2. General model of political communication process

Between the two World Wars, a classic scientist of American political science Harold Dwight Lasswell published a work connected with the analysis of the general model of political communication, the role of propaganda in the political life of society and other issues of mass communication (Lasswell, 1953).

He became the founder of a general model of political communication process, known as “Lasswell formula”. According to this formula, "the most appropriate way to describe the act of communication is to answer the following questions: Who reports? What is reported? By what channel? To whom reports? With what result? " (Lasswell, 1953; p.176).

Thus by G. Lasswell, general communication model consists of five elements:

• Communicator (the author);

• Message (information);

• A communication channel (means of communication);

• Recipient (recipient of the message);

• Made impact (effectiveness of communication). (Lasswell, 1953; p.180)

Lasswell considered propaganda to be the main form of communication impact on politics, which he understood as a process of "ruling of collective preferences by manipulation of significant symbols" (Lasswell, 1953; p.176). The media plays a particularly important role in this process, because in today's world political communication primarily takes the form of mass communication. According to the classical definition of Lasswell, mass communication is "intended effect of the communicator to the audience by messages transmitted by technical means"(Lasswell, 1953; p.179). As the audience of the media is in a state of mass, in which atomically isolated individuals are deprived by the possibility of mutual communication - so far it is easily suggestible. This point of view is known as the "magic bullet" theory (Historical Dictionary of Political Communication in the United States, 1999).

3. Political communication and modernization

This study of the previously mentioned American political scientist Lucian W. Pye (1967) is well known in scientific circles. He writes, evaluating the role of political communication in traditional societies: "The most important characteristic of the communication process in traditional societies was that they were not organized into a separate system of relations, sharply distinguished from other social processes. Traditional systems were lacked of professional communicators, and those who took part in political communication did soon the basis of their social or political position. The information was usually distributed along hierarchical lines, or in accordance with traditional ideas of each society. Thus, the process of political communication in traditional societies was totally dependent on the structure of social relations in society and the content of political messages"(Pye, 1967; p. 20).

Modern communications systems, according to Pye include two essential components. First, is the availability of modern tools of mass communication and a large social group of professionals working in this field. Second, is the existence of a “feedback mechanism”, which is implemented through a two-stage communication. According to Pye, political communication "does not rely solely on the media, because there is an appreciable interaction between professional communicators and those who occupy influential positions in professional and personal relations"(Pye, 1967; p. 24).

Tradition communication systems are characterized not only by a weak technological development of the mass media or irregular penetration across the country. The most important characteristic is the absence of a “feedback mechanism” between the media and the public. Moreover, usually in developing countries, there is a sharp regionalization of information systems and the lack of horizontal linkages between them. Thus, the development of political communication includes both the penetration of modern mass media to all corners of the country and the increase of interoperability of the media and society (Pye, 1967).

Wilbur Schramm (1964), analyzing the need for a successful modernization of traditional societies on the field of political communication, pointed out that they refer basically to three directions:

• Increase of information flow due to expansion of the political horizon from the events of the local level prior to the events of national and global significance;

• More active participation of citizens in the political events and decisions that will require additional channels of communication;

• Permanent training in new forms of socio-political and professional activity, based on the use of new communication channels, remote and indirect forms of study (Schramm, 1964).

Political information is transmitted in the community in many different directions and pierce through the whole society. Horizontal political communication takes place between equal and independent from each other political agents (such as between the political parties). Vertical political communication affects the relationship between the dependent and unequal political agents (such as between central government and local state agencies). During the vertical political communication information is transmitted downwards in the form of regulations, laws, orders, etc., and from bottom to top in the form of public opinion, statements, complaints, etc (Schramm, 1964; p. 154). Pye writes the same, "Political communication involves more than one-sided signals from elite to mass but the whole range of informal communication processes in society, which influence politics in different directions (Vershinin, 2001; p. 54)

Thus, the successful modernization of society requires a constant increase in the number of communication channels, their capacity and skillful use as a tool for mobilization and socialization of masses. Schramm concludes: "There is no doubt that modern communications are powerful key factor in developing countries" (Schramm, 1964; p. 156). Conclusions made by the theorists of the concept of modernization in our opinion sound very relevant in our day, especially for a country like Russia.