Producer Joseph Prigozhin voiced a strong warning regarding Nikita Dzhigurda, urging that the showman be evaluated in a psychiatric facility after Dzhigurda publicly pressed deputies to scrutinize Valeria’s husband following a phone call he participated in during 2023. This stance was conveyed as a direct response to the controversial remarks noted by HABER.RU, shaping the conversation around accountability, public conduct, and the potential impact of sensationalism on political and personal reputations.
In a separate statement, Prigozhin contended that Anastasia Volochkova, a figure known for her public presence, deserves formal examination by mental health professionals based on her activities within the public sphere. He emphasized that his focus was not on the individual at the center of the dispute but rather on the behavior patterns he perceives as destabilizing or sensationalist. He described the person in question as unwell, and underscored that his private conversations had no place in public discourse, arguing that personal boundaries were being breached by the ongoing media attention and public chatter. The producer stressed the need for clear boundaries between private life and public performance, asserting that certain actions degrade civil dialogue and stir unnecessary controversy among audiences and observers alike.
Prigozhin further labeled Dzhigurda with harsh terms, calling him a “scum of society” and an “animal.” He argued that Dzhigurda had managed to maintain visibility not through constructive engagement but through the deliberate mudslinging of others. According to Prigozhin, such tactics fuel curiosity and popularity, yet they also corrode trust and encourage reckless public behavior. The critique focused on the broader consequences of constant sensationalism in entertainment circles, where personal conflicts can overshadow artistic achievements and contribute to a hostile public climate.
During the interview, Prigozhin asserted that there would come a day when Dzhigurda’s ability to influence the public mood might be restrained. He claimed that the content created around the dancer and actress involved could harm the wider community by normalizing negative and corrosive discourse. The producer insisted that he no longer actively pursues acting as a profession and described his current role as distinct from his former life in the industry. His comments reflected a desire to reframe the debate away from personal provocation toward more substantive discussion about culture, media ethics, and the responsibility of public figures to maintain respectful dialogue.
Earlier, Dzhigurda reportedly reached out to his ally, Vitaly Milonov, to request an examination of an old telephone exchange involving Joseph Prigozhin. The exchange in question, which dates back to 2023, circulated online and appeared to address the political climate in Russia. Prigozhin subsequently contested the authenticity of the recording, suggesting that the voice might have been manipulated or misrepresented. The incident added a layer of complexity to the ongoing public discussion, highlighting concerns about authenticity, misinterpretation, and the potential for misinformation to distort perceptions of both individuals involved and the broader political environment.
There was also mention of Dmitry Medvedev, previously associated with the project known as Tomboys, who reportedly commented that he could not participate in production activities at that moment. The remarks, while not elaborated upon in detail, point to a climate of tension and scheduling challenges within the entertainment and media circles where celebrities, producers, and political figures intersect. Overall, the episode illustrates how personal disputes among public figures can ripple through media channels, provoking debates about ethics, accountability, and the impact of public scrutiny on private relationships.