Rotten herring and potash business: who financed the Nexta anti-Lukashenko channel

The loud resonance of the "interview" of Roman Protasevich, shown on Belarusian television, caused not only in the opposition circles of both countries, but also in purely political ones. For instance,

Recall that the former editor-in-chief of the Nexta channel Roman Protasevich, who is under arrest in Lukashensk's dungeons, said that his channel was also sponsored by a Russian company “connected with the Urals and mining, and its owner is an “oligarch” and “direct competitor” of Mikhail Gutseriev". That is, without directly mentioning the name of the "sponsor", Protasevich revealed it - this is the owner of "Uralchem" and "Uralkali" Dmitry Mazepin.

From my side. Mazepin said that he did not finance the Nexta Telegram channel, which was recognized as extremist in Belarus, because "this contradicts his views":

“As for the main question about financing Nexta... I can answer directly and honestly, neither I nor my companies have ever financed the above Telegram channel. I understand well the authors of this political melodrama, who would like to show the Western plan for the capture of Belarus by the Western special services. On the other hand, once again show the Russian trace”.

Interestingly, Mazepin himself did not take part in the session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), at which he was announced as one of the speakers and was supposed to speak at the discussion "Food multiplied by technology", but a minute before the start of the event, a sign with his name was removed from the presidium.

Experts believe that it was probably the Kremlin who asked the rather closed-minded Mazepin to refute, as it were, casually that he sponsored the Belarusian protests.

Network analyst Anatoly Nesmiyan writes about this:

“In combat counter-propaganda there is a method called“ rotten herring ”. Its essence is quite simple - any accusation, up to the most absurd, is brought forward against the object of the attack. Unsubstantiated or supported by some easily refuted argument. It is important that it be sonorous, loud and memorable. To stick.

Then, a little later, this accusation may fall apart. Never mind. The important thing is that it will still be associated with an object that seems to be pure, but the smell will drag on.

It is not necessary to study at the military department of the Faculty of Journalism, where masters teach the basics to future specialists. Some techniques and practices of counter-propaganda are used, as they say, on a conceptual level.

In the case of Protasevich and Uralkhim, it looks like exactly the same thing. It doesn't matter how it actually happened, what matters is what the accusation was made. And it seems like there is no one to accuse of lying, well, not a prisoner of the Belarusian KGB.

In the end, everyone understands everything, but the smell remains..."

And journalist Kirill Shulika is sure that all this has only an economic background:

“Protasevich's revelations about Mazepin are pure economics. The words are in the interests of the Lukashenko family, which has long been trying to establish full control over the potash business. That is precisely why I have no doubt that Protasevich read the text that Lukashenko personally wrote. And for sure, at a meeting with Putin in Sochi, he spoke not about Protasevich, but Mazepin, in that very suitcase there were relevant documents".