Is it true that the Ukrainians falsified a report about the shelling of a maternity hospital in Mariupol?

On March 10, 2022, numerous materials appeared in the Russian media, Telegram channels and social networks exposing footage taken the day before after explosions near a medical facility in Mariupol. We tried to figure out whether the staging really took place and whether the report was falsified.

For example, a fragment of the broadcast of the Rossiya 24 TV channel was published on the Vesti.ru website under the heading “Ukrainian model suspected of filming a fake about a maternity hospital in Mariupol.” “Social network users suspected Ukrainian beauty blogger Marianna Podgurskaya of participating in the filming of staged photographs against the backdrop of an allegedly destroyed maternity hospital in Mariupol,” the material reports. "Rossiyskaya Gazeta" posted on its website a note entitled “Another fake of the West: a woman filmed in a Mariupol maternity hospital turned out to be a fashion model in makeup.” "Komsomolskaya Pravda" told to its readers about “another fake from Ukrainian propaganda: all the photographs from the destroyed maternity hospital show the same girl in different clothes, and all the pictures were taken by the same photographer.” Later, a similar description of what happened was supported by Russian departments: official representative of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation Igor Konashenkov stated, that “the alleged airstrike was a completely orchestrated provocation to maintain an anti-Russian stir among Western audiences.”

On the afternoon of March 9, 2022, Mariupol City Council reportedthat Russian aircraft “purposefully bombed a children’s hospital in Mariupol.” The message was accompanied by several videos showing destroyed buildings and destroyed cars (one of which continues to burn). People also appear in the videos, mostly in the background. The voice-over in one of the videos says that in front of the audience is “the 3rd hospital of Mariupol, maternity hospital.” The author of another video says: “Shelling... maternity hospital.” In this video first carry someone on a stretcher, then two men leading a pregnant woman towards the author. In the background are two dozen people leaving a three-story building.

Soon in the official Telegram channel of President Vladimir Zelensky appeared video taken inside the building (probably by the same police or rescue service officer who made the second video mentioned above). On the recording one can hear conversations on the radio - about who is doing what now and who should do what next; one can see destroyed premises, broken glass, flying plaster, beds, mattresses, tables. There was almost no medical equipment in the frame, and no injured people either. The voice of the person filming can be heard behind the scenes: “Aviation hit the maternity hospital. So much for the Russians.”

In the evening of the same day, first again at Telegram, and then a series of photographs appeared in major Western media, made at the scene of the events by the famous Ukrainian photo reporter Evgeniy Maloletka for the Associated Press (AP, one of the largest and most respected news agencies in the world). Maloletka’s photographs were analyzed on the morning of March 10 by the anonymous Telegram channel “Signal” (it now has more than 493,000 subscribers and supports the Russian special operation). It was after this that the refutation of the Ukrainian fake was spread throughout the infrastructure of pro-government blogs and Telegram channels.

Let's look at all the arguments of the authors of the refutation one by one.

""Signal" discovered a girl whom photographers photographed in the ruins of a maternity hospital in Mariupol. She turned out to be a model and popular in Mariupol beauty blogger. Her name is Marianna Podgurskaya. The girl is really pregnant..."

Everything here is true. The heroine of the filming is called Marianna Podgurskaya (married Vyshemirskaya), she runs an Instagram page, and at the time of filming she was actually pregnant. Subsequently, pro-government Russian media deliberately drew attention to Podgurskaya’s occupation (beauty blogger), obviously hinting that she was used to participating in filming. However, this fact itself cannot serve as evidence of falsification: a woman of any profession can be pregnant, a woman of any profession can end up in a maternity hospital if she is pregnant.

“The girl is really pregnant, but there was no way she was lying in the maternity hospital, which had long been occupied by neo-Nazis from Azov. <…> March 8 was published interview with one of the maternity hospital employees. She reported that Azov kicked out all the staff and patients from there and occupied the building. March 5th was recorded“that Azov militants are firing from the territory of the same maternity hospital”

These statements look solid, but in fact they are not supported by anything. IN report On the pro-government Russian website Lenta.ru, which Signal refers to, there is the following fragment: “Igor said that in the last days of February, people in uniform came to the maternity hospital where his mother works. He doesn’t know whether they were fighters of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (Ukrainian Armed Forces - editor’s note) or the nationalist Azov battalion (banned in the Russian Federation). The military knocked down all the locks, dispersed the maternity hospital staff, and set up firing points in the building so that, as they explained to the doctors, they would prepare the “Mariupol fortress” for defense.”

