Non-democratic discourse of democratic mass media in Russia: analysis of frames

The procedure for conducting a review of current research on Russia's public sphere. The conceptualization of the concept of a democratic discourse to define variables and indicators and description of the data. Evaluation of the discourse of the media.

Рубрика Журналистика, издательское дело и СМИ
Вид дипломная работа
Язык английский
Дата добавления 02.09.2016
Размер файла 77,2 K

Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже

Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.

3. Hypotheses and argumentation

· Discourse of Russian democratic mass media does not correspond to normative claims of authentic democratic discourse due to the bias in favor of opposition.

The first hypothesis bases on two arguments. First is devoted historical-institutional thesis on path dependence in the development of media-sphere in Russia. For instance, Ivan Zassoursky argues that since its origins in early 1990-s democratic media has been socially and politically biased. First, they discriminated communists in favor of the adherents of market reforms. Second, they primarily broadcasted intelligentsia's vision on core political issues. In this logic, historical origins of democratic media formation influence its political bias today.

Second, the political bias of democratic media devoted to the nature of hybrid regimes. According to Diamond, hybrid regimes «adopt the form of electoral democracy, with regular, competitive, multiparty elections… but fail to meet the substantive test, or do so only ambiguously». Hybrid regimes are usually characterized by limited violations of political competitiveness, rule of law, political pluralism. Andreas Schedler collects the menu of manipulations of hybrid regimes, focusing of the following types of violations:

· Limiting the scope of elective offices by reserved positions;

· Limiting the jurisdiction of elective offices;

· Exclusion of opposition forces by restricting access to the electoral arena;

· Fragmentation of opposition forces by disorganizing electoral dissidence;

· Direct repressions;

· Restricted and unfair access to media and money;

· Formal and informal disenfranchisement;

· Voter intimidation and vote buying;

· Electoral fraud;

· Institutional bias in favor of an incumbent;

· Preventing elected officers from exercising their constitutional powers;

· Preventing victors from taking office, or elected officers from concluding their constitutional terms.

Thereof, hybrid regime is neither democracy, nor autocracy. It has its specific features of media functioning. If authoritarian regimes restrict mass media and prevent an access of opposition to media sphere, hybrid regimes are characterized by a control of media sphere, which maximizes electoral advantages of a ruling group. In hybrid regimes, media sphere is neither well institutionalized and differentiated from politics and economics, nor oppressed by government. Media sphere in hybrid regimes is controversial and ambiguous. It may include as government controlled media sources as independent media sources. Both of these types may consist of politicized mass media and non-politicized mass media. Nevertheless, we argue that politicized independent mass media is necessary politically biased in favor of opposition due to the controversy between impartial coverage of politics as a fair struggle for power and existing unfairness of political struggle. The rules of democratic struggle in hybrid regimes are violated by the predominant force, which occupies elected offices. Thus, those mass media who try to be independent in hybrid regimes and broadcast political news must publicly articulate this unfairness and be open for opposition.

Despite democracy is a struggle of different political projects, it is a political project itself. The controversy between impartial coverage of politics as a fair struggle for power and existing unfairness of political struggle unclothes the controversy between independent mass media and hybrid regime. Attempting to broadcast politics impartially, mass media necessarily becomes politically biased in favor of opposition because of the structural conditions of such types of regime.

· Media bias in medias differs due to the type of media

Media coverage is substantially biased by the type of media. According to M. McLuhan, medium is the message. It means that media substantially determines the very information it contains. McLuhans illustrated his idea by hot and cool medias.

He argues that various media invite different levels of participation and inclusion of audience who consumes it. Some media (for instance, movies) are «hot», because it enhance only one human sense (in case of movie - vision) in such a manner that a human does not need to participate in construction of a movie image. He contrasted hot media this with «cool» media (for instance - TV). Cool media requires much more participation from audience. Due to its minimal presentation of visual details TV requires a high level of participation in order to fulfil the image. Thus, a movie is «hot» because it intensifies one single sense, which he labels as «high definition», it demands a viewer's attention. TV is «cool» because it is characterized by «low definition», it requires more conscious participation by the audience. According to McLuhan, «any hot medium allows of less participation than a cool one, as a lecture makes for less participation than a seminar, and a book for less than a dialogue».

Hot media provide complete engagement without necessary stimulus. For instance, print media uses visual senses occupying visual space and fully involves a reader. In contrast to cool media, hot media favor analytical skills and quantitative analysis. They stress one sense (for instance, of sight or sound), rather than the others. Radio is an another example of hot media. In contrast, cool media provides little engagement with substantial stimulus. It requires user's active participation.

Despite McLuhan's concept presupposes the division of media into two opposed categories, we will consider coolness and hotness of media as a continuum use this continuum to define differences between Russian democratic mass media.

4. Data and operationalization

Sources and case description

Data has been collected from one radio station (Echo of Moscow), one TV-channel (TV-Rain) and one print media (Novaya Gazeta). This selection covers different types of media and includes various representatives of Russian democratic mass media.

Echo of Moscow is a radio station, that was founded in 1990. It specializes on news programs and talk shows. Ekho Moskvy is often considered as the last popular independent mass media in Russia. It broadcasts in more than 40 cities in Russia and Post-Soviet republics. According to Medialogiya, Ekho Moskvy is the most cited Russian radio station. Despite of its anti-governmental reputation, Ekho Moskvy is owned by the state controlled company Gazprom media, which holds 66% of its shares.

