A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
Art Vandelay
Banned
1) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, except reverse the first point, necessities should be produced domestically
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, except reverse the first point, necessities should be produced domestically
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
1) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, but with @Art Vandelay's point that necessities should be produced domestically.
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, but with @Art Vandelay's point that necessities should be produced domestically.
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
1) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, except reverse the first point, necessities should be produced domestically
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
2) Kriss plan, except reverse the first point, necessities should be produced domestically
3) mix of Kriss and ruffino plans
4) Kriss plan
1. support more for @ruffino 's plan, with increased emphasis on pushing russians living abroad to migrate back to Russia. we should not try and destroy our soft power and reputation by acting so aggressive.
2 & 3 & 4. support for @Kriss plan with increased push for further EU economic cooperation where possible.
2 & 3 & 4. support for @Kriss plan with increased push for further EU economic cooperation where possible.
Russia was depopulated in the 20th century, and now that borders are open, millions more are emigraiing to more prosperous countries. Unemployment will never be a serious problem. In the long run, we'll have to import substantial workforce from abroad.
For 2), 3) and 4) I'd like to go with @Kriss's plan
For 1), I think as Kriss said, we push for Narva hard. On the diaspora, I think we need to bring them back. Below is the demographic pyramid in the present day. We have plenty of women, we need men for these women to marry and for our future generations to stand a chance. Note the steep decline at 30 - when the USSR collapses; by our decisions we can ensure this drop is nowhere near as steep and that we maintain a cylindrical shape rather than an inverted triangle. Already our actions have allowed for the economy to be $55 billion larger. By bringing more people in, from the Baltics, we'll also likely get additional educated people.
On a separate note, we should look into a closer Federation within the CIS between us, Belarus and Kazakhstan. These two nations are very culturally close to us and thus should be treated this way. Perhaps in time their independence can be reversed. Belarus will give us direct access into Poland for our trade while Kazakhstan has our uranium and spaceport. This could also be extended to the breakaways from Georgia.
For 1), I think as Kriss said, we push for Narva hard. On the diaspora, I think we need to bring them back. Below is the demographic pyramid in the present day. We have plenty of women, we need men for these women to marry and for our future generations to stand a chance. Note the steep decline at 30 - when the USSR collapses; by our decisions we can ensure this drop is nowhere near as steep and that we maintain a cylindrical shape rather than an inverted triangle. Already our actions have allowed for the economy to be $55 billion larger. By bringing more people in, from the Baltics, we'll also likely get additional educated people.
On a separate note, we should look into a closer Federation within the CIS between us, Belarus and Kazakhstan. These two nations are very culturally close to us and thus should be treated this way. Perhaps in time their independence can be reversed. Belarus will give us direct access into Poland for our trade while Kazakhstan has our uranium and spaceport. This could also be extended to the breakaways from Georgia.
That is correct, but the economic change caused short term rising unemployment, which immidiately had to be adressed. Emigration to Russia will be expanding from now on tough.
1,4. @Kriss idea
2. @Kriss idea with @Art Vandelay point on necessities produced domestically
3. Mix of @Kriss and @ruffino idea
2. @Kriss idea with @Art Vandelay point on necessities produced domestically
3. Mix of @Kriss and @ruffino idea
Regarding option 2 i should elaborate production of necessities, i was referring to the fact that we may have shortages, thus we should import those to avoid said shortages, at least until we build up domestic capabilities to produce them. Thanks to @Art Vandelay for pointing this out and i have as well changed my vote to reflect this. But yea i agree that we should produce those at home.
The State of Russian Television - 1993
The State of Russian Television - 1993
This is The One (and The Two too)
Ostankino Technical Center (12, Akademika Korolyova Street, Moscow)
As of 1993, Russia had three different state-owned broadcasting companies. Ostankino and Peterburg were both successors to Soviet Central Television and Radio, while VGTRK was founded as the broadcaster of the Russian republic. For a country making strides towards a more democratic order, this much state media was an overkill, but the question was how to deal with that.
Someone in the government might have had an idea.
