from 2005 to 2009 ), General Director of the Foundation for the Promotion of Education in the Field of Journalism “Medialogy” (from 2008 to the present).
Biography
Born in Moscow in the family of Toviy Alekseevich Tretyakov (born in 1926) - an engineer, participant in the Great Patriotic War and Nina Ivanovna Tretyakova (born in 1927) - a worker.
In 1976 he graduated from the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov.
Career
In 1976-1988 he worked at the Novosti Press Agency.
In 1988-1990 - in the editorial office of the Moscow News newspaper as a columnist, then a political observer and, finally, deputy editor-in-chief.
In 1990, he created Nezavisimaya Gazeta and was its editor-in-chief until the beginning of the summer of 2001, as well as its separately published supplements - “Independent Military Review”, “NG-religion”, “Ex libris NG” and others. In May 1995, due to financial difficulties, the publication of the newspaper was suspended. In August 1995, a group of several members of the editorial leadership attempted to remove him, but already in September of the same year, Vitaly Tretyakov, with the assistance of Boris Berezovsky, regained leadership of the editorial office and resumed publication of the newspaper.
From 2001 to 2013 - owner and general director of the Independent Publishing Group NIG. Since the same year, he has been running the program “What to do? Philosophical conversations" on the TV channel "Culture". In 2003, the program received the TEFI Award.
From 2005 to 2009 - owner and editor-in-chief of the monthly magazine "Political Class". In just 5 years, 60 issues of the magazine were published; since January 2010, publication was suspended and has never been resumed.
In 2006-2007, he was editor-in-chief of the Moscow News weekly magazine.
In 2008, he organized and subsequently headed the Higher School (Faculty) of Television of Moscow State University. M. V. Lomonosov.
In 2008, he became co-founder and CEO of the Medialogia Foundation for the Promotion of Education and Science in the Field of Media and Television.
Since the fall of 2015, professor at the Department of Sociology and Humanitarian Culture at MEPhI.
Other biographical facts
In 2000-2002, he was a professor at the Faculty of Applied Political Science at the Higher School of Economics - State University.
In 2001-2007, he was a professor at the Faculty of International Journalism at MGIMO (U) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation.
In 2004-2008 - member of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for promoting the development of civil society institutions and human rights.
Since 2004 - honorary professor at the Russian-Armenian (Slavic) State University in Yerevan, Armenia.
Member of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy (SVOP), Moscow.
Member of the Board of Trustees of the Institute of CIS Countries (Moscow).
Since 2005 - member of the Editorial Council of the Journalist magazine.
Head of the Sociological Service “Vox populi-T”. Together with Professor Boris Grushin (died in 2007), he is the author and director of the long-term sociological projects “100 Most Influential Politicians in Russia” (monthly surveys from January 1993 to 2011) and “100 Experts of Russia” (quarterly surveys from May 2000 -th to 2005).
In Novosibirsk state university a lecture by the dean of the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University Vitaly Tretyakov “Journalism in the era of information war” was held. He told the students that a journalist is a fighter, the Ukrainian language is worse than Russian, and propagandists, unlike liberal journalists, do not lie. He also, at the request of the special correspondent “Father,” commented on the situation with harassment in the State Duma and stated that Slutsky behaved “like a normal man.” Some students were outraged and left the lecture.
Vitaly Tretyakov began by saying that there are many people who do not believe in waging an information war against Russia. During the course of the lecture, he asked this question several times and, as a result, led the audience to the conclusion that journalists who do not choose sides are traitors and collaborators: “If you want to be defeated, capitulate, run away from the front line, say that it’s okay. You will be defeated if you want it. But you must understand that there are others who definitely do not want this. And apparently, they are the majority and they will resist. Either you or you.<...>Fighters are journalists. You may be the best pacifist in the world, but if they strangle you and your family, what good is your pacifism? Only harm. This does not mean that I am now calling on everyone sitting in this room to write angry notes about what a fool Theresa May is, what a scoundrel Boris Johnson is. Although both are true.<...>Even in classical war we see that there are breaks between battles. And there is no need to be mistaken here. Now there is no battle going on, and you say it’s war. Espionage activities continue, troops are landing. We journalists cannot help but take a certain position. If you are a deserter, you will not be shot. But that doesn't mean you won't be treated differently by most others. You can consider them cattle. That they are not civilized, that we would drink Bavarian beer and not Zhiguli. You can think so, write articles on these topics. But just understand that the majority thinks differently. The nation must survive." The lecturer added that in order to “fulfill a professional mission,” a journalist goes beyond the bounds of public morality, or rather, steals information, as the intelligence services do to ensure the country’s security.
