How russian propaganda got into The Telegraph’s lobby?
tale of bad title, much blocking and a chance lost
“Ukraine knows it is finished” Telegraph screamed at me on Wednesday - and I immediately got this urge to sell or get rid of whatever that thing “Ukraine” is.
Oh shoot – it’s my home country!
I read more and found out that Lisa Haseldine - author of the piece – was actually saying Ukraine is finished “without Western support”.
And well, there is no way around the fact Ukraine will be in a very tough spot indeed if all help from all (stress on “all” ) West countries will stop.
So, you could say , maybe Haseldine did it for a dramatic effect?
Maybe.
But hard to know now - she blocked right after I voiced my critique over the title.
As she blocked many others like me.
Okay, but still, you might insist, weren’t the intention good? Like, to bring attention to Ukraine and the threat, which is real?
Maybe.
But “finished”?
Mister putin must’ve had a good laugh.
If you feel this is important to be read and seen - feel free to share it with friends or click the ❤️ so more people can discover it on Substack.
You see, there are tonnes of ways to add drama without making Ukraine look like a lost cause.
To prove it - after the wave of critique on social media, The Telegraph actually found one. Few hours later , out of nowhere, new title appeared: “Without Western armaments, Ukraine may only have months left” . It could easily be the subtitle of the first one – but at least now it provided the context in which Ukraine “may have only months left”.
Still sounded like a stage 4 cancer patient.
But hey, you could say, maybe that’s how it is?
Okay, listen, of course Ukraine does rely heavily on Western help, and if indeed the whole world withheld all the help (stress on “whole” and “all”) Ukraine would be in a really, really dark place –
but this is where dramatic effect got the best of journalism.
The piece downplays and simply doesn’t mention the help and support of so many of Ukraine allies, updates about which happen almost everyday.
It doesn’t mention how UK is one of our most trusted ally since day one of the full-scale war, and you know, those things like 10 year mutual security deal UK and Ukraine have signed earlier.
You won’t get it from Haseldine’s piece.
From it you’ll learn that US and UK - as well as other European nations are too focused on their own elections to bother about Ukraine. You’ll learn that “russia is catching up in its ability to produce ammunition that matches Ukraine’s Western technology in quality and far outstrips it in quantity”.
Haseldine will also tell you that “putin would be happy to stop the war as long as he got to keep the territory he has occupied”, which is a dangerous piece of russian propaganda that had just got through The Telegraph rolling doors somehow and now was casually chilling in the lobby.
It could be just a bad choice of words, you could say. Maybe Lisa wanted to add “as russian media are trying to paint it,” and forgot. Maybe she also forgot to mention “but we shouldn’t trust putin’s promises since russia never makes them in good faith”. Maybe she also wanted to bring Munich agreement in 1938 and remind readers what happens when you believe a dictator will be satisfied with “just the territories he has occupied”
If you feel this is important to be read and seen - feel free to share it with friends or click the ❤️ so more people can discover it on Substack.
Or, again, maybe not.
After painting a grim picture of west “losing interest” and putin “consolidating his strength” Haseldine finishes it with “ it looks increasingly that Ukraine has just a few months of resistance left.”
“Increasingly” must be here to soften the blow, but most readers might not even see it and go right to “finished” part we know so good from the original title.
Then Haseldine adds – and I am breathing a sign of relief – that “we should not forget the war in the East.” . And then goes : ”A russian victory in Ukraine would rewrite the map of Europe and present the continent with a threat not seen for more than 80 years.“
russian victory in Ukraine My personal horror. Millions of lives destroyed. Thousands of people tortured and raped on occupied territories. Dozens of millions of refugees around the world.
And yeah, sure, a “rewritten map of Europe” and a threat for a continent “not seen for more than 80 years”.
Haseldine’s not wrong about this part.
It is factually correct.
But this is not the only thing that should be expected of a journalist.
I was taught, as a journalist I should be careful about what I publish because it directly influences the lives of people whose stories I share.
I was taught I need to weight the importance of the story against how it will influence the lives of these people and so to be mindful of how and in which manner I share it.
I was taught I should always remember what influence I as a journalist have and that I should think of those I am putting in a spotlight.
And most importantly - I was taught to be careful with the words I choose when speaking about their lives.
So yes, we should expect of journalists not just to be factually correct – it is a given – but to be aware of the responsibility they have, for them to think how their stories would influence the lives of those they write about.
To think what narrative they construct - because journalist do construct one, whether they want to think about it or not.
Of course, nobody is a saint, we all make mistakes, we choose not the best titles sometimes, have people who rewrite them for us, have just so much words we need to put a story in and just so much time we have before publishing it before we need to jump to the next -
that’s why we should have a chance to talk about it without being blocked right away for just not agreeing with the title.
We also should absolutely be able to expect media to be honest about their mistakes.
None of it happened here.
Haseldine blocked those who commented against the title – and didn’t answer those who managed to get through with their comments. Later, The Telegraph just changed the title, without communicating anything.
Like if they knew they did something wrong.
What truly amazes me is what an opportunity for an honest communication was wasted here. The Telegraph and Lisa Haseldine could’ve made a whole thing out of it, showing they value audience’s feedback, change it publicly. I mean, they changed it anyway, why not to go all in? They could’ve started a conversation with those who reached out – and gained an audience that saw they were heard and seen.
Instead, we got blocking and sneaking out.
And it makes me really sad.
Because ultimately, I, as a Ukrainian journalist, have the same goal with this piece:
to remind the world to pay attention to Ukraine and continue the support so Ukraine can fight back. So russia will be stopped.
So then – one day - victory and peace could come.
But how you can be on one team with someone who’s blocking you just for having an opinion?
Thank you for your continuous support. Your kind support makes it possible for me to continue sharing stories about Ukraine and let the world know about war russia started against us. If you want to join my effort, you can support my work via buy me a coffee.
Дякую.
If you want to support my reporting on monthly basis you can become a paid subscriber so I can continue my reporting and share more stories like this.
Thank you.
I work in a big London newsroom and I know that in newspapers the reporter often has no idea what headline is going with their piece. But I do question the wisdom of commissioning articles from someone who’s never been to Ukraine, when there are so many Ukrainian journalists they could have asked, or Telegraph foreign affairs reporters, who are far more experienced and have more wisdom, context and judgment to bring to the story. I agree with you 100% that words have a real life impact. Always striving to do better!
Well said