In 1993, a tense meeting occurred between the representatives of VGTRK and Ostankino on one side and government officials (including Prime Minister Yavlinsky himself) on the other. Yavlinsky voiced the opinion that television in Russia should be a pillar of democracy instead of a pillar of propaganda, something that most people present broadly agreed on. Then, a bombshell was dropped.
The Russian government wanted to make a single public broadcaster out of VGTRK and Ostankino, which would work much like the BBC. The new structure was to be named ORTRK, or Public Russian Television and Radio Company. Certain assets of the new company would additionally be privatized.
Oleg Poptsov, head of VGTRK, asked an important question: would the new enterprise allow criticism of the government? After thinking a while about it, Yavlinsky responded that the new broadcaster would be founded on principles of independence and pluralism of opinions, and would not be made to bend to Kremlin’s will, which meant that criticism would be permitted as means of keeping the powers that be in check. This drew skepticism from Evgeny Kiselyov, who noted that an approach like that would make Fyodorov seem weak and give power to Yeltsin (of whom, granted, Kiselyov was no fan), to which the Minister of Culture responded that the integrity of ORTRK would be protected vigilantly.
Even then, not everyone was entirely on board with the proposal. Vlad Listyev pointed towards the elephant in the room, which was advertising. Listyev was not opposed to commercials on principle, but feared that the television advertising business was getting too cutthroat, with oligarchs controlling much of it and unwilling to advertise if the network’s content was critical of them. Listyev himself was thinking of a temporary ban on advertising while the new company was restructured into a more transparent organization. A suggestion from one of Listyev’s apprentices, Konstantin Ernst, was to establish their own ad company and sell commercial time on its own terms to cut out the middlemen.
Fight For the Four
Logo used by Russian Universities
VGTRK and Ostankino needed some time to think over the proposed merger, but one thing they managed to achieve together was to establish Russian Universities, a television company that was responsible for broadcasting on the fourth button. True to its name, Russian Universities was mainly an education channel, with lectures, documentaries and talks with known academicians.
The spot was, however, too sweet to be ignored. Should ORTRK be formed, Russian Universities would have to have its government ownership phased out, but what should take its place?
Clamoring for the fourth button were 2x2, Russia’s very first commercial broadcaster; Mir, a pan-CIS broadcaster; ATV, a private production company predating the fall of the USSR by five years; finally, Rolan Bykov, who intended to create a network for children. An idea was floated to make the Fourth Channel into, well, Channel Four, like in the UK, where it was a publicly owned but funded by advertising broadcaster separate from the BBC and reliant on third-party production companies for its programming.
For now, though, all this was, to use a Russian idiom, fighting over the hide of a still living bear. The ORTRK decision still needed to be made for any of this to go forward.
Television Rules the Nation
Logo used by RTRN
The Russian government would commit to another large-scale initiative related to broadcasting. After the Soviet Union fell apart, a lot of broadcasting infrastructure fell into a state of disarray; to mend this, the Russian Television and Radio Broadcasting Network (RTRN) was created.
RTRN was a unitary enterprise created specifically to deal with the technical side of things in broadcasting. Spread over the Russian Federation, RTRN would ensure that quality television and radio signal would be available to anyone anywhere.
Jokes about this were abundant. Some drew parallels between the electrification of Soviet Russia and RTRN, saying that “Ilyich’s light bulb” was soon to be joined by “Nikolaich’s telly”. Some snarked that Fyodorov, an ophthalmologist by trade, was betraying his own Hippocratic oath by introducing as many eye-hurting screens as possible.
On a more serious note, some suggested that RTRN could be used to fund public broadcasting, since, after all, it was supposed to bring television to as many houses as possible, and it wouldn’t be doing it for free.
Leningrad Time Zero Hours Zero Minutes
View of Saint Petersburg TV Tower
When the Russian government was proposing a merger between existing state broadcasters, one of them, Peterburg, was notably absent. It was quite obvious that the government had different plans for them.
The St. Petersburg broadcaster was drifting dangerously close to Yeltsin’s camp, and thus was a ticking time bomb if it was to be government-controlled. With the policy of downsizing state enterprises that were getting too sprawling, privatizing GTRK Peterburg made sense to the Kremlin.
