this is bbc news. we will have the headlines and all the main stories for you at the top of the hour, straight after this programme. hello, and welcome to this week's edition of the media show. once again, we're going to be talking about ukraine — but this time, through the prism of russian media. we'll be considering what information is available to russians to learn about what their forces are doing in ukraine, and we'll consider how the western media is or isn't choosing to be involved in that equation.

we have a number of guests to help us with this story, but let's begin in russia with vera krichevskaya — she's co—founder of tv rain, which was the only independent tv station in russia. i say "was" because late last week, it was forced off air. vera, thank you very much indeed forjoining us. for people who don't know tv rain, just tell us about the station. good evening. we launched this television company, this news station in 2008. in 2010, we had our first broadcast. we were shut down by the government first on our tenth day of broadcasting. we relaunched ourselves on the internet afterwards, we managed to arrange satellite providers, etc. by 2014, the beginning

of this war, actually, tv rain — we call it dozhd, dozhd tv — had 30 million households in russia. it's a lot. and the company was shut down the second time in 2014 during the beginning of this war. it was the first scenes of this war. we covered enormously what was happening with kyiv citizens. we were covering russian soldiers who participated in the war in eastern ukraine. afterwards, dozhd was broadcasting on only the internet under a paywall, sometimes without paywall. and during last 12 years, it was the only independent

news tv source inside russia — the only. the company had managed to survive somehow until last thursday. last thursday — actually, the company was shut down by the government last tuesday. it was, as far as i remember, the sixth day of the war. tv dozhd continued its broadcasting on youtube, but on thursday, the ceo of the company and founder of the company, her name is natalie sindeyeva, had to suspend the broadcasting because of the new law you just mentioned. do you think it's the end of your company? i hope there'll be another another launch, another relaunch very soon. well, we appreciate you joining

us on the media show today, vera, you'll be spending the whole edition with us. thank you very much. and as we're hearing from you, the information available to russians is clearly under severe pressure, we also know that russian state tv isn't giving an accurate account of the war in ukraine. and in that context, here's a further question for us all to consider — how does the bbc fit into this equation? and the reason i ask the question is that, on monday, the bbc announced a raft of new services designed to reach russians. let's understand that decision — jamie angus is controller of bbc news output and commissioning. jamie, thanks forjoining us on the media show. why has the bbc stepped into this space in this way? well, of course, the bbc has been providing news in russian for decades, initially on short—wave radio services, latterly digital services and on a television bulletin — which actually, of course ran on tv rain, on dozhd tv, as vera was talking about.

recently, we've only really been able to get our news through to russian audiences on those digital platforms. and of course, in good times, digital is a brilliant way to disseminate news in a society with, kind of, good connectivity. but, of course, the downside of that, as we've seen, particularly in the last week, is that when governments decide to significantly restrict access to the internet, particularly from sites based outside the country, then they can really squeeze the traffic. and that's what we've seen — the bbc russian website, for example, after a period of incredible traffic growth in the first week of the war, the blockage of that website, our app, and our social media feeds meant that there was a huge decline in traffic. so that's why we've introduced new services. we've put in some additional hours of short—wave radio in english, but also some tiktok platform services in both english and russian, to try and make up for that fall in traffic to our existing sites.

butjamie, you're notjust offering new services, you're also offering advice. for example, i'm reading from the bbc press release on this, saying, "although tiktok suspended new content and live streaming in russia, we know that audiences are finding ways of getting to and sharing the content." in other words, they're getting around that. you've also published, in russian, a guide for people to use the dark web to try and access some of these services you're listing. is that not a reasonably antagonistic position for the bbc to be adopting, and why have you decided it's still worth doing? well, of course, circumventing blocking is nothing new to the bbc world service. there's a number of markets we operate in — so particularly our iranian services, our farsi services foraudiences in iran, but also services we do for audiences in north korea, for example, and whatever information we're able to get into mainland china, where we've also been blocked for many, many years. so encouraging audiences to circumvent blocking is nothing new for us. and, of course, it's absolutely right that we give out

