Presidential hopeful Ksenia Sobchak slams RT Journalists, for criticizing her very offensive behavior which she didn’t even deny doing!
During an interview, RT’S Oksana Boyko discussed Sobchak’s platform in a fair and balanced way, but when the journalist wanted to discuss Sobcak’s own actions, the “candidate against all” felt she was above scrutiny.
Boyko suggested that a certain part of the Russian public sees Sobchak as quite a snobbish person, because of past public statements and some leaked telephone conversations. In particular, she referred to a 2013 leaked phone conversation between Sobchak and her house manager, in which she complained about noise caused by repairs in the building and about noise restrictions that would allow children to have a short nap during the day.
After the leak initially appeared on the internet, it drew some attention from the press and the public – mostly because of Sobchak’s extremely rude language and manners, along with statements like: “If you plan to have some sort of ‘quiet hours’ for these little bastards, I will be having rave parties at exactly this time,” as quoted in a report by Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper.
The election hopeful interrupted the interviewer and began shouting that she would not answer the question because the leak had resulted from eavesdropping by Russia’s federal security service, the FSB. Sobchak also noted that she has a right to say anything during her private conversations, or write anything in her private correspondence, adding that it was unethical for reporters to bring up such things in interviews.
Apparently, it’s unacceptable to criticize someone’s poor behavior, if they didn’t want said behavior to become public. Apparently, people cannot be scrutinized for poor behavior, or expected to answer for it, so long as that behavior was in private.
Sobchak’s line of defense in the story is not new. Back in 2013, she first claimed that the recording of the conversation had been heavily doctored, and the comment about the “little bastards” was taken out of context. A short time later, she switched to portraying herself as the victim of unnamed pranksters with alleged connections to the Kremlin.
He excuse and blatant evasion of responsibility reminds me of a story on the 29th of January, when a youtuber, Ayra Mosallah, threw water in the face of London pedestrians in a “prank” video. His actions caused outrage, as London is suffering an acid attack epidemic, and his water “prank” terrified several people initially. He defended his vastly inappropriate behavior as the typical “it’s just a prank”.
He claimed he was being “slandered”, because the media drew attention to the actions which generated outrage, the very actions that he didn’t deny doing. This brings up a really good point that must be hammered home, as we have seen this pandemic – a failure to talk responsibility for ones own actions – happen all to often lately.
Thanks to the internet, something you say, write, or do, can be immortalized for potentially centuries to come. A Public figure is slammed for doing something inappropriate, and instead of denying the actions due to the existence of proof, they begin to say they are being slandered by the media.
News Flash: When journalists, critics, or the general populace calls you out for something you don’t deny doing, something which makes you look like a complete moron, unimaginably cruel, or profoundly insane, that’s not slander!
People who criticize you for massively offensive (and possibly criminal) actions are not “haters”, they may or may not hate you, but it’s not hateful to point out when someone is doing something deplorable or otherwise unethical.
In the case of Miss Sobchak, we have seen another defense, that her statements were “taken out of context” as RT reports.
If that is true, then that is a valid argument. President Putin’s comments are constantly taken out of context. Take for example when he speaks about the tragedy of the fall of the Soviet Union (he wasn’t talking about communism or political power, he was talking about a humanitarian tragedy), or when he spoke about Lenin’s body being similar to the idea of venerating Orthodox relics, (he wasn’t saying he believes Lenin is a Saint, he is saying the Bolsheviks stole the idea from Orthodox people). We discussed how the west misunderstands him in great detail here.
In our day and age, it is all too common for overly sensitive people to become offended at everything, and for journalists to rush to publish any statement before fact-checking or clarifying.
In the case of Miss Sobchak, if her arguments are truly taken out of context, and we can only truly know if we were there, then she may have a valid argument, however, it seems as if she isn’t denying saying the actual words.
It’s like if someone says “Those children are hideously ugly” and then says “That was out of context! I was referring to their outfits, not to their faces!”. The defense falls flat.
It seems like Miss Sobchak did indeed say what she said, but her argument seems to actually be the media has no right to report on it, (you can tell she is embracing western democracy there) along with the infamous “that isn’t me, that’s not who I am as a person”, that we hear ad nauseum.
Anytime a poor innocent girl is sexually assaulted, or a mother leaves her children unattended and they get injured, or someone spouts a racial slur that goes viral, we constantly hear from the criminal about how that’s not really them. How they are actually a devout feminist, or a dedicated mother, or we get a long list of how many friends of X race that person has, and how they love “those people”.
This happens especially when alcohol is involved, apparently drinking turns you magically into a different person, and whatever you do while intoxicated can’t be blamed on you. People make mistakes, but some mistakes can’t be washed away by claiming you just weren’t feeling like yourself, or your incredibly vile behavior was just misunderstood.
In this situation, Miss Sobchak was rude to RT’s Oksana Boyko, when being interviewed about her actions, switching the subject, and threatening to contact the authorities if reporters continue to criticize her outrageous behavior.
According to RT:
Oksana Boyko said she did not consider the issue to be Sobchak’s private affairs, and it should not be protected from scrutiny by the press. Instead, it was an insight into how someone who is seeking a top public post communicates and negotiates with her neighbors.
That is the issue at hand: Sobchak claims she is against corruption, for an open and fair media (so long as they criticize her opponents), but seemingly becomes infuriated when the media criticizes her.
Anyone with aspirations to become a Head of State must understand they are no longer a private figure, they forfeited that right the moment they expected people to grant them the senior executive post.
Such a person would do well to understand that their actions have real consequences, especially know when anything you say can be remembered forever.
In all, it is this failure to take responsibility for one’s own actions that is plaguing the world today.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Duran.