TV-Rain is a TV channel, which was founded in 2010. After the 2014 scandal poll on the Leningrad siege, it was disconnected by the largest TV providers. It includes various types of programs, focusing on politics, culture, news and discussions.

Novaya gazeta is a newspaper, which was founded in 1993 with the financial aid of Mikhail Gorbachev. It is published three times a week - on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. The newspaper focuses on politics and journalist investigations. Since 2000 three journalists of the newspaper has been murdered (Anastasia Baburova, Yury Shchekochikhin, Anna Politkovskaya). Novaya Gazeta is controlled by its stuff (51%). 49% of shares belongs to Alexander Lebedev and Mikhail Gorbachev.

Unlike the majority of Russian mass media, these sources have covered 2011-2012 protest actions, the information on electoral fraud, corruption scandals, activity of opposition. Federal TV-channels describe these mass media as the domain of so called «non-system opposition». In return, these sources accuse Channel One, Russia-1 and NTV in the strong political bias in favor of the government.

The hypotheses are tested on the material of media coverage of Russian military activity in Syria (30.09.2015-15.03.2016). This topic was on the agenda during the whole period of the military invasion.

Criteria of selection

We focus on the coverage of the crucial events during the Russian military activity in Syria:

· 30 September 2015 - the annunciation of the military intervention;

· 07 October 2015 - missiles from the Caspian Sea attacked 11 targets within Syrian territory;

· 24 November 2015 - a Turkish Air Force shot down Sukhoi Su-24 strike aircraft;

· 11 December 2015 - Vladimir Putin ordered the military in Syria to destroy any threatening targets;

· 1 February 2016 - Geneva Syria peace talks;

· 14 March 2016 - the annunciation of the military withdrawal.

This sample generally covers the media agenda of Russian military intervention in Syria.

Data from Echo of Moscow was collected from the «Special Opinion» program. We considered programs on a day and a following day of the event. In cases of a lack of relevant information we also scrutinized programs from the second day after event. In total we collected 23 programs.

In case of TV-Rain we analyzed newscasts. In contrast to Echo of Moscow TV-Rain focuses on authorial programs, which are titled by the second name of the presenter (e.g. Sindeeva, Belkovsky, Medvedev, Panfilova). Key words of the search - «Syria», «Turkey», «ISIS», «IS», «Assad». Every newscast was additionally tested on relevance. In total, 125 newscasts were collected.

Data from Novaya Gazeta was collected through Factiva. Key words - «Syria», «Turkey», «ISIS», «IS», «Assad». Period of time - 30 September 2015 - 15 March 2016. In total 123 materials were collected. Due to the extent of the sample (Novaya gazeta materials are more extensive than TV-Rain newscasts) we checked relevance by the title.

Collected materials were analyzed by the schema, which will be presented in the following paragraph.

Operationalization

In this study we borrow the discourse analytic scheme, which was developed by T. Van Dijk. Unlike N. Fairclough and R. Wodak, T. van Dijk focuses on power relations within particular discourses. He scrutinizes news in order to unclothe a racist discourse. This strategy is relevant for the aim and hypotheses of this study. To unclothe power relations within public discourse of democratic media we use the following aspects of discourse.

Contextual features of discourse. Speaker always speaks as a member of a particular social group. He also addresses recipient as group member. Context is often a source ideological bias. All context models are ideologically biased due to subjective representations of communicative event and its participants as members of groups or categories.

Text, discourse, conversation. Defining the overall strategy of any political discourse we can address to us-them distinction. According to Carl Schmitt, this distinction is the essence of politics. He defined the political as existential public struggle of us and them. It is crucial for discursive construction of political identities to stress this distinction and emphasize positive presentation of «Us» and negative presentation of «Them». This aim can be achieved by discursive emphasizing Our good things, and Their bad things, and de-emphasizing Our bad things, and Their good things.

The level of meaning is the crucial aspect of discourse analysis. It enables to reveal signifier-signified relations. To do this we will scrutinized the following aspects:

Topics as semantic macrostructures. Selection of topics substantially determines the content of discourse, the very formulation of topics contain a bias about Us and Them.

Local meanings and coherence. Positive/Negative Meanings for Us/Them can be grasped by the following parameters:

* manifestation (explicit versus implicit),

* precision (precise versus vague),

* granularity (detailed/fine versus broad, rough),

* level (general versus specific, detailed),

* modality (we/they must/should),

* evidentiality (we have the truth versus they are misguided),

* local coherence (based on biased models),

* disclaimers (denying our bad things, «We are not racists, but…»).

Lexicon. Using certain lexicon could shape audience's perception of problem issue. Selecting positive and negative terms for Us/Them (e.g. «terrorist» versus «freedom fighter») adds certain connotations to political actors.

Each meaning is shaped in certain discursive form. Scrutinizing forms we will focus on the following aspects.

· Syntax (emphasize and deemphasize of positive/negative agency of Us/Them),

§ cleft versus non-cleft sentences («It is X who…»),

§ active versus passives («USA invades Iraq» versus «Iraq invaded by USA»).

§ full clauses/propositions versus nominalizations (the invasion of Iraq).

· Sound structures (intonation, etc., emphasizing and deemphasizing Our/Their good/bad things).

· Format of the message. Including schema of representation the format of the message construct the superstructure which implicitly influence audience's perception. On this level, we will focus on positive and negative meanings for Us/Them in:

§ dominant categories (e.g. headlines, titles, summaries, sonclusions) versus non-dominant categories,

§ argumentation structures (stereotypical arguments, e.g. «For their own good»),

§ fallacies that falsely conclude Our/Their good/bad things, e.g. overgeneralizations, authority, etc.

· Rhetorical structures.

§ Forms: Repetition

§ Meanings: Comparisons, metaphors, metonymies, irony; euphemisms, hyperboles, number games, etc.

5. Results and discussion

Results of discourse-analysis

This chapter contains the results of discourse analysis. Results are presented consequently per each investigated media.

Results: evidence from Echo of Moscow

Echo of Moscow extensively broadcasted all of topics we analyzed. Moreover, Echo of Moscow provided a tribune for adherents of various political views and values. During 30 September 2015 - 02 October 2015 it invited the following speakers:

· Oksana Dmitrieva (deputy chair of the State Duma committee of budget and taxes),

· Anton Krasovsky (journalist),

· Shod Muladzhanov (editor-in-chief of «Moskovskaya pravda» newspaper),

· Yuri Novolodsky (president of the Baltic body of lawyers),

· Viktor Shenderovich (writer),

· Maksim Shevchenko (journalist),

· Nikolay Svanidze (journalist),

· Stanislav Belkovsky (political scientist).

The issue of Russian missiles attack of 11 targets within Syrian territory from the Caspian Sea (07 October 2015) was extensively commented by the following guests:

· Orhan Dzemal' (journalist),

· Nikolay Svandze (journalist),

· Maksim Shevchenko (journalist).

When a Turkish Air Force shot down Sukhoi Su-24 strike aircraft (24 November 2015) Echo of Moscow invited:

· Andrey Movchan (financier, the head of economic program of Moscow Carnegie Center),

· Sergey Markov (political scientist)

· Dmitry Muratov (editor-in-shief of «Novaya Gazeta»)

· Alexey Venediktov (editor-in-chief of «Echo of Moscow»)

Vladimir Putin's order to destroy any threatening targets (11 December 2015) was covered by:

· Nikolay Svandze (journalist),

· Ekaterina Shulman (political scientist).

Geneva Syria peace talks was commented by:

· Artemy Troitsky (journalist, music critic),

· Yevgenia Albats (journalist),

· Anton Krasovsky (journalist).

Finally, the annunciation of the military withdrawal (14 March 2016) was covered by:

· Vladimir Ryzhkov (politician),

· Sergey Markov (political scientist),

· Nikolay Uskov (editor-in-chief of Russian «Forbes»).

The majority of these speakers are regular commentators of current agenda on Echo of Moscow. Despite the only invited politician was an oppositional politician (Vladimir Ryzhkov is a former State Duma member and former co-chair of the oppositional political party RPR-PARNAS), invited journalists and political scientists adhered and broadcasted different political views. For instance, Segey Markov is often called as a pro-Kremlin political scientist. Besides he is assistant professor of Public Policy department at Moscow State University and professor of the Faculty of Political Science at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO-University), he is also a member of the Presidential Commission of the Russian Federation to Counter Attempts to Falsify History to the Detriment of Russia's Interests.

At the same time, Yevgenia Albats is a famous and well-known oppositional journalist, who does not conceal her political views and extensively criticize the government and the Kremlin. She is also an editor-in-chief of The New Times - a weekly magazine, which was founded in 1943 and reloaded in 1988. It focuses on critical coverage of current Russian politics, economic issues and journalist investigations. Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Valeria Novodvorskaya were columnists of this magazine during the 2000s.

Thereof, Echo of Moscow did not use the manipulation of the public agenda. Furthermore, inviting adherents of different political views Echo of Moscow provided the contestation of discourses on the air. Nevertheless, scrutinizing frames Echo of Moscow translated to the audience we have revealed a substantial bias in favor of oppositional ideas and views.

Russian military intervention in Syria was contextualized in international geopolitical contestation frame and was connected with Russian activity in South-Eastern Ukraine. Despite different speakers made a nexus between these two topics by themselves, this connection was promoted by radio presenters.

«Special Opinion» with Stanislav Belkovsky, 02 October 2015

M. Koroleva (presenter): Hello! This is «Special Opinion», my name is Marina Koroleva, on the opposite side is Stanislav Belkovsky, a political scientist. Hello, Stanislav.

S. Belkovsky (guest): Good evening.

M. Koroleva (presenter): Let's start with unexpected topic. Everyone has forgotten about Ukraine. Today there are negotiations on the situation in Ukraine between leaders of the Norman Four. Whether everything will be ok?

S. Belkovsky (guest): We will endlessly discus these issues because it is my initiative. «If Obama does not want to have a meeting with me on Ukrainian issues, I will intervene Syria and he will have to have a meeting with me,» - Putin speaks.

The very connection between these two topics corresponds to a particular point of view, which considers Russian invasion in Syria as an attempt to overcome the diplomatic isolation, caused by Russian participation in the Ukrainian civil war and the annexation of Crimea. Despite this view is adhered by the majority of political scientists and observers, media space should not privilege it over all other points of view. Moreover, according to the conception of «Special Opinion», which was described by Echo of Moscow's editor-in-chief Alexey Venediktov, a presenter must permanently challenge a guest and adhere an opposite point of view on air.

The annunciation of the Russian military intervention in Syria was articulated predominantly in the Ukrainian frame. Nevertheless, some commentators considered this topic within the historical frame. For instance, Anton Krasovsky discussed post-soviet Russian history and made a nexus between peaceful development and state capacity. He argued that military invasion in Syria will cause the collapse of Russian state because of the imperial nature of this action.

It must be said that radio presenters did not argued with presenters provoking the contestation of frames. They tried to discuss the topic within the speaker's own discourse. Nevertheless, even within the speaker's discourse they controlled the agenda and connected the Syrian topic with the Ukrainian and vice versa.

«Special Opinion» with Maksim Shevchenko, 01 October 2015

I. Vorobyova (presenter): Maxim, do not comparing countries and situations I would like to compare your attitudes. I have already heard about Bashar Assad. Whether you have forgiven Poroshenko for use of military forces against the citizens?

When presenters wanted to argue with speakers, they implicitly expressed their disagreement by rhetorical questions and asking to elaborate certain issues. They often used such constructions as «are you really think so?» and «are you serious?». Vice versa, when presenters agreed with speakers, they accompanied their answers by saying «yes» or providing speaker's point of view by additional arguments.

With the continuation of Russian military invasion in Syria, presenters and speakers developed the images of «us» and «them». «We» - Russia, Russian state, Russian nation. «They» were constructed differently according to specific circumstances. Nevertheless, the national logic determined the constitution of «them». In opposite to Russia the image of «them» was constructed in nationalistic logic. Despite some speakers stressed civilizational, ethnic or moral signifiers, they were fulfilled by nationalistic meanings (signified).

«Special Opinion» with Nikolay Svanidze (09 October 2015):

There are no jokes here. I speak seriously. Absolutely. Since the beginning of the military intervention in Syria, short and «air» invasion, we fastened a quarrel upon with all Arab world and Turkey. It will cost a lot of money for us and a lot of political losses. I do not know about positive sides and results of this operation.

It is a common knowledge that military conflicts annihilate all lines of political conflicts and contestations within the country or at least substantially soften it. According to Ernesto Laclau, the very social reality with political identities (he calls it identifications rather than identities) and lines of contestations is contingent and differs in dependence of the logic of antagonism. While the image of «us» is «constituted outside», by the opposition to the Other, the constitution of «we» in nationalistic logic put out from the agenda domestic political differences and issues.

Nevertheless, sometimes speakers discussed the logic of the agenda-setting in Russia and considered Russian military invasion in Syria in the context of Russian domestic policy. In this cases presenters implicitly tried to shape the agenda in the dominant frame using nationalistic discourse.

«Special Opinion» with Viktor Shenderovich, 01 October 2015:

V. Shenderovich (guest): What? The main domestic aim is to save the power, foreign aim - he is player, he wants to send a message to the elite, our elite, oligarchs and those, who dream that sometimes Putin will suddenly disappear as Pavel I or someone else, just disappear. He wants to show that he is strong, that he is a player and he must be taken into account. He is a very viable political rat. Along with Lukashenko he showed a tremendous effectiveness in the solution of their own problems. How many times Lukashenko was politically buried?

M. Koroleva (presenter): It is our national interest, isn't it? To provide the global return of Russia, for example, by the Syrian culbite?

V. Shenderovich (guest): National interests is that they do not dependent on the current mood of the aged dictator. This is the main interest of the country and, I guess, you recognize it, Marina. This is the interest. Being independent from the today's head of the dragon.

M. Koroleva (presenter): One more time. Does ISIS must be defeated?

V. Shenderovich (guest): Sure. But the issue of Assad presidency… Wait a second, what are we discussing? If we discuss certain aspects of the foreign policy, I am ready to speak about it. Assad's support, if there were no Russian support of Assad, there had not been Assad. Long ado. Three years ago. Assad is a war criminal, he has killed hundreds of his fellow citizens. He is the cannibal of cannibals. He remains only due to our support.

This fragment shows how the presenter shaped the agenda, which was accompanied by the discursive drift. The speaker discussed the Putin's support and the sources of the sustainability of his presidency. He presented several political actors and at least one line of political contestation - between Vladimir Putin and the elite. Despite the elite is loyal to the President, there is a permanent potential of the disloyalty and political struggle. Nevertheless, the presenter did not share this discourse and tried to articulate the issue in the dominant nationalistic discourse (It is our national interest, isn't it?). Then, the guest re-articulated the notion of national interest in the framework of domestic politics. Facing this, the presenter stopped him and asked about ISIS. The fragment ends when the guest agreed to promote the presenter's discourse.

Despite presenters and guests divide common agenda, the former could pressure the latter in order to discuss the topic within the particular discourse and construct certain media frames. The privileged position of presenters enables them to influence or even determine air discourse. Nevertheless, sometimes guests do not agree to promote a presenter's discourse on air. In these cases a presenter ironically comments a guest's answers and stop do it when a guest start to promote discourse or even a particular point of view which is close to a presenter:

«Special Opinion» with Sergey Markov, 25 November 2015

O. Zhuravleva (presenter, ironically): Oh, they are already terrorists? Okay.

S. Markov (guest). Now it is our reaction. [If Turkey does not admit its guilt], I think that we should not torture our people by the restriction of tourism and so on. Our people have a right to travel to sea. But it is a winter now and no one go to sea…

O. Zhuravleva (presenter, ironically): I know, you are an expert on warm seas

S. Markov: Now people go to other seas… Yes, sure. We should not do this again, what is bad for us. We should not repeat the mistake, which we made in the case of European Union.

O. Zhuravleva (presenter): That's it! Please, speak about it in detail.

A privileged position of a presenter is reinforced by the access to audience's questions and comments. During interview, a presenter can challenge the agenda by appellation to the audience. Moreover, a presenter often highlights so-called «an opinion of the audience». Voluntary capturing certain questions or comments enables a presenter to direct the air discourse. Sometimes a presenter identifies herself with an audience and speak with guests on behalf of this audience. Along with the use of irony, identification with an audience foster a particular perception of speaker's position. Using of grotesque and hyperbole reinforces this effect: a speaker starts apologetically clarify his point of view.

«Special Opinion» with Sergey Markov, 25 November 2015

S. Markov (guest): The main direction of attack is Ukraine, where the coup d'etat has occurred and the Ukrainian people lives under the rule of the ultranationalistic junta, which promotes terroristic policy…

O. Zhuravleva (presenter): I am sorry, but you have already spoke juntas many times.

S. Markov (guest): But this is the most important.

O. Zhuravleva (presenter, ironically): I understand. So, someone, who is against Russia, made it in the Ukraine…

S. Markov (guest): Sure. Ukraine is occupied…

O. Zhuravleva (presenter, ironically): Stop it. To make worse to Russia. We understand it.

S. Markov (guest): Not to make worse… You think they just want to do Russia dirt? No such matter.

O. Zhuravleva (presenter, ironically): Oh yes.

Despite the aim of «Special Opinion» is to promote the view of a particular person, who is a speaker, his opinion can be corrected by a presenter. Paraphrasing a guest's statements in grotesque and hyperbolic manner influence the audience's perception of a speaker's opinion.

«Special Opinion» with Nikolay Svanidze, 11 December 2015

O. Zhuravleva (presenter): Mass psychosis works as it is. Without television.

N. Svanidze (guest): Absolutely. It reinforces by itself.

O. Zhuravleva (presenter): Nikolay Svanudze is on air. He has started to describe the picture of mas psychosis.

In this fragment, the guest described the quality of discourse on Russian TV-channels and explained public attitudes of Russian people by the contemporary condition of discourse on TV-channels. The presenter labeled the condition of public opinion as a «mass psychosis» and then ascribed it to the guest.

A presenter is like a phantom on the air. He does not represent himself, he does not promote his particular point of view. Nevertheless, he frames what happens on air and has a primary role in the operation of discourses and frame formation. Thereof, political bias of a presenter substantially determines political bias of the air.

Echo of Moscow air is hardly biased in favor of one particular point of view. Instead of this there is a set of discourses, which are recognized, and a set of views and opinions which are discriminated on the air. Comparing Echo's interviews with Yevgenia Albats and Sergey Markov we conclude that the former's views are close to the representer, while the latter faces with irony and sarcasm. Despite each of them are formally in common circumstances (program time, random selection of a presenter, advertising time, etc.), Sergey Markov's views seems marginal and are perceived much more critically than what Yevgenia Albats speaks. We have already showed the forms of implicit expression of presenter's opinion and point of view. All of these forms are presented in «Special Opinion» with Sergey Markov from 16 March 2016. At the same time, we did not find it in «Special Opinion» with Yevgenia Albats from 02 February 2016.

6. Results

Evidence from TV-Rain

Due to the specific features of television format in case of TV-Rain, we scrutinized newscasts rather than interviews. Table 2 (Attachments) contents the full list of analyzed news stories. We collected newscasts from a day and a following day of the event. Key words of the search - «Syria», «Turkey», «ISIS», «IS», «Assad».

TV-Rain provided an extensive coverage of Russian military invasion in Syria. In total, 125 newscasts were collected. The topic dominated on the agenda on TV-Rain during the first months of Russian military invasion in Syria. The most covered issue was an accident with Sukhoi Su-24 strike aircraft, which was shot down by Turkish Air Force.

TV-Rain provided both thematic and episodic frames for news issues. Moreover, one newscast could contain both episodic and thematic types of framing. The former predominated in the first day of the event, the latter - on the second. Moreover, there was the central topic of Russian military invasion, which covered all relevant events. This feature shows that TV-Rain constructs its own way of covering of the topic.

The titles of TV-Rain newscasts are predominantly neutral. The most widespread way of formulation the titles was to provide the source of information, the subject of action and brief description of the very action.

The Head of Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs: Ankara provided evidences of Su-34 violations of Turkish borders (01 February 2016)

Foreign-office: Putin «undermines» the resolution of the Syrian conflict (02 February 2016)

The USA accused Syria in oil trading with IS (11 December 2015)

Nevertheless, the logic of media presupposes the bias as a primary condition of media coverage due to the complexity of reality, which should be reduced in a particular way in order to be perceived. So the question is, where are the borders of TV-Rain bias and whether it is political in nature?

TV-Rain covered various aspects of the topic: global politics, domestic economic and political consequences of the military invasion, the condition of public opinion, etc. It provided an exhaustive picture of the topic attracting different sources of information and covering the vast set of issues.

As it has been already mentioned, in the beginning of the Russian military invasion in Syria TV-Rain newscasts promoted predominantly episodic frames. It was mirrored in the lack of contextual information in newscasts discourse. Thus, TV-Rain avoided the promotion of any presuppositions on the topic. Moreover, providing the contextual information TV-Rain covered official's actions and statements which enabled to minimize its own biased statements.

In the end of the operation TV-Rain newscasts provided contextual information according to the thematic frame which was constructed during the operation. Scrutinizing the latest newscasts enable to reconstruct this frame. According to TV-Rain, the problem issue is political tension in Syria. The manner of problem issue articulation was relatively neutral: in the newscasts TV-Rain did not used politically biased signifiers such as «civil war», «war against terrorists», «anti-governmental riots», etc. It used predominantly neutral diplomatic clichйs, which let it be relatively objective in the formulation of the problem issue, and avoided the use of non-consensual vocabulary (e.g. «terrorists» versus «insurgent fighters» covering the activity of Free Syrian Army).

In the TV-Rain thematic frame there was only one recognized cause of the problem issue - ISIS's activity in Syria and Iraq. TV-Rain did not called other countries or organizations as causes of the Syrian conflict. There were a plethora of sensitive issues, which were solved by the use of quotes or naming the source and highlighting the particularity of the point of view. For instance, TV-Rain avoided the coverage and direct naming of Free Syrian Army. It covered its activity only as what is dependent on other actors, rather than as an independent political actor. There was a set of legitimate political actors, which made different statements on this issue.

In the newscast The Kremlin contested the existence of «Free Syrian Army» (30 September 2015) TV-Rain mentioned Dmitry Peskov (Putin's press secretary), Russian Ministry of Defense, Pentagon, NATO and Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. «Free Syrian Army» was described in the end of the paragraph as an armed Syrian opposition.

TV-Rain newscasts avoided moral obligations and offered solutions. The majority of materials contained only first and second components of frame (articulation of the problem issue and defining causes). Thereof, we cannot conclude that there is a political bias in TV-Rain framing of Russian military invasion in Syria on the level of direct framing.

In opposite to «Echo of Moscow» TV-Rain attracts much more sources of information. Moreover, it covers activity of many political actors: states, politicians, civil society organizations, public intellectuals, deputies of the State Duma and so on. At the same time, TV-Rain privileges one points discriminating the others. For instance, providing a lack of analytic discourse in newscasts, it put comments of Stanislav Belkovsky in this section. Stanislav Belkovsky is a Russian «political scientist» and communication specialist; he is a commentator on a variety of political issues, including Ukraine, Syria, Putin's worldview, Russian oligarchs, etc. Since 2014, Stanislav Belkovsky works at TV-Rain as a main specialist on all issues. According to TV-Rain advertising, Stanislav Belkovsky knows answers on all interesting questions. Putting his comments in the newscasts section can be considered as the channel's own content promotion. Nevertheless, it privileges Belkovsky's analytic point of view over all others analytic points.

In his interview from 24 November 2015, Belkovsky contextualized an accident with Russian aircraft in his personal discursive framework. He argued that the main reason of the accident was the contestation of two egos - Putin and Erdogan's, rather than national interest of Turkey, which tried to restrain Russian activity in the Near East. Nevertheless, he accused Russian forces in permanent violation of Turkish state borders. Despite these statements corresponds to legitimate point of view in public space, locating them in newscast section groundlessly privileges one particular polemical point of view over the others.

Sometimes TV-Rain provided its own analytic materials to describe the situation in Syria. The article «Eight things you should know about Russian military invasion in Syria, 30 September 2015» (30 September 2015) starts with the statement that the international coalition's activity in Syria was substantially ineffective. Providing the opinion of Russian scholars, TV-Rain states that along with the international coalition Russian air forces will destroy ISIS. During the material TV-Rain promotes the position of Russian officials stating that Russia waited for official request from the Syrian government.

Nevertheless, as we have already mentioned, all context models are ideologically biased. According to Zizek, ideology is a modus operandi of reality, which makes it perceivable and understandable. TV-Rain constructed the context through the contestation of frames in public space. Thereof, the context of Russian military invasion in Syria was a product of the very media coverage. Providing the variety of sources and privileging officials over all other sources of information, TV-Rain constructed vast predominantly nationalistic frame, which covered the variety of political discourses.

According to Carl Schmitt, the nation-state is the supreme form of association, which covers all other distinction and forms social of pluralism. The majority of contemporary scholars considers this idea as the apology of totalitarian state, oppression of social pluralism and democratic rule. At the same time, several authors argue that the authentic thought of Schmitt is devoted to the idea of nation-state as a supreme discursive form, which is like an umbrella for all other political and social identifications. Thereof, nationalist discursive framework in this sense is devoted to a set of legitimate political discourses, which contest each other in public sphere.

For instance, in the material «RBC has ascertained on Russian air forces aims in Syria» (30 September 2015) TV-Rain narrated about Russian military strategy in Syria. Russia as a nation-state was the main actor in that story. Moreover, Russian positive role was implicitly stated by the highlighting the negative role of ISIS. The story contextually emphasized Russian positive satellites - Iraq and USA.

«RBC has ascertained on Russian air forces aims in Syria» (30 September 2015)

The source close to the Kremlin stated… the idea of military support occurred when the coalition headed by the USA manifested its inability to stop the expansion of the «Islamic State»

Iraq government has decided to cooperate with Moscow on that issue.

Nationalistic frame here is discursively hidden by non-nationalistic signifiers. Using the synecdoche enables to avoid direct naming of the authentic actors and metaphorically present them by other names. «The Kremlin» designates «Russia» as a political actor who make important decisions. Then, «Russia» is substituted by «Moscow». This substitution is rhetorical rather than substantial because it does not devote to Moscow as a federal city of Russia. Thus, hidden nationalistic framework is hidden on the level of signifiers, but is present on the level of signified.

Despite in the story TV-Rain focuses on activities of nation-states, it highlights other political actors - United Nations (as an independent actor rather than the board of nations), the Russian Federation Council, Syrian Army. All of these actors are presented as subjects of particular actions.

Despite nationalistic frame covers a variety of political actors, it generates certain bias in news procession. Due to the supremeness of the state, foreign citizens statements are also articulated in the nationalistic frame. For instance, the article «The Investigating Committee has opened the criminal case on Gerashenko's call to collect information about Russian militaries in Syria» (07 October 2015) narrates about Russian state reaction on the statement of private actor. Anton Gerashenko is a deputy of the Ukrainian Supreme Council. Despite the private character of the statement, the story implicitly stresses Russian-Ukrainian relations.

Moreover, the primary role of nationalistic discourse in TV-Rain media-coverage is presented in titles. The majority of titles contains references on nation-states and national predicates (e.g. «russian», «american»). At the same time, Russian issues are sometimes articulated without such signifiers. Nevertheless, it made an implicit impact on the coverage due to the general frame.

Despite the nationalistic bias TV-Rain remains relatively impartial. As it has been mentioned, every media contains a bias as a primary condition of media coverage. Also, we have stated that democracy is the political project. Promoting the vast nationalistic frame TV-Rain provides a domain for discussing of foreign and domestic issues. Moreover, in circumstances of military conflict all non-nationalistic media frames become inevitably politicized. While political identity in constituted outside, military conflict is devoted to Schnitt's essence of politics and produces primary political identification.

Results: evidence from Novaya gazeta

Data was collected through Factiva. Key words - «Syria», «Turkey», «ISIS», «IS», «Assad». Period of time - 30 September 2015 - 15 March 2016.

The beginning of Russian military invasion in Syria was covered with an agenda bias. Unlike Echo of Moscow and TV-Rain Novaya gazeta extensively scrutinized the issue, whether Russian air forces attacked Free Syrian Army or ISIS? This issue was articulated in American public sphere and contextualized on Russian agenda as one of controversial issues of the military operation. For instance, TV-Rain always accompanied all messages on this issue by references to sources and providing an opposite views. Unlike TV-Rain, Novaya gazeta articulated this issue as a common knowledge and provided a number of opinions in support of this point of view. There were three articles in the issue of 2 October 2015, which were devoted to Russian military invasion in Syria. Their titles are presented below:

«Polite» airstrikes have caught the USA flatfooted» (2 October 2015)

Far from target? (2 October 2015)

Whether there were terrorists on the opposition-controlled territory? (2 October 2015)

Thus, the issue agenda was constructed around this topic. Moreover, Novaya gazeta labels Free Syrian Army as «terrorists». The status of Free Syrian Army in Syrian civil war is contested by Russia, the USA, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Turkey. While Russia and Iran consider Free Syrian Army as terrorists, the USA, Turkey and Saudi Arabia argue that they are a moderate Syrian opposition. Thereof, Free Syrian Army is a controversial actor, who media coverage is inevitably sensitive. Labeling them as «opposition» and opposing them to «terrorists» Novaya gazeta privileges the position of the USA, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Moreover, these articles were published in the beginning of the operation. Thereof, covering Russian military invasion in Syria Novaya gazeta was substantially biased and privileged the international coalition's particular view on the Syrian civil war.

For example, in the article «Polite» airstrikes have caught the USA flatfooted» (2 October 2015) the author considers disputes and current agenda in the American politics. He describes tension between John McCain and Rand Paul he implicitly contextualizes their disagreement in the issue of Russian attack against the Syrian moderate opposition and civilians. However, the author mentions that Russia does not approve the attacks against the Syrian opposition. Nevertheless, it is mentioned only contextually and presented as a particular position of one of political actor. Moreover, this actor as presented as a negative hero of the narrative.