information about freely—available vpn services, and also the sifon service and the torbrowser, the so—called dark web browser that would allow people to continue to access these services. and we can see from traffic that they are continuing to access them because, although traffic has fallen significantly, it hasn't fallen to zero. so we know that some of the digital information we're publishing from outside of russia is continuing to get through — an absolutely vital lifeline service to our audiences inside the country. nonetheless, i'm sure you'll be aware that the russian government will see these actions as something that is supporting the western perspective on this conflict, and the western—desired outcomes in this conflict. i wonder if the bbc consulted with the uk foreign office before announcing these measures? no, it's something we've decided to do on our own, very much in line with other circumvention measures we've used in the past. it's very important to underline that the russian state often seeks to paint

the bbc world service as, you know, an arm of the uk government. but, of course, as our audiences know, we're nothing of the sort — we're an independent public service broadcaster funded by the uk licence fee payer. and therefore, that's why bbc news russian information is so widely trusted in the country and, indeed, of course, bbc news ukrainian services inside ukraine. and they've never been more needed than they are now. so no discussions whatsoever between bbc news and the uk government with regards to how the bbc covers this conflict? it's not the government'sjob or position to tell the bbc how to cover the conflict. our editorial independence from the uk government is assured and underlined by the trust our audiences have in us. and you know that as well as i do, ros, because you present output on our international services. and i wonder as we talk, jamie — vera, if we could bring you in from tv rain — do you think this is an appropriate contribution for a british broadcaster to be making into the russian media ecosystem? i think that right now, all

true information is essential. and for me personally as a user, it doesn't matter — should i use vpn or other channels of getting the information? i think it is essential, right now, it is really complicated to get information. so that's why i totally support the decision of the bbc. so you support it — let's also bring in olga irisova, who's editor—in—chief of riddle russia, an online journal covering russian news. you're based in berlin, olga — i wonder if you and your russian friends and colleagues see the bbc as a helpful and a credible source of information at this perilous moment for your part of the world? hi, thanks for having me. so i can only praise the bbc for this brave decision. - but i would also say that i

unfortunately, this solution does not address the problem of the fact that still, - most russians watch tv newsl and, according to the different polls, they use russian official information - as the main source of their. information about the world. but in a few months, - i do hope that many more and more people will be more interested in getting - non—official information and getting alternative i information because, . as the sanctions will hit russian the population harder, | and as there will be more news about the death of russian soldiers in ukraine, - more and more people will be interested in alternative - information. and i do hope that yourj viewership will increase significantly in- the next few months. olga, thank you — i know

you and vera will be staying with me. jamie, before i let you go, i just wonder what the bbc�*s endgame here is? because if you are taking a position which actively undermines the wishes of russia's government, is the bbc in some way taking a position, as well, on whether that government should be in charge in russia, should be setting the rules in russia? well, of course, we don't have an editorial position on that. we are operating within the rules. you know, the media rules were changed in a real hurry towards the end of last week, very quick legislation passing through the duma. the bbc rightly paused its operations in order to give us a chance to look at that legislation and ensure that our staff could operate freely and safely in the country. and we have resumed our broadcasting the early part of this week, in english only, from moscow in the light of the legal and operational advice that we've taken. but of course, the provision of free and independent

information is not in any sense an attack on the russian state. it's simply part of the world service mission, as it has been for a number of decades. and, you know, even though people will try to paint it in that light, that's not why we do it. it's just part of the world service mission, which will continue. jamie angus, thank you very much, indeed — jamie is controller of bbc news output and commissioning. and listening to jamie angus was peter pomerantsev, author of this is not propaganda. peter was born in the soviet union. also, julia davis, a columnist with the daily beast in the us, who specialises in russian media. peter and julia, you'll have just both been listening to that discussion. peter, i wonder how you view western media's role within the russian media ecosystem at the moment? so there is also another aspect that we need to think about. and obviously, the situation is influx. when we talk about russian state media — a state media which, you know, is essentially using dehumanizing language in order to make possible the mass murder of ukrainians, calling russian opposition "vermin" literally in order to make it possible to oppress them very, very brutally. so when you watch russian state

