Journalician – a kind of interbreeding between a journalist and a politician, a journalist engaged in political struggle, a produce of Georgian democracy.
Who remembers in Georgia that journalism should, first and foremost, be committed to truth; devoted to citizens; journalism should provide people with the information they need for freedom and independence. That’s the main responsibility of media, but TV media in Georgia, as a rule, instead of society, shows commitment to a smaller part if it - influential political groups. Accordingly formally independent media is a tool of political struggle rather than society’s servant. Media – in service to society sounds cynical in Georgia and this conjunction of words can be used as a sample of false symbolism. Following the logics of this false symbolism journalists, or better say journalicians, are attending press conferences on behalf of the society to kill public curiosity, therefore conflicting the respondent gives an illusion that a politician is confronting not a single journalist or a group of journalists but the whole society.
In the course of Ivanishvili’s press conference the main reason of journalists’ behavior was to provoke this effect. Most of questions reiterated one another with its content, continuous lingering tautology prevailed, which is of aggressive nature itself, let alone local content of questions that have fully stripped off intellectual component and reshaped itself in the following question: “Are you Kremlin’s last hope?”
When posing the question of the kind, the answer naturally makes no big sense, the more so as no one is waiting for the substantiated answer to make conclusions. The situation greatly resembles the novel The Utopia of a Tired Man by Jorge Luis Borges describing the model of public behavior, where no one cares about facts. Facts are just starting points for fabrication and discussion.
Whatever answer is being provided Ivanishvili will still be Kremlin’s last hope, funder of General Lebed (killer of 14-15-year-old girls – MP Nugzar Tsiklauri), Putin’s friend and so on and so forth.
Hard to disagree with the notion: the one giving no questions, does not exist. The questions should be definitely posed and no wonder the questions are asked by journalists as well as journalicians. For the first category a question is an efficient tool to get aware of the situation, while for the latter the personal opinion included in the question is of essential importance and the answer does not really matter that much.
A passion for holding and disposing a mic is another issue. A microphone is a necessary tool for journalists to communicate, it’s a kind of language, so to say. Without a mic you lack the ability to speak. A journalist needs a mic to give a question and tell a story while a journalician possessing a mic is like a gangster holding a gun in his hand. Only the hand holding a mic can impose time control, initiate a radical change of situation and stop (or hinder) a torrent of information flowing from the respondent. There is no explanation for the struggle for mic at Ivanishvili’s briefing. No one limited invited subjects either in terms of the topic of the question or the time but the journalicians of First Channel and other pro-governmental televisions could not lose a grip of a mic. Through letting the mic away the mechanism of stopping the opponent (respondent) gets lost and the answer is quite likely to overwhelm the importance of the question. Besides, for a jurnalician the press conference of a political rival is like a duel which, of course, is not going to end with just harmless information sharing. Journalician’s main responsibility is to inflict maximum damage to opponent’s reputation.
Not that hard to guess that journalicians appear in non-free environment as a result of violence on media, and the more non-free the society is the higher the quality of genuineness of images over objects is and wider the arena is available for journalicians. The effect of Simulated Kronika is a clear proof.