Vitaly Tretyakov
Tretyakov also noted that it was not Russia that started the information war, since it could not have started it in the “post-Soviet, or more precisely, in the anti-Soviet years.” At the same time, Tretyakov stated that Russia is the greatest country “in terms of duration of existence” and in terms of “linguistic criteria.” He said that the tactics of “Bandera” to “expel the Russian language” are correct, but we must resist it. " Ukrainian language worse than Russian, it is certainly a level lower linguistically, but in this case this is not the main thing,” Tretyakov said. After this remark, four people left the audience. “What are you, comrades-in-arms of Bandera’s followers?” - the speaker asked after them.
The dean of the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University said that, unlike a classical war, during an information war, “hostile entities” are not withdrawn from the territory of the country and there are many more of them on Russian territory than there are Russians in the West. Employees of foreign foundations, according to Vitaly Tretyakov, including the recently closed British Council, are spies. “Practically everyone is involved in political intelligence. It is unlikely that they are stealing secrets from your physics institutes, although this is unknown. The states understand that everything cannot be closed, so everything is controlled and misinformed accordingly. Classic counterintelligence activities are being conducted. The closure of the British Council means that fifteen percent of British agents on Russian territory have simply been confiscated. This is a significant blow."
Tretyakov noted that a journalist should not be ashamed of the fact that he is a propagandist.
“There is a journalist, and there is a propagandist. The journalist may be wrong, but he good man. And the propagandist is a priori bad. This is absolutely wrong. Every journalist is a propagandist,” said the dean of the Higher School of Television. - There are no journalists who do not engage in propaganda. There are those who forbid themselves to evaluate information and comment. But they are sources of black propaganda. They lie, they deceive. What is now commonly called fake journalism.” Propagandists, according to Tretyakov, speak “sincerely and honestly, without deceiving.” “If someone says to my face: “You are a propagandist,” this person will be completely verbally smeared in a minute and a half. The audience will understand that he is an idiot. And many shy away when they are accused of this. You shouldn't get lost. We must defend the country, our corporation, and not fall for these cheap tricks,” he added. Tretyakov also said that he recommends several textbooks for students to read in order to master journalism: “This is my textbook, the Bible, the Koran for Muslims, the Criminal Code and a textbook on homiletics - the art of preaching.”
The first question was asked by a first-year student at the NSU Department of Journalism: “How do you comment on the positive internal agenda of federal channels and the hushing up of events? The latest example is the rallies in Volokolamsk over the poisoning of children. But, unfortunately, there was nothing about this on Channel One in the final release. At the same time, the emphasis is on foreign policy. Is this an element of information warfare for you?” Tretyakov, interrupting several times young man, replied that this was being done so as not to cause panic “during the post-election euphoria.” “Just imagine, you are returning home. The family is happy to see you, dinner is ready, and you say that a person was killed there. Ruin their mood. They really killed a person, they really are lying in the mud, but to tell or not to tell is a moral choice.”
“I am struggling with the fact that there is an opinion: the reserves of honest journalism are in the West, and the breeding grounds for vile, vile and deceitful propagandists are in Russia. Firstly, you don’t respect yourself by thinking like that. Secondly, this is not true. By the way, in Russia there really are breeding grounds, as a rule, for lying journalists. Basically, they are in the liberal media,” Tretyakov added.
The next and final question was asked by the special correspondent of “Fathers,” a third-year student at the NSU Department of Journalism, Pyotr Manyakhin:
- How do you feel about the situation with harassment in the Duma, the decision of the ethics commission and the boycott of the media?
- How can I tell you? Do you hit on girls?
- Not usually.
- NO?!
- Only by obtaining their consent.
-Your sexual tactics are even more sophisticated. This is called waging an information war. First, psychological suppression of the object of capture, and then physical capture, which in any case would be regarded as violence, but since the victim has already been propagated, she surrenders and thinks that with pleasure. I know Leonid Petrovich Slutsky well. And it is possible that he, like any normal man, in certain circumstances could put his hand on a woman’s bare knee or on some other place. Not everyone is so prepared for modern tolerance. And in our time, there were those who fooled a girl for a long time before they tried to kiss her, but there were also more straightforward ones. I don't see anything wrong with this.
But this is communication in professional discourse. A journalist comes to a deputy for a comment. In the evening, at the exit from the State Duma, you can give a bouquet.
- Who told you that? Is this what they tell you in the West? I believe that a man and a woman remain a man and a woman both at the exit and on the third floor, and some even in the elevator.
- No, on the third floor of the State Duma they are, first of all, a deputy and a journalist.
- Who told you this?
- This presupposes the ethics of business communication.
-Who wrote this ethics? The code of ethics is known to me in the biblical presentation. I am a non-believer, although I really value Orthodox civilization. But I know one source of morality is what is written in the Bible.
- Slutsky proposed to a BBC correspondent to become his mistress. The Bible says you can't have mistresses.
- How do you know?
- There is a recording.
- I stated my position. Any normal man in certain circumstances, namely in a closed room, would do the same. Do you think the office is somehow different from the bedroom? In this large audience Sexual instincts manifest themselves somewhat differently. If they put it into you that this is not possible, then you can’t, it’s a zoo. There really isn't much that can be done there. Mating occurs according to the decision of the zoologist. We live in a free world. We, thank God, do not live in the West. I started in Soviet time work. Soviet Union They accused us of having few Orthodox churches. Now Russia is being criticized for the fact that our country is flourishing Orthodox Church. This is because then they did not spread rot on their church. They recognize as good only what is already happening to them. Hence the dual position.
Someone said there - on Ekho Moskvy or in Meduza: they say, we refuse to communicate with Slutsky. The subtext is this: you will be healthier. Well, don't communicate. There are many women in Moscow, many journalists, others will communicate. And these journalists act according to the templates that are in the West. Why didn’t you tell us about this five years ago? Because of your silence, Slutsky now heads the Committee on International Affairs and the Kremlin cannot expel him from there. I don’t listen to such recordings, I’ve seen pornography. Is there a slap sound there?
- No.
- Why the hell if he harassed her? This is exactly how a girl should behave in such a situation.
“She probably thinks she can’t slap a deputy in the face.”
-Are you taking this girl's side?
- I ask you, and you start discussing.
- Any man at a certain age begins to harass different women. One of the harassments ends in a wedding, then children are born. You were born, as I understand it, in the same way.
- Perhaps I didn't ask.
- I do not rule out that the initial act took place in an office building.
- Hardly.
- I understand that in my time it was considered impossible. I cannot boast of being as old as you, although at your age you also have youthful stubbornness and youthful conformism. We used to hear this from old people, but now from young people. World turned upside down. First, will you report on how you behave at the registrations?
- Wonderful. At most, I just get drunk.
- And I think it’s indecent to get drunk. Although this happened to me too. Now political correctness is replacing what used to be censorship. We are not biorobots. If a man's behavior offends you, slap him in the face. But five years later... Well, yes, they sit with their friends, drink, remember their youth, who fought off whom. But they are making a political gesture. Well, do it right away, since you are so brave, declare it right away. Just like with Harvey Weinstein. I am ready to defend him. He seduced film actresses, which in itself is an oxymoron. Conviviality is now in Hollywood. In our country, someone said that Weinstein molested her. They showed it on Channel One because it was from Channel One. There is no big resonance. It's okay that Weinstein harassed a Russian actress, that's when he harassed Hollywood stars- this event. And these savages...
Don't become an old man who itches and discusses gossip. It's all gossip.
During the discussion, people began to leave the audience, and some became indignant at Tretyakov’s words. By the end of the lecture, no more than half of the original amount remained.
“My classmates and I decided to leave because we were no longer going to listen to Vitaly Tretyakov’s sexist statements. Can anyone even wrap their head around the idea that an adult man in an audience, most of which are girls, future journalists, will begin to defend Leonid Slutsky? It is very convenient to explain all situations where a woman is subjected to violence or “aggressive advances” by masculine nature or the woman’s “inappropriate” behavior. I didn’t expect that someday within the walls of NSU I would hear about how it has become the norm to “put a woman’s hand on a woman’s bare knee or somewhere else,” because “well, he’s a man,” Anna Anishchenko, one, told “Father.” of the students who left the lecture.
The famous Russian political scientist, journalist and public figure is famous for his harsh statements on topical issues modern life and the history of the country. Vitaly Tretyakov is engaged teaching activities at the Higher School of Television of Moscow State University. He is the owner and editor-in-chief of Nezavisimaya Gazeta and the author and host of an interesting program on the Culture channel.
Origin
Vitaly Tovievich Tretyakov was born on January 2, 1953 in the capital of the country, Moscow. In a simple Soviet family. Father, Toviy Alekseevich Tretyakov, is an engineer, head of production at a pilot plant, and a veteran of the Great Patriotic War. Mom, Nina Ivanovna Tretyakova, was a factory worker all her life. The journalist himself emphasizes that he is from a simple family - not an intellectual one. However, the ancestors on my father’s side were prosecutors and priests, and on my mother’s side they were mainly teachers and doctors. His grandfather, a village priest, was repressed and shot in 1937.
On his father's side he comes from among the Old Believers (according to family tradition). His grandfather Alexei Tretyakov worked in pre-revolutionary times as the personal driver of the famous millionaire Ryabushinsky. In Soviet times, he became the head of a workshop at ZIL (then automobile plant named after Stalin, then Likhachev).