media, you see this sort of nazi—esque stuff, then you have this, sort of, weird moment when it's followed by advertising for western companies. now, western companies are leaving the russian market, but not all of them. and every day, we are funding this hate machine. and it's notjust that — if you switch on just before the political talk shows, you'll find western entertainment format — strictly come dancing, for example — which reel the viewer in so they stay for the hate propaganda. well, on this peter, before you go on, let's just let's make clear that the bbc and other western media companies have stopped licensing certain entertainment shows in russia. here's a bbc statement saying, "the bbc has revealed that the executive team had met

and decided to stop all content licensing to russian customers in common with other media organisations." so is your critique that this isn't enough in and of itself? or is your critique that it should never have been happening for the last few years? i think certainly, it shouldn't have been happening for several years. people have been talking about this since 2014. there's something just very, very wrong with us licensing entertainment to media — russia, we could also think about others — who then use that to reel viewers in and distribute their hate propaganda. i'm not a lawyer — i really welcome that statement from bbc studios, and itv have done a similar one. as i say, the situation is influx. but stopping licensing, is that really enough, you know? can we do more to get them to stop broadcasting now, or at least raise that issue? also, not other companies, i'm glad bbc studios have reacted. i think there's still questions about other large entertainment companies. but let's bring julia in and explore this idea that extreme messaging around

the conflict is in some way being normalised, or being prepared for consumption by the programming around those news broadcasts. julia, what's your view of peter's thoughts on that? he is completely on the right track with what he's said. - and i actually heard _ the russian state media trying to rationalize why- entertainment programmes are no longer available. they're trying to say it's. because people are more interested in news right now — clearly they're not telling - the truth about why these - companies and entertainment programmes are no longer available to russians. - and i think that will be. the key for more people to start questioning _ the information they're getting on state tv, and seeking out alternative information. - and the bbc making those | efforts to make it available will be crucial in that sense. and i wonder whether you, and peter, perhaps you could come in on this first, whether you see what the bbc and others are doing now via newer platforms like tiktok is really any different

to what bbc world service, voice of america, radio free europe, and others have been doing for a long time? is this different? you're asking the wrong person. the only reason i sound like an english person is because my parents, who were, sort of, exiled after being arrested by the kgb in the '70s — my dad got a job at the world service in the cold war. i'm a child of bush house, so i'm probably the wrong person to ask. i think we should be doing more, i think we should be funding it much more. i think we're still far behind the russians and the chinese in really thinking about, what is democratic communications in the 21st century? i think we should be doing much, much more. and olga, as you watch western organisations making this move, do you think there's a risk the bbc and others could appear to have been weaponized, even, by the west and its general strategy to counter russia? so, i would say that i'm a bit afraid that the russian

government can use your efforts on their hands by saying — and they've already been saying that the west is waging an information campaign, propaganda campaign against russia — and they would just repeat these statements, they would just tell their users, "look, they are funding the news services. they are providing more money to deceive you, to spread lies about what's going on in ukraine." and for a time being, at least, the viewers and users of russia's official narratives would buy these explanations. well, olga, you're a russian journalist based in berlin. let's pick up on that last point you make about the creation of narratives, because i guess one aspect of the story, as told through russian media, is the restriction of information. but another crucial aspect

is the way that russia is seeking to create its own narrative around this war. let's consider how it's going about that. dr ian garner is also joining us — he's a historian who specialises in russian propaganda. and dr garner, as you watch the russians construct their narrative over what they're doing in ukraine, how do you assess its success? i mean, the narrative that they're attempting to construct has old roots in the soviet union, and in putin's russia. the government under putin has spent years preceding the myth of world war two as being the moment where russia stood alone and defended itself, sacrificed 25 million of its citizens in order to stop the fascists destroying the entirety of humanity. this is a hyperbolised version of this story. and peter mentions entertainment shows from the west, and we also see world war two, kind of,

entertainment shows — big dramas, big blockbuster movies that have come out, state—funded over the last few years. and essentially, since 2014, it's attempted to paint ukraine as a new fascist threat to russia, that this government is run by nazis, run by fascists. and now it's trying to activate that propaganda in a new way by saying, "the time has come, if we don't go in to attack ukraine, then everything will fall apart, and russia itself is under threat. " unfortunately, i don't think that narrative has very successfully cut through to anyone except the most converted putinist believers. and i'm interested that you reference world war two — we heard president zelensky address the house of commons yesterday via video link from kyiv, and he referenced winston churchill's famous speech about fighting on the beaches — he adapted it for the ukrainian situation, but it played into the importance that world war two has in shaping how

the west sees conflicts. does the same thing occur in a russian context? well, absolutely, we're seeing all these narratives be pushed forward, but the government is doing it in a rather haphazard, inconsistent way. and the real problem it has with doing this is that zelensky and the ukrainians are also the inheritors of world war two. there was also huge fighting and huge sacrifice in ukraine. and so, zelensky makes reference to the idea of kyiv as "a new hero city", which is a soviet term for the great cities that withstood the nazi onslaught. his proxies are making reference to kyiv as a new stalingrad — which of course, is a russian battle. and they have heroes, they have martyrs. what the russian government doesn't have — and you mentioned at the top of the programme — that they're still not calling this a war. this is stilljust a special operation.

the russian government doesn't have any martyrs, it doesn't have any heroes of its own because it won't even talk about this as if it's a war. it won't, you're quite right, and in fact, they've made it illegal for media to use the word "war" — it has to be referenced as a "special operation". and julia, as you listen to dr garner and the the points he's making about the construction of narrative, how do you see the russians innovating or changing how they go about constructing narrative? we know state tv is important, but it's not the only thing being used by the russians. so, where else are you seeing them working hard to create their own stories around this? well, first of all, - i see their nazi narratives are crumbling. and falling apart. so they're starting to change . them, because it was obviously ridiculous from the onset to represent a country. with a jewish president as a nazi country. - they're already slipping up and starting to admit- that it was really - all about a land grab, about solidifying the i annexation of crimea,

demanding that ukraine| recognise that, and also that they recognise - the independence of these so—called republics. and also today, on state tv, i heard them openly say - that this was really _ about making sure that ukraine is forever neutral- and neverjoins nato. so i think even they are - realising that this nazi idea is not sticking. they are adding to that. the so—called bioweapons supposedly developed in the labs in ukraine. they're adding to that - the allegation that ukraine was about to attack donbas and russia using nuclear. weapons, building. dirty nuclear bombs. so they're exposing their hand in not being certain _ of their own conspiracy theory, and creating multitudes - of others to try to justify| their invasion post facto. so, multifaceted narrative you're describing, julia. dr garner, i must ask you about telegram — we see it being referenced

a lot with reference to russian media. some listeners won't have encountered it. could you just explain what it is as a service, and why we need to consider it when we look at the construction of russia's narrative? so, telegram is a somewhat encrypted — although that's debatable — messaging service, something like whatsapp or signal, which are more widely used in western europe. it's extremely popular in russia, there's something like 37—38 million regular users. russians use it to message each other and make phone calls, but also as a source of news. and there are some really large independent channels, as well as state channels — channels with millions of followers who are putting out any narratives they like. and so we're seeing a disinformation, misinformation war play out in that space that is really beyond the government's control. thank you very much indeed. olga, i could see you wanting to come in here — how important do you believe telegram and other newer platforms are, in terms of the information russians are finding? it's definitely very important.

