The Analysis of the TV Program

1. The name of the program is ‘Poedinok’ or (Single Combat)
2. Rossia Odin or (Russia One) runs the program
3. The host is Vladimir Solovyov
4. The key point of the program is the rhetorical question: ‘Should we return death penalty?’ There are two participants Mihail Veller and Genri Reznik. The first is the famous writer and the last is the lower.

Seek Truth and Report It

The accuracy of information is tested. The moderator, preparing to the program, analyzes news concerning the headline of the program. Sources of information are identified. They are thoughts of the speakers. The headline of the program is absolutely adequately represented by the context. By the way, sound bites after each round is very suitable for this topic. There are no photos, video or graphics usually in any releases of this program. There is no any evidence of plagiarism in this program. It’s a very respectable program which can’t permit such a trick. There are some analysis and commentary in the program after each round. The honest goes to the room where the arbiter is sitting, hearing both discussants, and making comments on this or that position. They are labeled. It’s a person opinion.

Minimize Harm

Compassion isn’t shown for those, who may be affected adversely by news. The most important thing to the program is to name things what they are. The host is sensitive when he is seeking or using interviews of those affected by tragedy or grief. He is on their way. The right of private people to control information about themselves is recognized. Names aren’t mentioned. Only facts are on the surface, easy to see.

Act Independently

Conflicts of interests aren’t avoided. Both participants are standing on their own positions. So it doesn’t manage to do it. In this program people tell what they want to prove it by facts. Advertisers aren’t mentioned in this program at all.

Be Accountable

All what has been reported is absolutely clarified and explained by the skilful host. The dialogue with the public is invited. There are 3 supporters of each opponent who are asking questions their competitors. Also there is other non-verbal dialog between participants and viewers, sitting in the hall. I’ve never heard that someone has encouraged against this media.

From my point of view the program is ethical. It’s our choice should we see it or not. I think so, because journalists appeal to the facts makes the program ethical. By the way there is no any evidence of plagiarism.