A request to correct a false statement in a New York Times article.
The bombshell New York Times article about the fateful Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 contained at least one falsehood. We could prove that in any independent probe. Nekrasov wrote a letter to the editor (letters@nytimes.com) in accordance with all NYT guidelines, asking for the falsehood to be corrected. It was left intact, and no reply was received.
From: Andrei Nekrasov
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 3:36 PM
To: letters@nytimes.com
Subject: A false statement in an article re Veselnitskaya/Trump
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 3:36 PM
To: letters@nytimes.com
Subject: A false statement in an article re Veselnitskaya/Trump
Sir,
On Jul 10th I sent a comment regarding a false statement in a NYT article dated Jul 8 2017.
Here is a somewhat more detailed statement, which has been also sent to the NYT Public editor with a correction request.
On Jul 10th I sent a comment regarding a false statement in a NYT article dated Jul 8 2017.
Here is a somewhat more detailed statement, which has been also sent to the NYT Public editor with a correction request.
Article Headline: Trump Team Met With Lawyer Linked to Kremlin During Campaign
Date Published: July 8 2017
Web or Print: Both
Phrase in Question: "Ms. Veselnitskaya was also deeply involved in the making of an anti-Magnitsky film".
Date Published: July 8 2017
Web or Print: Both
Phrase in Question: "Ms. Veselnitskaya was also deeply involved in the making of an anti-Magnitsky film".
Ms Veselnitskaya was not at all involved in the making of the film in question, which I directed.
On reading the article on July 8th I contacted Natalia Veselnitskaya and she assured me that she had confirmed to a NYT reporter working on the article, that she had met me (Nekrasov, the film's director) AFTER the film was finished. As I was in control of the making of the film all the time, there could not have been an "involvement" (let alone "deep involvement") without my knowledge.
It would have also been appropriate to contact me for a comment about weather an involvement in my work had actually taken place, especially if such an involvement is tantamount to questionable political influence in this high profile case. I feel NYT has shown reckless disregard for my creative rights and reputation, as well as those of my respectable producers and supporters.
My film (The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes) disparagingly called by NYT "an anti-Magnitsky film", was produced by Piraya Film, a Norwegian company, whose production credits include such titles as Oscarnominated The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence, multiple award winning Gulabi Gang, Yodok Stories etc.
The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes was financed exclusively by Western-European mainstream institutions and broadcasters, such as Norwegian Film Institute, Fritt Ord ("Freedom of Expression") Foundation, NRK (Norwegian national TV network), Finnish Film Foundation, YLE (Finnish national TV network), ARTE (French-German TV network) etc. There was no Russian involvement whatsoever.
The film comes to the conclusion that the Magnitsky story as it is known in the West, the basis of a U.S. legislation, is a hoax.
William (Bill) Browder, who has spread the story in the media, lobbied it in the North American and European political establishments, and seems to be a source for the Magnitsky element in the article, is not an uninterested party to the argument. As I show in the film he has a direct motive to spread the Magnitsky narrative I had come to refute. Browder was investigated for the fraud he blamed Russian officials for (in fact the police who investigated him).
I am writing this remaining a consistent critic of Mr Putin.
Browder succeded in stopping the premiere and TV release of my film in Europe (NYT seems to suggest in the article that the premiere did happen), but when he failed to have a small screening in Washington (Newseum) cancelled, Seymour Hersh who saw it there said "This is a new truth".
Without the film's findings being given a fair minimum of unbiased representation it is particularly wrong to publish inaccurate information about it in such an explosive context as Trump's possible Russian connections.
My producer and I would like to encourage you to familiarize yourself with the relevant documents and materials in our posession as well as with the film itself.
Quite specifically, however, the claim of Veselnitskaya's "deep involvement" in the making of my film is outright wrong and I ask for an appropriate correction to be issued as soon as possible.
Thank you
Andrei Nekrasov
Piraya Film AS
Kvitsøygata 25,
4014 Stavanger
Norway
On reading the article on July 8th I contacted Natalia Veselnitskaya and she assured me that she had confirmed to a NYT reporter working on the article, that she had met me (Nekrasov, the film's director) AFTER the film was finished. As I was in control of the making of the film all the time, there could not have been an "involvement" (let alone "deep involvement") without my knowledge.
It would have also been appropriate to contact me for a comment about weather an involvement in my work had actually taken place, especially if such an involvement is tantamount to questionable political influence in this high profile case. I feel NYT has shown reckless disregard for my creative rights and reputation, as well as those of my respectable producers and supporters.
My film (The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes) disparagingly called by NYT "an anti-Magnitsky film", was produced by Piraya Film, a Norwegian company, whose production credits include such titles as Oscarnominated The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence, multiple award winning Gulabi Gang, Yodok Stories etc.
The Magnitsky Act - Behind the Scenes was financed exclusively by Western-European mainstream institutions and broadcasters, such as Norwegian Film Institute, Fritt Ord ("Freedom of Expression") Foundation, NRK (Norwegian national TV network), Finnish Film Foundation, YLE (Finnish national TV network), ARTE (French-German TV network) etc. There was no Russian involvement whatsoever.
The film comes to the conclusion that the Magnitsky story as it is known in the West, the basis of a U.S. legislation, is a hoax.
William (Bill) Browder, who has spread the story in the media, lobbied it in the North American and European political establishments, and seems to be a source for the Magnitsky element in the article, is not an uninterested party to the argument. As I show in the film he has a direct motive to spread the Magnitsky narrative I had come to refute. Browder was investigated for the fraud he blamed Russian officials for (in fact the police who investigated him).
I am writing this remaining a consistent critic of Mr Putin.
Browder succeded in stopping the premiere and TV release of my film in Europe (NYT seems to suggest in the article that the premiere did happen), but when he failed to have a small screening in Washington (Newseum) cancelled, Seymour Hersh who saw it there said "This is a new truth".
Without the film's findings being given a fair minimum of unbiased representation it is particularly wrong to publish inaccurate information about it in such an explosive context as Trump's possible Russian connections.
My producer and I would like to encourage you to familiarize yourself with the relevant documents and materials in our posession as well as with the film itself.
Quite specifically, however, the claim of Veselnitskaya's "deep involvement" in the making of my film is outright wrong and I ask for an appropriate correction to be issued as soon as possible.
Thank you
Andrei Nekrasov
Piraya Film AS
Kvitsøygata 25,
4014 Stavanger
Norway