We don’t know who this Igor is and whether he’s telling the truth, but let’s assume that he is. However, even in this case, it is impossible to understand which specific maternity hospital we are talking about - there are several of them in Mariupol.

The second source of the “Signal” is note state news agency RIA Novosti, which quotes the words of the official representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense, Major General Igor Konashenkov: “At the units of the People’s Militia that have entered the city, militants of the national battalions “Azov” and “Aidar” are firing from positions equipped in schools, hospitals, maternity hospitals and kindergartens.” But Konashenkov did not name the numbers of the maternity hospitals from where the fire was allegedly coming from. This means that even if you believe Russian propaganda that “Azov” occupied some maternity hospitals in Mariupol, it does not follow that this is exactly the maternity hospital where Marianna Podgurskaya was filmed. 

The specific number of the allegedly seized maternity hospital on March 7 (two days before the shelling discussed in this material) was mentioned by the Russian representative in this organization, Vasily Nebenzya, during a speech at the UN. With reference to local residents, he said: “Having expelled the entire staff of maternity hospital No. 1 in the city of Mariupol, the Ukrainian Armed Forces equipped a firing position in it.” A few days later, explaining what happened in Mariupol, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (referring to Nebenzya) said, that “this maternity hospital has long been captured by the Azov battalion and other radicals.”

However, maternity hospital No. 1 and the maternity ward of hospital No. 3 are different institutions located in different areas of Mariupol. At the same time, from the photographs and videos that included neighboring houses, it is possible to accurately installthat it was City Hospital No. 3 that was attacked. And even if the story about “Azov” allegedly occupying maternity hospital No. 1 is reliable, this in itself could not in any way affect the work of the city’s specialized institutions. After all, many residents remained in Mariupol, despite the siege, and no one can prohibit women from giving birth on time, even in war conditions.

“The same model played in three episodes».

The gist of the argument seems to be that if it had not been staged, all the photographs would have shown different girls. “All the photographs from the destroyed maternity hospital show the same girl in different clothes,” adds "Komsomolskaya Pravda". Indeed, in two of the three photographs in the Signal collection (one of them was taken by Evgeny Maloletka, the second by another AP reporter Mstislav Chernov) we see Marianna Podgurskaya. But the third photo (a wounded pregnant woman on a stretcher) definitely doesn’t show her. This is visible to the naked eye.

But it’s even better seen in another video (2:17), which the authors of The Signal do not pay attention to. This video was shot by the AP photo and video reporter Mstislav Chernov, already mentioned above. The four-minute video shows many people and different situations, and you can also see the remains of medical equipment. In addition, Podgurskaya got there for a few seconds (3:10).

At the same time, this video responds to another one argument supporters of the version of the staging, according to which “in the footage taken after the rocket hit near the maternity hospital, there is not a single victim” (in this video you can see both the scale of the destruction and the victims of the shelling). In addition, it is quite difficult to imagine who, in a besieged city under constant shelling, could organize such a large-scale and complex staging.

What's the result?

Statements about staged and directed shots do not stand up to criticism and are definitely not true. The dissemination of this information through anonymous Telegram channels and pro-government media looks like a deliberate manipulation of public opinion. The photographs and videos depicting the aftermath of the March 9 shelling in Mariupol were taken by professional journalists who work for one of the most respected news agencies in the world. Independent media do not participate in the information war; their task is to cover events honestly and impartially.

So far, we do not know exactly who exactly and from where the shelling of the maternity ward of hospital No. 3 in Mariupol was carried out. However, we assume that one day someone will bear real responsibility for this.

Correction March 14, 2022: The original publication erroneously stated that both photographs of Marianna Podgurskaya were taken by reporter Evgeniy Maloletka. In fact one of them belongs to another photographer, Mstislav Chernov. The text of the analysis before making corrections is available at link.

Not true

What do our verdicts mean?

Read on the topic:

1. Fake news about what is happening in Ukraine
2. Fake news about what is happening in Ukraine. Part 2
3. Fake news about what is happening in Ukraine. Part 3
4. Fake news about what is happening in Ukraine. Part 4
5. StopFake.org. Fake: women in labor injured as a result of shelling of a maternity hospital in Mariupol are staged