And so, it was done. 5 Kanal Peterburg JSC took the place of GTRK Peterburg, with a mandated minor share held by the Federal City of St. Petersburg itself, to ensure that the new organization remains in St. Petersburg.
Naturally, it took a short while before pro-Yeltsin narratives emerged on 5 Kanal. While the share of Federal City of St. Petersburg couldn’t go lower or higher than 9%, St. Petersburg officials had little to say about the new state of affairs - besides, the network generally supported them and was harsh on any opposition. Oligarchs flocked to 5 Kanal, fighting for control and funding different programs favorable to themselves. 5 Kanal was a mess, short and honest.
The St. Petersburg broadcaster was drifting dangerously close to Yeltsin’s camp, and thus was a ticking time bomb if it was to be government-controlled. With the policy of downsizing state enterprises that were getting too sprawling, privatizing GTRK Peterburg made sense to the Kremlin.
And so, it was done. 5 Kanal Peterburg JSC took the place of GTRK Peterburg, with a mandated minor share held by the Federal City of St. Petersburg itself, to ensure that the new organization remains in St. Petersburg.
Naturally, it took a short while before pro-Yeltsin narratives emerged on 5 Kanal. While the share of Federal City of St. Petersburg couldn’t go lower or higher than 9%, St. Petersburg officials had little to say about the new state of affairs - besides, the network generally supported them and was harsh on any opposition. Oligarchs flocked to 5 Kanal, fighting for control and funding different programs favorable to themselves. 5 Kanal was a mess, short and honest.
American Boy, American Joy
The world of Russian television was drawing attention not only from within. In 1993, Ted Turner made a visit to Russia which resulted in the creation of a joint venture between Moscow Independent Broadcasting Company, led by television veteran Eduard Sagalaev, and Turner Broadcasting System. The new channel, TV6, would feature CNN news broadcasts with Russian translation, demonstrably distancing themselves from all the political turmoil, in addition to other materials provided by Turner. Advertising would be handled by the American side as well.
The relationship between Turner and MIBC, however, is uneasy. The profits between them were not split evenly, and Sagalaev is convinced that a Russian network needs a Russian team to run it, finding TBS’s attitude to be condescending. Put in charge of various aspects of TV6 were the likes of Ivan Demidov (host of MuzOboz, a popular show about music) and Aleksandr Oleinikov, who were to realize the previously unknown in Russia concept of entertainment television. All in all, they manage to handle it well, but whether the relationship between TV6 and TBS remains or shall it be broken is an open question.
That said, Ted Turner isn’t the only American with an interest in Russian television. Peter Gerwe, an American businessman who had worked in the USSR and later Russia for several years, is considering the idea of launching a franchise-based television network, with affiliate regional broadcasters spreading the network in exchange for ad space. Gerwe’s company, StoryFirst Communications, has already had experience in Russian media, such as Radio Maximum. For now, however, these plans are just plans for a better, less turbulent time, which might come sooner than expected.
The relationship between Turner and MIBC, however, is uneasy. The profits between them were not split evenly, and Sagalaev is convinced that a Russian network needs a Russian team to run it, finding TBS’s attitude to be condescending. Put in charge of various aspects of TV6 were the likes of Ivan Demidov (host of MuzOboz, a popular show about music) and Aleksandr Oleinikov, who were to realize the previously unknown in Russia concept of entertainment television. All in all, they manage to handle it well, but whether the relationship between TV6 and TBS remains or shall it be broken is an open question.
That said, Ted Turner isn’t the only American with an interest in Russian television. Peter Gerwe, an American businessman who had worked in the USSR and later Russia for several years, is considering the idea of launching a franchise-based television network, with affiliate regional broadcasters spreading the network in exchange for ad space. Gerwe’s company, StoryFirst Communications, has already had experience in Russian media, such as Radio Maximum. For now, however, these plans are just plans for a better, less turbulent time, which might come sooner than expected.
I'm writing this post with @panpiotr's blessing and expect it to be threadmarked soon. In spirit of the thread, I want to take suggestions on where Russian television will go from here.
If this continues, you may expect delving into popular Russian TV shows of the time.