"I'm Russian and proud of it"
Thanks to his unusual patronymic, Vitaly Tretyakov is often mistaken for a Jew. In his memoirs, he writes that the unusual middle name did not cause any particular trouble. Because I’m used to being constantly distorted. I met my patronymic in the most different options spellings: Tuvievich, Tofievich, Todievich, Dodievich, Iovlievich, Tolievich and even the natural Anatolyevich...
According to family legends, my paternal grandmother Evdokia Mikhailovna gave birth to six boys, but always dreamed of a girl. During her seventh pregnancy, her dream reached its climax. She even came up with a name for the girl, and not just a simple one, but a literary one - Zemfira, according to Pushkin. However, she again gave birth to a boy, whom she named out of disappointment after a little-known biblical saint - Tobias. So grandmother Evdokia protested against the injustice of fate. And in a purely Russian family a boy appeared with the usual Jewish name. According to another family legend, Evdokia Mikhailovna decided not to invent something herself, but simply found the most tricky name in the calendar.
early years
In his childhood, Vitaly Tretyakov loved to read; at an early age he read Don Quixote and almost all of Dreiser. He still has three books inherited from his father as a child - a biography of Joseph Stalin, his selected speeches and speeches during the Great Patriotic War, and a volume from the collected works of Gogol (selected correspondence).
Vitaly Tovievich studied at secondary school No. 477, which was located on Bolshaya Kommunisticheskaya (now Alexander Solzhenitsyn Street). On holidays, schoolchildren were taken on excursions to Red Square. One of the most memorable impressions of Tretyakov’s childhood was a visit to the Mausoleum; he saw Lenin alone (in civilian clothes), and together with Stalin (in a ceremonial jacket with many awards). No special emotions little boy The “mummies” of the leaders were not called.
The beginning of journalistic activity
After graduating from the prestigious Faculty of Journalism at Moscow State University in 1976, he was assigned to the Novosti news agency. In 1988, he went to work at the editorial office of the Moscow News newspaper, where he worked until 1990. Worked his way up from columnist to deputy editor-in-chief.
With the beginning of perestroika, he created Nezavisimaya Gazeta, where he worked as editor-in-chief until 2001. In 1995, one of his deputies, Alexander Gagua, with the support of an oligarch from the “seven bankers” tried to take away the newspaper. Only thanks to the financial and forceful support of Boris Berezovsky did he manage to maintain control over the publication.
Vitaly Tretyakov noted in his “Political Diary” that he personally knew many of the reformers of the 90s, and was even friends with some. Therefore, the results of the reforms being carried out were a grave disappointment for him. Despite this, liberal values are still close to him, but Tretyakov now stipulates that they do not destroy natural values.
On the channel "Culture"
Since 2001, he moved to the position of General Director of the Independent Publishing Group NIG company, which he himself was the owner of. In the same year he began hosting the program “What to do?” on the "Culture" channel, which became one of the first political talk shows in the country. The main goal The program was to introduce intellectualism, a discussion of current political problems free from the current situation.
One of Tretyakov’s first guests was Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad, the current patriarch. Since then, the best Russian political scientists, scientists and famous specialists have taken part in the program. As viewers note, the program has become a genuine encyclopedia of Russian thought, in which many intellectuals of the country took part. In 2003, the project “What to do?” received the TEFI television award as the best journalistic program.
Television School
From 2005 to 2009, he published 60 issues of the Political Class magazine, where he was publisher and editor-in-chief. In 2008, he organized the Higher School (Faculty) of Television at Moscow State University, which he has headed since then to the present. Teaches journalism at various higher education institutions educational institutions. He considers it historically wrong that Russian universities focus only on Western journalism textbooks. He tells his students that they need to study not only classical Western theories of journalism, but also Marxist-Leninist ones.
In recent decades, he has been constantly and actively published in various in social networks from "Live Journal" ("Political Diary of Vitaly Tretyakov") to "Twitter". In his posts he expresses views on the most pressing problems. He has written several dozen books: from textbooks on the theory of journalism and television to political science works.
personal information
Private life Vitaly Tretyakova has long been established and quite prosperous. He is married, his wife is Olga Tretyakova. U married couple already an adult son.
He considers Yevgeny Primakov and Orthodox Patriarch Kirill to be outstanding modern political thinkers. He greatly appreciates the work of the philosopher Alexander Dugin and the activities and works of the political scientist Andranik Migranyan.
The journalist’s immediate plans are to resume work on the third part of his memoirs, which will tell about his own life, as well as society and the country. He wants to record on paper and convey to the audience his thoughts and details of modern political life. He also plans to write a second book about Vladimir Putin (the first was published in 2005) and continue to keep the “Political Diary of Vitaly Tretyakov” on LiveJournal.