and also, youtube, in recent years, has become an alternative to the tv for many russians. but i'd also add something about the narratives — ian just said that russian tv cannot show their own martyrs, because it's not a war. yeah, that's true, russian official media don't call this war a war, they call it a "special operation". but at the same time on sunday news in the evening, the first channel, it's like it's one of the two most popular state tv channels in russia — it showed the pictures of russian militaries honouring them for the things they did in ukraine, and they actually showed the pictures and said, like, "this person killed two nationalists, this person destroyed ten tanks," etc, etc. so they're all trying

to create this narrative. they're creating heroes, or at least they're trying to. i would like to finish where we began with vera, from tv rain. and, just in the last few seconds of the programme, vera, do you have hope that russian media may become freer once again in the future? right now, i have no answer. right now, no hope, frankly. these days, it is really very complicated to produce anything from inside the country. it's about safety, and... no, i'm not optimistic at all right now. well, vera, we appreciate you joining us all the same. thank you very much indeed for your time. indeed, thank you to all of our guests, who were vera krichevskaya from tv rain, jamie angus from bbc news, the historian dr ian garner, the author peter pomerantsev, olga irisova, who's a russian journalist based in berlin, and julia davis, who's

a columnist at the daily beast. i should also mention that vera has directed a documentary about tv rain — it's called tango with putin. it's available now on the bbc iplayer. but that is it for this edition of the media show. thank you very much indeed for watching. we'll see you next week at the usual times. all the best. hello. it is mid—arch, days are getting longer and the sunshine is getting stronger, and we will see some of that as we go through the week ahead. a lot of dry weather in the forecast, pretty mild, by day, in the sunshine. chilly at night still, with some patchy mist and fog, and there will be some rain this week, but it is most likely to be through wednesday. for the here and now, we've got rain clearing to the east. this little area of cloud bringing showers into scotland

and down into the south—west. these showers in the south—west may be heavy and thundery. they will drift into the channel coast during the early part of the morning. at the same time, some showers moving out of northern ireland into central and southern scotland, along with northern england, with the best of the sunshine perhaps a little bit further south, into central parts of england and wales, with highs of 14 degrees. now, there's going to be a good deal of dry weather around on tuesday as well, with light winds. yes, a weather front will start to move in from the far north—west, and we could see a few early morning showers, some patchy mist and fog around, but they will clear away quite quickly. a good deal of dry weather, light winds for most, so, in the sunshine, it will feel quite pleasant, with highs of 15 degrees. cloud and rain starts approaching from the atlantic, a cold front behind it, bringing in some colder air. but at the same time, we've got this very warm air blowing in from the near continent, and where these two frontal systems will meet, that is where we are likely to see a real clash, with some heavy rain,

potentially; as much as half an inch likely to fall in some places on wednesday. it is likely to stay dry though east anglia and south—east england, and by contrast, here we could see temperatures peaking at 17 degrees, 63 fahrenheit. the average for this time of year in the south is around 11 celsius. the rain will clear its way south and east through wednesday night into thursday, and it may well take its time in doing so, and lingerfirst thing across that south—east corner, with a ridge of high pressure building in behind. so after a cloudy, damp start across the far south—east, an improving weather story. a little bit of showery rain into the far north—west, not amounting to too much. thursday will see highs of around ten to 13 degrees. a little bit cooler, because the wind direction�*s changing slightly, coming in from the north sea, but it does mean friday and saturday, we keep that dry theme going, and again, those temperatures peaking at 15 degrees. enjoy.

some ask welcome to bbc news — i'm david eades. eades. our top stories: a missile attack on a ukrainian military training base close to the polish border kills at least 35 people — the local mayor is defiant. translation: they can bomb us, but they will never be able - to break ukrainian spirit. they will never be rulers at our land. ukraine's president zelensky visits injured troops. the country says it's lost 1300 soldiers in battle. and "stop this massacre" — the words of pope francis, who's made an impassioned plea for an end to the violence.