(MILAN, ITALY) – Russian state television largely ignored or disparaged the opening of the Winter Olympic Games in Milan, presenting the global sporting event through a sceptical and hostile lens that reflected the Kremlin’s wider political narrative.
While much of the world focused on ceremonies celebrating international cooperation and peace, leading Russian broadcasters framed the Games as poorly organised, excessively expensive, and lacking significance. Commentators repeatedly described the event as a “tragedy” rather than a celebration of sport.
Russian programmes suggested that preparations had been rushed, venues unfinished, and infrastructure inadequate. Reports highlighted closed streets, disrupted schools, and temporary construction, portraying routine security and logistical measures as signs of chaos.
Coverage contrasted sharply with international broadcasts that showed large crowds, coordinated performances, and appearances by global figures, including actress Charlize Theron, who spoke about peace and unity.
Speakers also referred to messages inspired by the legacy of Nelson Mandela, which were presented during the ceremony. Russian commentators dismissed such statements as empty symbolism.
At the same time, programmes acknowledged that Russian missile and drone attacks on Ukraine continued during the opening, underlining that appeals for peace had no impact on the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and his military campaign.
Several analysts on state television argued that international ceremonies and “peace performances” only increased Russia’s isolation. They claimed that Western leaders and institutions were using sport to criticise Moscow.
Some presenters linked this tone to what they described as envy and resentment towards countries hosting successful global events. Others suggested that propaganda workers were motivated by financial dependence on the state and personal benefits, including housing and luxury vehicles.
Broadcasts also compared Milan with previous Olympics, particularly the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi. Critics noted that Russian television now raised corruption and safety concerns abroad while remaining silent about similar or larger problems at home.
The late opposition politician Boris Nemtsov was cited in archival material explaining how funds were misused during preparations for Sochi. He had previously estimated large scale embezzlement linked to Olympic construction.
According to these assessments, losses ranged from 750 billion to 1 trillion roubles. At current exchange rates, this equals roughly 8.2 to 11 billion US dollars. Analysts argued that such sums could have funded housing, roads, and sports facilities across Russia.
One example frequently mentioned was the Adler to Krasnaya Polyana road, reportedly costing about 200 million US dollars per kilometre, making it among the most expensive roads ever built.
Commentators also recalled reports of migrant labour exploitation, poor construction standards, and environmental damage during the Sochi project. Many facilities were later underused, partly because the region’s climate is unsuitable for winter sports.
Despite these issues, Kremlin media at the time claimed that almost all funding came from private investors. Independent investigations later found that around 96 per cent was provided from public budgets.
During the Milan opening, several major channels appeared to avoid the event altogether, focusing instead on domestic school competitions and regional contests. Media analysts described this as a deliberate strategy of silence.
Other broadcasters aired investigative style segments highlighting alleged failures, including minor technical problems and brief power outages at test events. These incidents were presented as proof of systemic collapse.
Russian talk shows also amplified unverified claims about foreign athletes and equipment violations, using sensational language and moralistic rhetoric aimed at provoking outrage among viewers.
Meanwhile, only a small number of Russian athletes competed under neutral status. State commentators questioned their participation and suggested that individual sporting careers were less important than loyalty to the war effort.
Media observers said this reflected the broader attitude of the authorities, which prioritises political loyalty over personal achievement and public welfare.
On the day of the opening, some channels instead rebroadcast films celebrating the Sochi Games. One such programme, shown by Channel One Russia, portrayed the 2014 event as an unmatched national triumph.
The timing coincided with the birthday of media executive Konstantin Ernst, who had overseen the Sochi ceremony. Reports said that about 1.6 billion roubles, or roughly 17.5 million US dollars, had been spent on the opening show.
Critics argued that the programme was intended to reinforce a narrative of past glory and distract audiences from current isolation and economic strain.
Independent analysts said Russian state television increasingly relies on such nostalgic and confrontational messaging as the country becomes more politically and economically marginalised.
They added that censorship and pressure on journalists have made open discussion of domestic failures impossible, encouraging broadcasters to attack foreign events instead.