If this continues, you may expect delving into popular Russian TV shows of the time.
Many thanks for your work! I will post the next update today
The State of Russian Television - 1993
This is The One (and The Two too)
Ostankino Technical Center (12, Akademika Korolyova Street, Moscow)
As of 1993, Russia had three different state-owned broadcasting companies. Ostankino and Peterburg were both successors to Soviet Central Television and Radio, while VGTRK was founded as the broadcaster of the Russian republic. For a country making strides towards a more democratic order, this much state media was an overkill, but the question was how to deal with that.
Someone in the government might have had an idea.
In 1993, a tense meeting occurred between the representatives of VGTRK and Ostankino on one side and government officials (including Prime Minister Yavlinsky himself) on the other. Yavlinsky voiced the opinion that television in Russia should be a pillar of democracy instead of a pillar of propaganda, something that most people present broadly agreed on. Then, a bombshell was dropped.
The Russian government wanted to make a single public broadcaster out of VGTRK and Ostankino, which would work much like the BBC. The new structure was to be named ORTRK, or Public Russian Television and Radio Company. Certain assets of the new company would additionally be privatized.
Oleg Poptsov, head of VGTRK, asked an important question: would the new enterprise allow criticism of the government? After thinking a while about it, Yavlinsky responded that the new broadcaster would be founded on principles of independence and pluralism of opinions, and would not be made to bend to Kremlin’s will, which meant that criticism would be permitted as means of keeping the powers that be in check. This drew skepticism from Evgeny Kiselyov, who noted that an approach like that would make Fyodorov seem weak and give power to Yeltsin (of whom, granted, Kiselyov was no fan), to which the Minister of Culture responded that the integrity of ORTRK would be protected vigilantly.
Even then, not everyone was entirely on board with the proposal. Vlad Listyev pointed towards the elephant in the room, which was advertising. Listyev was not opposed to commercials on principle, but feared that the television advertising business was getting too cutthroat, with oligarchs controlling much of it and unwilling to advertise if the network’s content was critical of them. Listyev himself was thinking of a temporary ban on advertising while the new company was restructured into a more transparent organization. A suggestion from one of Listyev’s apprentices, Konstantin Ernst, was to establish their own ad company and sell commercial time on its own terms to cut out the middlemen.
Fight For the Four
Logo used by Russian Universities
VGTRK and Ostankino needed some time to think over the proposed merger, but one thing they managed to achieve together was to establish Russian Universities, a television company that was responsible for broadcasting on the fourth button. True to its name, Russian Universities was mainly an education channel, with lectures, documentaries and talks with known academicians.
The spot was, however, too sweet to be ignored. Should ORTRK be formed, Russian Universities would have to have its government ownership phased out, but what should take its place?
Clamoring for the fourth button were 2x2, Russia’s very first commercial broadcaster; Mir, a pan-CIS broadcaster; ATV, a private production company predating the fall of the USSR by five years; finally, Rolan Bykov, who intended to create a network for children. An idea was floated to make the Fourth Channel into, well, Channel Four, like in the UK, where it was a publicly owned but funded by advertising broadcaster separate from the BBC and reliant on third-party production companies for its programming.
For now, though, all this was, to use a Russian idiom, fighting over the hide of a still living bear. The ORTRK decision still needed to be made for any of this to go forward.
Television Rules the Nation
Logo used by RTRN
The Russian government would commit to another large-scale initiative related to broadcasting. After the Soviet Union fell apart, a lot of broadcasting infrastructure fell into a state of disarray; to mend this, the Russian Television and Radio Broadcasting Network (RTRN) was created.
RTRN was a unitary enterprise created specifically to deal with the technical side of things in broadcasting. Spread over the Russian Federation, RTRN would ensure that quality television and radio signal would be available to anyone anywhere.
Jokes about this were abundant. Some drew parallels between the electrification of Soviet Russia and RTRN, saying that “Ilyich’s light bulb” was soon to be joined by “Nikolaich’s telly”. Some snarked that Fyodorov, an ophthalmologist by trade, was betraying his own Hippocratic oath by introducing as many eye-hurting screens as possible.
