Who and how does Russia ‘world leader corruption’

Mediasphere today (2011.11.02) Was pretty clogged materials about

"Rating Russia on corruption. "

The essence of the campaign consisted of two things — a certain report from stuffing "Transparency International"And it was a perverted interpretation.

Here is a typical version of misinforming treatment (Meyl.ru "with reference to« BFM.ru]):

"Russia has become the world leader in corruption. In other countries, namely businessmen from Russia most likely to bribe. Russian companies have been leaders in the ranking of export companies bribe abroad. These data are contained in the report international corruption organization Transparency International, which annually calculates the index Bribe Payers Index."


As is typical of this publication, we explain it more detail.

"Russia has become the world leader on corruption"(Title, contrary to the content).
This is an outright lie — Russia has not become a world leader that is known at once — we are talking about, "the study» TI («Transparency International») is not only the world, but only 28 of the most developed countries, and not the countries themselves, as well as to their "export" businesses operating abroad.

The fact that the investigated "propensity to pay bribes"- and outright lies. This follows from the description itself TI The methodology of the "research" (see below).

The fact that there has been "research"- A gross deliberate distortion. From a public press release TI that took place just a sociological survey (Albeit conducted by fraudulent methods, as below) managers of companies. The quality of the survey (which is not hidden) makes a particularly cynical media statements about the "world leadership."


Now a procedure. Read from this point of view it is the correct material

"Russian companies are the most corrupt in the world, indicates "Bribe Payers Index 2011", prepared by Transparency International. Researchers studied the behavior of companies from various countries abroad. From Russian firms more than on any, other waiting, that they will give a bribe. In second place below China.

The non-governmental organization Transparency International, fighting against corruption and poor governance, the first time in three years, introduced the "Bribe Payers Index". Research, Spent in 28 countries, was shown how fair behave certain national companies abroad. It was founded on the method of expert judgment: 3016 managers (of which companies?) Were asked to rank countries in order of 10 — the countries whose companies would never rely on bribes to 0 — countries whose companies abroad are not without corruption ….

Reason for special concern — the presence of China and Russia at the end of the list — the report said. — Given the growing global representation of business from these countries, bribery and corruption are likely to have a significant impact on the countries in which they work, and will affect the ability of other companies to compete fairly in those markets. " The interconnectedness of the unlawful behavior of the national companies abroad and domestic corruption The replies executives living (they are citizens?) in countries with high corruption. They more often than their counterparts in more affluent countries have argued that foreign companies are paid off. According to the "Corruption Perception Index TI», Russia ranks 154th out of 178, while China — the 78th …."


Now, referring to the release (*. Pdf) TI a description of the methodology described in the stated look fine.

1. The researchers did not study the behavior of the company's 28 countries abroad. Again, there was a public opinion poll within a particular group. There was no evidence of judicial sentences, etc., which would make reasonable loud statements have not been studied and is not — it is about the experiences of some of the respondents. Russian companies are not at all the leaders in the lists of "bribery" cases are investigated abroad. It is known to all who follow the publications. "Do not be caught — not a thief" is a principle of law, not a curse.

2. Russian did not climb all the bribes them to do so, with bated breath, waiting. "From Russian firms more than on any, other waiting to see what they would pay bribes"It is fundamentally and practically NOTE accurate tsitatata press release. Opinion businessmen one country of their counterparties or competitors of the other — is not an indication of the real state of affairs.

3. It is not known which company managers were given their "expert opinion" on the territory of a country. Since its release in TI wisely avoids this question, we can talk about the formation of rogue groups of respondents. The organization says that either decide which company directories "Yellow Pages" (as in Russia) — no parameters, sampling, or relied on the guidance of his colleagues. But the most important thing here is that shamefully did not specify who asked (waiting to see whether they offer a bribe) in the same Russia — Russians, or working ("living") are foreigners. "Accommodation" says nothing about such important things as the work of a Russian or non-Russian company. It is necessary to explain the difference? Someone does not remember about "expert" De Custine. "

And the latest. All of this "study" — really another "expert survey" of corruption. Or rather — of its "perception." We have already written in great detail, answering the question of how and why are these ratings. It has been shown that it is a very sly system because the public drumbeat introduced to her as his own experience, formed by this kind of "research." And no one anywhere not even argues that it is any objective evidence — neither TI, nor the World Bank, etc. The question is why it is also a very specific answer. We are told that there is virtually frankly fraudulent system of ratings that must not only affect the investment attractiveness of countries and individual companies (we all know that in Russia for such "export-orintirovannye companies mainly), but also on the formation of political doctrines Ministries of Foreign Affairs of individual states. But this time, in a press release TI has a very clear indication of confirmation (we apologize — as in the original):

"Doing business within a comprehensive ethical framework is not only important to prevent foreign bribery and for companies to stay on the right side of the law, it is also good for business. For example, a Europe-wide business survey found that two-thirds of respondents agreed that a company's strong reputation for ethical behaviour translates into a commercial advantage."

If the transfer are (not content) do not hesitate subjectivity of our ratings are aware of the fact that our imagination (about the "correction" or "fall" of countries and companies in the "ratings") may affect the state of affairs.< br/>

Like this post? Please share to your friends: