Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Political communications. Lecture course. Курс лекций
.pdf
Russia West
For the Russian side, “the
return of Crimea to the Russian
Federation is a great historical event, the restoration of
justice and the correction of
the historical mistake made by
Nikita Khrushchev in the last
century...”
The annexation of Crimea is
positioned in the context of the
people’s right to self-determination
“Militias”. Attention was drawn
to the need to find ways to
resolve the conflict by Ukraine
independently, the military
presence of Russia in the region
was denied, and cases of humanitarian assistance were
recognized
–
The end of table 2.2
The Crimean referendum was called by
the EU and the US unconstitutional,
illegal and, as a result, illegitimate.
“The Western powers did not recognize
the vote as constitutional and
regarded it as an attempt by Moscow
to provide itself with a false cover of
law for the annexation of Crimea” (The
Independent, 2014).
The referendum was called antidemocratic. “The Crimean referendum
was a demonstration of fictitious
democracy” (The Guardian, 2014)
“Separatists”, “terrorists”, and later –
“Russian-terrorist forces” in relation
to those who disagree in Donbass
On the one hand, the phobias and
cliches of the Cold War era have
returned to Western discourse
regarding Russia. On the other hand,
new ones have been added – “countryoccupier”, “sponsor of terrorism”, etc.
Russia began to position itself as an
aggressor country, striving by any
means to preserve its influence in
the post-Soviet space. “After more
than two decades after the collapse
of the Soviet Union, Russia still
suffers from phantom pain from limb
amputation. It whines every time the
former Soviet republic takes a step
towards integration with the West”,
Reuter, 2013 (restoration of Russian
empire)
61
This case clearly demonstrates the main non-marketing
technologies of political communications that are used by the
initiators of modern information wars.
Lecture Review Questions
1. What are the fundamental differences between market-
ing and non-marketing types of political communications?
2. What are the current propaganda technologies?
3. What is the specificity of agitation?
4. What are the problems of conceptualization of informa-
tion wars on a global level?
5. What non-marketing technologies of political communications are most often used in the release of modern information wars against the Russian Federation?
Sources
Fuchs, C. Propaganda 2.0: Herman and Chomsky’s propaganda model in the age of the internet, big data and social media [Text] / C. Fuchs //The propaganda model today: Filtering
perception and awareness. – 2018. – P. 71–92.
Gandesha, S. How do People Become a Mass? [Text] /
S. Gandesha //Polity. – 2022. – Vol. 54. – №. 1. – P. 84–106.
Hobbs, R. Teaching about Propaganda: An Examination
of the Historical Roots of Media Literacy [Text] / R. Hobbs,
S. McGee // Journal of Media Literacy Education. – 2014. –
№ 6 (2).
Muradov, I. The Russian hybrid warfare: the cases
of Ukraine and Georgia [Text] / I. Muradov // Defence Studies. – 2022. – Vol. 22. – Iss. 2. – P. 1–24.
Murphy, D.M. Propaganda: can a word decide a war? /
D.M. Murphy, J.F. White // The US Army War College Quarterly: Parameters 37.3. – 2007. – № 23. – P. 348–387.
Pedro-Carañana, J. The Propaganda Model Today [Text] /
J. Pedro-Carañana, D. Broudy, J. Klaehn. University of Westminster Press, 2018.
62
Seib, Ph. Information at War: Journalism, Disinformation
and Modern Warfare [Text] / Ph. Seib //International Journal
of Communication. – 2022. – Vol. 16. – P. 4.
Robinson, P. The propaganda model: still relevant today?
[Text] / P. Robinson //Noam Chomsky. – Palgrave Macmillan,
London, 2015. P. 77–96.
U.S. Military opportunities: information warfare concepts
of operation [Electronic resource]. – URL; https://www.rand.
org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1016/
MR1016.chap7.pdf (accessed 17.03.2021).
Wright, B. Manipulating the Masses: Woodrow Wilson
and the Birth of American Propaganda by John Maxwell Hamilton [Text] / B. Wright //Southwestern Historical Quarterly. –2022. – Vol. 125. – №. 3. – P. 325–326.
Евгеньева, Т.В. Технологии социальных манипуляций и
методы противодействия им [Текст] / Т.В. Евгеньева – СПб. :
Питер, 2007.
Кошкин, Р.П. Информационная война вокруг событий
на Украине: геополитический анализ [Текст] / Р.П. Кошкин // Стратегические приоритеты. – 2015. – № 1. – С. 10–
29.
Манойло, А.В. Государственная информационная политика в условиях информационно-психологической войны [Текст] / А.В. Манойло, А.И. Петренко, Д.Б. Фролов. –
3-е изд. – М. : Горячая линия – Телеком, 2012.
Панарин, И.Н. Информационная война, PR и мировая
политика [Текст] / И.Н. Панарин. – М. : Горячая линия – Телеком, 2006.
Политические коммуникации [Текст] : учеб. пособие для
студентов вузов / Ю.Ю. Петрунин [и др.] ; под ред. А.И. Соловьева. – М. : Аспект Пресс, 2004.
Харитонова, Е.В. Нейролингвистическое программирование как метод анализа и проектирования латентного содержания текстов. Скрытое эмоциональное содержание текстов СМИ и методы его объективной диагностики [Текст] /
Е.В. Харитонова. – М. : Смысл, 2004.
63
LECTURE 3. STATE INFORMATION
POLICY
Key Terms: state information policy, models of interac-
tion between the state and the media, counterparties of
the state in the information space, the image of the state.
Features of information policy as a direction
of state activity
Despite the expansion of the range of political communications’ actors due to the increase in the individual activity of citizens, the development of electronic governments, the intensification of information exchanges at the supranational level as
a result of globalization processes, the state still remains the
most important actor in political communications today.
It can act in the information space in different ways. So, the
forms of information behavior of the state can be the so-called
singular actions associated with information coverage of some
individual events, information campaigns (including election
campaigns). The forms include the actions of the state in the
post factum mode, when the state does not plan in advance the
production and distribution of any messages, but only reacts to
some events that have occurred. This mode of functioning is the
least desirable and attractive for the state. However, the most
large-scale form of information activity is information policy.
Information policy can be understood as a set of inter-relat-
ed activities aimed at creating the conditions for citizens to get
information that meets their basic needs and interests, the development of appropriate technical means to ensure the establishment (processing, storage and delivery) of information resources of business, entertainment, scientific, educational and
other measures. In modern conditions, this type of information
activity of the state involves ensuring international contacts
and relations between the state and society, embedding institutions and power structures in global information processes.
64
Like any political relationship, information policy combines
public, shadow and semi-shadow politics. So, public information policy suggests the main efforts of the state constantly
aims to create open and accessible means of transmitting information to the public. In turn, the shadow and semi-shadow politics are associated with the need to maintain not only mass communication, but also to solve complex problems related to the
settlement of relations within the ruling layers or confidential
matters (issues related to provision of state secrets, national security, diplomacy, etc.).
The information policy of the state is possible as a special
purposeful activity for the production and dissemination of information corresponding to the goals of the political regime,
including ideological principles. The second element of the information policy is the information support of what the state
is doing in a particular area. This form of information policy
is associated with the publicity and openness of the activities
of state institutions and is implemented in order to inform different audiences (citizens, certain social groups, international
structures), explain the need for actions taken.
The elements and directions of state information policy include:
• creation of conditions for the citizens to obtain informa-
tion, meeting their basic needs and interests;
• the development of information technology infrastructure;
• providing international contacts, integration into global
information environment;
• counter the information risks.
The media has always been and remains the only conductor
of information state policy. In their famous work “Four Theories of the Press”, American sociologists F. Siebert, T. Peterson and W. Schramm raised the problem of the relationship
between power and the media. The classification put forward
by them is based on the criterion of freedom and the criterion
of control.
65
According to authoritarian theory, rooted in 16th century England, the media should be under the control of power.
At that time, any criticism from the public was considered
harmful to the stability of the state, so the ruling elite used
a variety of mechanisms that influence the media, such as censorship, licensing, and in some cases punishment for objectionable coverage of political issues.
Press freedom theory, or libertarian theory, is the exact opposite of authoritarian theory. It declares the freedom of the
press from state control. Every individual has the right to freedom of speech, to receive reliable information, and any government intervention infringes on these fundamental rights
of a citizen. A free media is an essential element of a free, democratic society. From this concept follows the positioning of the
media as the “fourth power”, independent of the other three
branches: legislative, executive and judicial.
The theory of social responsibility arose at the junction
of the first two theories. In the second half of the 20th century, the media became unprecedentedly powerful. Radio, television and the Internet have spread. And although journalists remained free, they had certain obligations to society. Therefore,
publishers and journalists made some concessions and limited
their rights in order to implement state interests. Thus, the
theory of social responsibility arose.
Communist theory gravitates toward an authoritarian approach. In line with this approach, in the socialist countries,
the media were tightly controlled by the state represented by
the communist party. Mass media is the main propaganda tool.
The main goal is to contribute to the prosperity and stability
of the socialist society
1
.
Depending on the type and characteristics of political re-
gimes, one can distinguish different types and purposes of in-
1
Siebert F, Schramm W. Four theories of the press: The Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility, and Soviet Communist Concepts of
what the Press Should be and Do / University of Illinois Press, 1956.
66
formation policy in them. So, under the conditions of the total-
itarian model, the state implements full control of power over
the information sector. All media are state-owned, relations
between the state and the population are based on one-way communications from top to bottom without feedback. The main
goal of political communications is the dissemination of state
ideology and the consolidation of its postulates in the mass consciousness. Obviously, in the case of totalitarian regimes, the
state used exclusively non-marketing forms of political communications, implementing informational secrecy, a ban on alternative information. We note that at present, modern North
Korea can be accurately attributed to totalitarian regimes,
however, elements of such an information policy are used by
any, including democratic, regimes involved in information
wars.
The main objective for various authoritarian regimes is to
ensure “manageable” electorate through the control and manipulation of media institutions. Comparing authoritarianism and
totalitarianism, we can talk about their similarity: both types
are based on the underdevelopment of political relations, a narrow circle of decision makers, the predictability of political development and the nominal nature of elections, and the turnover of power in general.
In democracies the law establishes a variety of media forms
and forms of ownership, free competition, and the growing pluralism of the state and private media, constitutional and legal
guarantees protect them from arbitrariness of the authorities.
However, we must not forget that any society is elitist, and
democratic political leaders and elites also use non-marketing
types of political communications to realize their own or national interests.
American experience in the implementation of state information policy. Regulation of the information sphere became
a priority of the American state information policy earlier than
in other countries. Traditions of individualism determined the
general approach of the American political system to the chal-
67
lenges of the information age. This is due to the fact that it was
the United States that became the epicenter of the information
revolution in the second half of the 20th century. After the
economic boom of the 1990s, when the Clinton administration
sought to extract the maximum economic benefit from the information technology revolution, there was a sharp increase
in state control.
The priority of the administration of George W. Bush Jr.
there was counteraction to terrorism, which required strengthening state control over information resources. Such measures
caused strong protests from the civil society, under the influence of which these decisions were revised under the administration of President B. Obama. In this regard, the Obama administration adopted “net neutrality” – the principle of “net
neutrality”, which was based on the work in the field of law by
the American law professor Tim Wu. The American jurist argued that the Internet should develop in accordance with the
principle of equality, which is expressed in that all information
networks should strive to provide equal access for all users to
any digital content
1
.
President D. Trump decided to cancel the principle of “net
neutrality”, which provoked a wave of protests from the enterprises of the information technology complex. In May 2018,
the issue of overturning Trump’s decision was put to a vote
in a Senate resolution. With a minimal margin, the principle
of net neutrality was supported. Priorities for European infor-
mation regulation policy have a certain unique specificity, but
are in many ways similar to the American ones. First of all,
the information policy of European countries is developing at
several levels: at the national level and at the level of the structures of the European Union. Most, if not all, EU member states
proclaim democratic principles of state regulation of the Inter-
1
Wu T. Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination // Journal
of Telecommunications and High Technology Law. – 2003. – Vol. 2. –
P. 141–176.
68
net and the national zone of cyberspace. All European countries
prioritize the protection individual rather than state interests
in the digital space. All national cybersecurity strategies address both threats infrastructure, as well as the fight against
propaganda and dissemination of malicious information from
abroad. At the global level, Europe is facing double Internet fragmentation – both at the national level and at the level
of European Union institutions.
Features of the Russian information policy
Modern Russian information policy is a rather contradictory phenomenon. By modern in this textbook, we mean the policy that begins in the post-Soviet stage, the collapse of the USSR
in 1991, the transformation of the USSR into the Russian Federation.
The main stages of the evolution of the Russian state information policy can be represented by the following steps: early
1990s, mid 1990s, 2000 to present.
The beginning of the 1990s information policy was virtually nonexistent. This period can be considered as the most
complex and chaotic, the state system of television and radio
broadcasting that existed in the Soviet period with the aim
of spreading the Soviet ideology ceased to exist, the state was
weakened in the economic, ideological, military spheres. It was
even possible to talk about the existence of a single Russian
state formally, the central government was split (in the early 1990s, the political system of Russia was extremely unstable due to the confrontation between the pro-Yeltsin, liberal
elite and the pro-Soviet nomenklatura, which led to the seizure
of the White House in August 1991 and further establishment
of the regime of the President of modern Russia B. Yeltsin, and
then the adoption of the new Constitution of 1993). During the
period of dual power and confrontation, the former nomenklatura still received information support from the State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, but this did not help the
regime survive.
69
The mid-1990s. The state information policy is associated
exclusively with the relations of the state with mass media or
informational support of technological disasters and military
conflicts. This is the period of the greatest flourishing of the
media, the active use of Western models and standards of television and radio broadcasting. During this period, the most
active distribution of marketing political communications is
due to the flourishing of the activities of political consultants,
specialists in the field of political marketing and management.
A large number of independent political consulting agencies
appear and begin to function actively, providing services to political actors during election campaigns. The information pluralism of this stage is also associated with the fact that in the
second half of the 1990s, information media holdings owned by
Russian oligarchs were tools for promoting oligarchic interests
in the Russian information space.
Beginning of 2000s. Information policy is examined more
comprehensively as the state’s activities to establish information relations with other political parties and corporations,
the introduction of legal norms, as well as professional training. With the coming to power of the new President V. Putin,
the Russian state is heading towards centralization, the establishment of the so-called vertical of power with the weakening
of the regions and the strengthening of the federal center. The
state is aware of the need to create and further develop prostate channels as a means of integrating Russian society, and
a mechanism to counter the influence of first oligarchic, opposition, and then hostile Western media (many of which are
considered by the Russian political regime as tools of information wars with Russia). In general, at the present stage, one can
observe tendencies towards centralization and ideologization
of Russian information policy.
The current priorities of the Russian information policy
are:
• promotion by Russian State of national information cor-
porations on the international market;
70
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]