Dean — Andrey Bystritskiy
25 years after the first publication of Media Events: The Live Broadcasting of History (Dayan and Katz 1992), not only has the concept of media events firmly taken root in media theory, but it has also been developed considerably as a result of multiple critical interpretations. Going beyond a neo-Durkheimian ritual perspective, which emphasized the integrative role of ceremonial media events, has allowed a number of authors to identify such genres as ‘disruptive’, ‘traumatic’ or ‘conflictual’ media events, including, first and foremost, terror, disaster and war (Cottle 2006; Dayan 2008; Hepp and Couldry 2010; Katz and Liebes 2007; Mitu and Poulakidakos 2016). However, there is another type of events targeting social and cultural change, which do not exactly fit the ‘integrative/disruptive’ opposition, even if these events take the form of protest, for ‘protests and strikes are agreed forms of sanctioned disruption’ (Katz and Liebes 2007: 159). Until protest grows into a revolution and civil war, it is an instance of ‘ritual’ chaos, constituting a part of the order. Events of this type show some features of social drama and cultural performance (Turner 1974, 1982; Alexander 2006, 2011). Nevertheless, not every ‘transformative media event’ (Mihelj 2008) has such radical goals and sweeping scale.
‘Transformative media events’ are initiated in public spaces by citizens, whose disagreement with certain social conditions and/or a call for change they express. The transformative power can be an inherent element of the event (for instance, in the case of a protest action), or can emerge as a result of public response to a published opinion or document (such as a YouTube video recording police abuse). The latter case includes practices of ‘sousveillance’ (Mann et al. 2003) or ‘citizen witnessing’ (Allan 2013) directed at the democratization of social relations. A key feature of ‘transformative media events’ is their tight connection to the ‘citizen media’, by means of which they become visible and powerful. In this context it seems useful to consider media events as ‘user-generated media events’ (Mitu 2016), ‘new media events’ (Neverson and Adeyanju 2017), ‘transmedia events’ (Bacallao-Pino 2016), etc.
This paper examines Russian defamation law and judicial policies to identify the extent to which they have been influenced by international legal standards on media freedom put forward in Europe by the Council of Europe (CoE). The main research method employed in this work is a qualitative comparative analysis of the CoE standards and the Russian national law as well as judicial practice. This paper suggests that the CoE standards have mostly an insufficient influence to the Russian legislation of defamation, and the discrepancy between the Russian and the CoE’s perspectives on defamation has increased during Russia’s membership in the CoE, especially because of the recent amendements on online defamation. The paper also argues that the CoE standards on defamation has had diverse impacts on the Russian judicial practice. The paper suggests that international organisations have the potential to become the main social platforms for resisting “weaponized” defamation but new effective measures should be devised for this.
Since the advent of digitization, the conceptual confusion surrounding the semantic galaxy that comprises the media and journalism universes has increased. Journalism across several media platforms provides rapidly expanding content and audience engagement that assist in enhancing the journalistic experience. Exploring Transmedia Journalism in the Digital Age provides emerging research on multimedia journalism across various platforms and formats using digital technologies. While highlighting topics, such as immersive journalism, nonfictional narratives, and design practice, this book explores the theoretical and critical approaches to journalism through the lens of various technologies and media platforms. This book is an important resource for scholars, graduate and undergraduate students, and media professionals seeking current research on media expansion and participatory journalism.
The paper is devoted to the issue to what extent mass media produces strong attitudes in an authoritarian political environment. A growing body of research scrutinize how contemporary autocracies use media to promote legitimizing messages and undermine opposition. This study contributes to the literature by showing whether public opinion formed under authoritarianism is strong in the face of counter-framing. While Russian state-owned TV-channels extensively promoted the idea that Donald Trump’s victory will be positive for Russian-American relations, we run an experimental study with various treatments. We revealed two major findings: (1) participants are strongly exposed to counter-framing, (2) those who watch news on state-owned TV-channels are more susceptible to the counter-framing effect.
This chapter focuses on the analysis of post-Soviet films and TV series dedicated to the medical profession, and it explores how the perception of gender and the representation of work practices among this professional group have changed in recent decades. The new cinematographic images are considered to be a result of Western cultural impact (after 1991) and Soviet cultural legacies. The 2000s witnessed the return of the special attention to “doctors” and “medical professionals” as the heroes of post-socialist drama and melodrama. However, these images are often misogynistic, and it is possible to say that cinematographic metaphors reflect developments in social attitudes.
The article presents the results of the research of media image of Russia as a great power in the international political media discourse. The main method used was the content analysis of a corpus of American, British, German, French and Spanish printed media texts during the period from 2000 to the present time. Despite the fact that Russia appears today in a fundamentally new quality and the international political establishment still sees it as one of the leading world powers, its image in the foreign media is mostly negative and largely based on stereotypes of the last century. Special attention the media pays to Russian foreign policy, describing it as aggressive and based on «imperial ambitions». The consequence of all this is a rejection of Russia as an integral part of the «civilized world», as a state which is ready to share «universal values» as they are seen by the Western society.
The idea of this chapter is to show the institutional organisation of alternative media in Russia and its relation with social dynamics of its public sphere/s. For us not all alternative publics in Russia could be called "counter publics" and respectively not all "counter publics" in reality use alternative media channels.
To analyse the contemporary alternative public media we will do a reference to the concept of official and parallel public spheres as well as to concepts of counter public sphere and alternative public sphere. Main argument of the proposed chapter is based on the idea of isolation between different public spheres and its discourses which ensures the gatekeeping function for messages in each of such public spaces. We distinguish official public sphere which is oriented toward mass audience and represent the mainstream media, institutionalised alternative public sphere which is oriented toward opposition minority and is organised around about 10 narrow so called 'liberal media' and non-institutionalized public sphere mainly relying on blogs, twits and others forms of social networking. The effectiveness of the state communicative manipulation resides in the ability to control and filter messages at the intersections of such public spheres. Such manipulation transforms some political forces into completely isolated "information ghettos" and deprives them from any legal and representative political activity.
Russian media are often accused of succumbing to state pressure (or of being an instrument of such pressure) , subordinating to power and, by implication, of being excessively dependent on state financing . In this contribution we are trying to systematically understand and analyze how the Russian state, in its post-Soviet incarnation, incorporates (or envisions incorporation of) the media into the national system of public institutions, and indeed how the state develops and implements public policy in respect of Russian media, are much more rare. Such analysis is, of course, complicated by the dual nature of media in Russia and in many other countries – on the one hand, as a branch of the economy and a market player among many, and on the other hand a purveyor of information, interpreter of cultural codes, and provider of public goods .
Drawing on Ernesto Laclau’s theory of articulation, this paper analyzes Barack Obama’s and Vladimir Putin’s public speeches on the Ukrainian crisis of 2014. The article discusses how the presidents constructed rival discourses by erasing the nuances of complex tensions between the logics of equivalence and difference existing within the Ukrainian discursive space. Acting like imperial administrators from colonial times, Obama and Putin pushed representations of Ukraine based on two ‘impossible wholes’: a unified nation whose sovereignty was threatened from outside (Obama’s discourse) and a consolidated pro-Russian Southeast needing to be defended from Kyiv-based nationalists and extremists (Putin’s articulation).
The review of introduction and adaptation of a news literacy course (based on key concepts of Stony Brook University program) to the educational and scientific program of National Research University Higher School of Economics in 2013-2017 as well as additional short-term news literacy workshops for students and teachers from other universities and schools from Russian regions will be made in the text.
In the year of 2018, the Internet is no more a wholesome phenomenon, but when recognised as a subject of studies, becomes similar to a teenager having already gained a certain independence. It understands its communication with other people but still wants to change the whole interaction system in order to nd its own place. At least, this is exactly the impression we receive: the impres sion of an ambitious object of study, of a misunderstood one. In this issue we offer you an occasion to think about different scenarios of the relationship between studies on the Internet and classic social sciences approaches. We do not focus on methodological issues, but on the Internet in its being an object of studies and a scienti c problem. We focus on studies on the Internet that accumulate knowlege about the Internet as a social phenomenon, being also an internation al and indisciplinar area of research. So cial sciences are represented in this case by sociology and anthropology, as well as other ones such as mediastudies, stud ies on sciences and technologies (STS), social geography etc.
The study deals with the hermeneutics of the cinema of the twentieth century, the disclosure of excluded content and cinepolitics based on the analysis of more than one hundred foreign and Soviet/Russian films. The book will be of interest to anyone interested in the phenomenon of mass culture, cinema and nature of power within their philosophical, sociological and cultural-political interpretation.
The article is dedicated to the significance and prospects of development of a new research field — astrosociology. Space studies have traditionally been the preserve of science and technology, whereas social and cultural aspects of space exploration have hardly been looked into. How can the space problematics enter the field of social science? What do sociologists have to say about human society that travels to outer space, survives in space, imagines space? These questions bring to the fore bilateral connections between mankind and space, namely the ways space affects social life and vice versa. The author identifies and characterizes three modes of astrosociological research: astrosocial studies, studies of astroculture, and studies of astropolitics. In the first case, space is regarded as an extra-social factor, in the second, as a social and cultural construct, and in the third, more specifically, as a matter of public opinion. However, the boundaries of these three research spheres are permeable, and taken together these areas of study form a multi-dimensional and as yet invisible interdisciplinary field. The present article aims at conceptualizing this field and raising social scientists’ awareness of its potential for further research.