On a more serious note, some suggested that RTRN could be used to fund public broadcasting, since, after all, it was supposed to bring television to as many houses as possible, and it wouldn’t be doing it for free.
Leningrad Time Zero Hours Zero Minutes
View of Saint Petersburg TV Tower
When the Russian government was proposing a merger between existing state broadcasters, one of them, Peterburg, was notably absent. It was quite obvious that the government had different plans for them.
The St. Petersburg broadcaster was drifting dangerously close to Yeltsin’s camp, and thus was a ticking time bomb if it was to be government-controlled. With the policy of downsizing state enterprises that were getting too sprawling, privatizing GTRK Peterburg made sense to the Kremlin.
And so, it was done. 5 Kanal Peterburg JSC took the place of GTRK Peterburg, with a mandated minor share held by the Federal City of St. Petersburg itself, to ensure that the new organization remains in St. Petersburg.
Naturally, it took a short while before pro-Yeltsin narratives emerged on 5 Kanal. While the share of Federal City of St. Petersburg couldn’t go lower or higher than 9%, St. Petersburg officials had little to say about the new state of affairs - besides, the network generally supported them and was harsh on any opposition. Oligarchs flocked to 5 Kanal, fighting for control and funding different programs favorable to themselves. 5 Kanal was a mess, short and honest.
American Boy, American Joy
TV6 Moscow ident
The world of Russian television was drawing attention not only from within. In 1993, Ted Turner made a visit to Russia which resulted in the creation of a joint venture between Moscow Independent Broadcasting Company, led by television veteran Eduard Sagalaev, and Turner Broadcasting System. The new channel, TV6, would feature CNN news broadcasts with Russian translation, demonstrably distancing themselves from all the political turmoil, in addition to other materials provided by Turner. Advertising would be handled by the American side as well.
The relationship between Turner and MIBC, however, is uneasy. The profits between them were not split evenly, and Sagalaev is convinced that a Russian network needs a Russian team to run it, finding TBS’s attitude to be condescending. Put in charge of various aspects of TV6 were the likes of Ivan Demidov (host of MuzOboz, a popular show about music) and Aleksandr Oleinikov, who were to realize the previously unknown in Russia concept of entertainment television. All in all, they manage to handle it well, but whether the relationship between TV6 and TBS remains or shall it be broken is an open question.
That said, Ted Turner isn’t the only American with an interest in Russian television. Peter Gerwe, an American businessman who had worked in the USSR and later Russia for several years, is considering the idea of launching a franchise-based television network, with affiliate regional broadcasters spreading the network in exchange for ad space. Gerwe’s company, StoryFirst Communications, has already had experience in Russian media, such as Radio Maximum. For now, however, these plans are just plans for a better, less turbulent time, which might come sooner than expected.
The pleasure is mine. Wanted to delve into this for a while, and I hope other readers will find it interesting and suggest directions for some threads left hanging.Many thanks for your work! I will post the next update today
1. Pressure the Baltic States in a similar way to Georgia. Even with the parlamentary elections behind us, we musn't rest on our laurels.
2. Encourage more private investment, but also invest in the economy in hard hit regions.
3. Well there's a few options - one is to yeet out minorities and give their homes to Russians, but that might hurt our standing with them, and the other option is to build mass housing and then sell it to the public at a loss.
4. Try and fool the germans into giving us economic aid while infiltrating their ranks. Promise them cheap gas and oil in exchange for stuff like cars and TVs.
I would say state ownership as governments come and go via elections and in functioning democracy state ownership doesn't necessary translate to government ownership.
Everything really depends on how leadership of the media is appointed, if it's appointed on principle of self governance then state media are actually by definition far more free and transparent than private owned media. I would go for mix of state owned and private owned TV stations.
Private ownership should be far better for commercial and entertainment industry in general.
Given that relationship seems unequal and I'm in favor of Russian team we should break it up. We could potentially renegotiate something in better down the line.
I'll just say for all televisions. Supporting domestic industry and domestic consumerism is paramount and media should take some cues from the state.
Last edited:
Local commercials.
I see. Out of all options that were mentioned for Fourth Channel's space, what would you prefer?