reprint
Who is behind Krzysztof Stanowski?
Krzysztof Stanowski very much wants to stay a Teflon candidate in the presidential election. I hope that the media, politicians and netizens will not supply specified comfort.
Krzysztof Stanowski had to compete in this election. No, not to become the conscience of democracy and the remorse of politicians who hold us all for – to stick to the poetics of the founder of Channel Zero – complete idiots. It's just another performance event, due to this kind of action Stanowski built his brand.
What does Stanowski feed?
For the first time, his “shocking” performance was “to crush” the book Małgorzata Domagalik about Jerzy Brzęczek, the then selectioner of the Polish football team. He sat in front of the camera and devastated this publication – polemically and physically. Although he felt that the book was hopeless, he dedicated respective episodes to her, filled with mockery, mocking authors, and ripping pages from her. It was impressive, yes, and the viewers – at the time the Sports Channel, due to the fact that it was there that Stanowski arranged this roast – sat in front of the screens of computers or smartphones to laughter at subsequent malicious and calumnias which Stano would service again.
Another highly “important” social topics Stanowski dealt with in justifying this ethical imperative afraid hypocrisy in breakfast tv (the case of Natalia Janoszek) or the “dismasking” of intellectual talent of boxer Marcin Najman.
In both cases – as in the book Domagalik and Brzęczko – Stano made another miniseries. Janoszek – a not peculiarly popular celebrity in Poland – in Stanowski's opinion she was even worth going to India, where he exposed lies about her career in Bollywood, or the creation by the owner of the Zero alter ego channel in the form of an Indian star, Khris Stan Khan.
It was, I admit, comic at times. The problem is, if you think about it, it's hard to justify it with ambitious journalism. It is simply cabaret entertainment, in addition to a mediocre edition, but preying on human weaknesses and imperfections. Of course, these in public space are worth pointing out and stigmatizing, but spending besides much time on them seems alternatively like unhealthy entertainment.
So what's all this for? Does Stanowski enjoy mocking human weaknesses? I don't know that and, to tell you the truth, I'm not interested. This nonsubjective is important, which has an impact on the audience: that is, the construction of a individual brand by Stanowski and, therefore, the making of land under scope for his subsequent media projects. This is simply a simple method to read: alternatively of buying ads online or laboriously building credibility, it can be done rapidly and comparatively inexpensive by filming another large scandal, where the whistleblower turns out to be an alarmist and showman in one. It is not by chance that after a fewer online brawls started, Stanowski decided that he was besides large for the Sports Channel and decided to go on his own, assuming the already mentioned Zero Channel.
It's no different with moving for president. Justification that in order to point out the weaknesses of politicians you request to run for election is simply lame and unbelievable. The fact that the Polish political class is presenting an increasingly lower level we know for a long time and a horse with a row of people who will tell what Stanowski's thought would change here. Apart from 1 thing, it will give the founder of Channel Zero the fuel essential to carry out further, business-effective operations.
Fun's over.
I just wonder what Stanowski will gotta do in a year or 2 to get the crowds excited again, mock human weaknesses, mix with mud 1 or another form of public life, to stay the 1 who can "orphan anyone."
I admit that I belonged to the camp of people who took Stanowski's announcements about moving in the presidential election seriously, as this fits into the logic of his presence in the public sphere.
Stanowski's candidacy in the presidential election was besides presented by him as a frivolous candidacy, which we should not be serious about, due to the fact that it is about amusement and heating up the casting of the full political class.
It is an interesting setting of the substance which many observers of public life seem to buy, treating Stanowski's participation in the election as a kind of performance, which will not have much influence on Polish politics.
I think otherwise: Stanowski, erstwhile announcing his candidacy, became simply a politician. It has a real impact on political processes in Poland. No, this is no longer a cabaret or a series of cheerful films on You Tube. It is besides not a mud bath decorated with this or another celebrity or the author of the book.
Stanowski's candidacy – even if, as any say, it withdraws it just before the first circular of elections – affects voters, prompts them to circumstantial behaviours. any to pass votes on to him, others to vote against him, others to go to the elections at all. Even if he resigns, voters will again make decisions based on this resignation, and surely many will change their election preferences by observing a fewer months of mockery from another candidates.
With the announcement of his candidacy, Stanowski completes the phase of the stowaway. It no longer works solely on its individual popularity, but enters into a space that truly affects people's lives and will affect them for years to come. For him and any of his supporters, sympathetic to his online stunts the fun begins, but the fact is different: the fun has just ended. And they will not aid here the spell about the request to exposure the intellectual mediocrity of the Polish political class. Stanowski becomes a point of mention for concrete electoral decisions that may affect our lives. Which, in times of large confusion and uncertainty in which we live, just sounds sinister.
That's why Stanowski's candidacy should be treated like any other. Its motivations request not be driven solely by the request to build their own brand. Let us not forget that Stanowski is simply a business man, with all the good and bad sides. There's nothing incorrect with making money and business success. I want Stanowski the best. But we know very well that a large business – and this is what the owner of Channel Zero is surrounded by – has its circumstantial goals, besides political ones. Lobbies, seeks to gain influence on legislators and the form of legislation. It is worth asking, then, who stands behind Stanowski and is his candidacy independent? However, there may be individual or individual who sees it as an chance to weaken another candidates and to strengthen those (or those) who are more accessible and susceptible to lobbying activities.
Scratch Teflon
For the record, I'm not suggesting any illegal activities here. Lobbing and another attempts by business to influence politics is completely normal, which does not mean that we should not talk about it or compose about it. Stanowski, meanwhile, tries to put himself in a comfortable position of Stańczyk, who has only noble intentions, entering a very crucial political gameplay. That's the kind of thing that's expected to cover him with Teflon. And that would be very damaging to the full election process. There can be people behind Stanowski who plan to influence politics with his help, making the candidate a bargaining chip.
So I want Stanowski that this election run would be exhausting and hard for him. Only then will it bring good fruit. We will learn then that with Polish public life is not as bad as we thought. So it's time to send X-rays to that candidacy.
Tomasz Figura
Who is behind Krzysztof Stanowski? - PCH24.pl