In October Novaya gazeta focused on economic and political consequences of the operation. This issues were covered critically or neutrally. Nevertheless, even in formally neutral articles Novaya gazeta promoted critical evaluations. For instance, the article «The war on terrorism has a price» (7 October 2015) contained controversial coverage of the financial aspect of the Russian military invasion in Syria. Stating that Russian military expenditure on the invasion is far less than coalition's one and providing arguments in favor of the relatively low economic costs of the operation, the author implicitly highlighted the opposite point of view using such constructions as «cannot be considered as tremendous». Moreover, in the end of the article the issue was covered by the critical frame: the author stated that despite the absence of catastrophic economic consequences of the Russian military invasion in Syria, the issue of its reasons is still open due to the tension with Sunni world and low probability of economic sanctions cancellation.

During the military campaign Novaya gazeta connected the Russian ivasion with such topics as the Ukrainian crisis, the Afghan war, the Cold war, the contestation between Russia and the USA, the possibility of nuclear war, etc. On the other hand, unlike Echo of Moscow and TV-Rain Novaya gazeta provide a lack of information both factual and analytic on the accident with Sukhoi Su-24 strike aircraft, which was shot down by a Turkish Air Force.

«How to take out the Turkish knife?» (27 November 2015) was the sole article, which was devoted to the accident. In this article the author critically evaluates Russian and Turkish military opportunities, concluding that Russia should be more moderate in relations with Turkey in order to avoid a war. Moreover, the author states that if it were a war between Russia and Turkey, the former would inevitably be defeated. Thereof, the article is devoted to Russian foreign policy rather than the accident.

Since the beginning of the Russian military invasion in Syria Novaya gazeta provided thematic type of framing. In case of Novaya gazeta it is better to talk about critical framing. This frame covers the majority of articles despite the different topics. Unlike TV-Rain, there were no domination of nationalistic discourse and construction of nationalistic frame in Novaya gazeta media coverage. Novaya gazeta focused on various range of actors (Russian mass media, Russian state, foreign and domestic officials, state-owned and private companies, military structures, etc.) and critically evaluated their activities. Considering Novaya gazeta titles, we revealed the widespread use of synecdoche, tropes, rhetorical questions and other forms of expression. The widespread use of such forms is an attribute of biased media coverage: rhetorical forms enables to construct and directly evaluate «Us» and «Them».

Novaya gazeta is characterized by the exhaustive framing of covering issues. In Entman's terms Novaya gazeta exhaustively provided all four components of frame. Below we deconstruct the Novaya gazeta's critical frame, which was extensively used in media coverage of the Russian military invasion in Syria.

First, defining the problem issue. Due to the articles format, each considered issue was articulated in detail. Novaya gazeta articles presupposes relatively large extent which enables to extensively discuss the problem issue. Thereof, the majority of articles starts from the elaboration of the problem. Unlike TV-Rain Novaya gazeta articles provide a lack of sources of information and external references. Nevertheless, it provides an exhaustive information on the problem issue during the articulation.

We can define several problems, which were permanently discussed in Novaya gazeta during the Russian military invasion in Syria:

· The problem of sanctions - Russia considers its participation in the Syrian conflict as a way for achieving the cancellations of economic sanctions.

· The problem of domestic support - Putin uses the Syrian campaign as a way to increase his own popularity.

· Global security - Russian military invasion as a way to achieve the peaceful resolution of the Syrian problem and defeat ISIS.

· National security - terroristic attacks on Russian territory as the consequence of the military invasion.

· Withdrawal from Syria - how to leave Syria minimizing costs?

Defining causes Novaya gazeta focused on a variety of factors. Depending on the problem definition, it articulated causes differently. Unlike TV-Rain Novaya gazeta did not considered ISIS activity as the main reason and rational of Russian foreign policy and international relations. There were several articles, which challenged the declared aims of Russian military invasion. Moreover, Novaya gazeta tends to consider Russian military and foreign activity as a main reason of articulated problem issues. Thereof, this way of causes definition enables to criticize the government and the president on the following step of fraiming - moral obligations.

Despite Novaya gazeta stresses the negative consequences of Russian activity in Syria and directly articulate its blame, there was a lack of authentic moral discourse in the articles. Moral obligations were articulated in the utilitarian logic with the predominance of costs-benefits logic of effectiveness. The majority of articles stressed negative political, economic or reputational consequences of the Syrian operation. Thus, moral obligations and moral political discourse were substituted by instrumental political discourse.

Thereof, supposing solutions were articulated in the logic of effectiveness, rather than in moral discourse. This logic was expressed by the following constructions: «it would be useful now», «national interest», «pragmatically we have to», etc. Critical frame considers such vision of the political reality as realistic vision. Nevertheless, such «realistic» vision undermine the political contestation between different frames due to the reduction of moral component. The lack of moral discourse leads to the unification of all frames under the umbrella of economic logic of effectiveness.

As we have already mentioned, critical frame is a thematic frame. It contextualized the Syrian topic in the following topics:

· Global isolation of Russia as the consequence of the Ukrainian crisis;

· Economic problems in Russia as the consequence of EU economic sanctions;

· Russian-American relation and the return of the cold war.

Due to this contextualization Syrian topic lost its unique discourse and autonomy from other topics. It was connected with other foreign policy issues and topics. One the one hand, this connection provides a kind of intertextuality effect. One the other hand, there was a lack of intertextuality due to the lack of moral discourse, which undermines contestation of different frames.


Подобные документы

  • The role of mass media in modern life. The influence of newspapers, magazines and television in mind and outlook of the mass of people. Ways to provide information and display the news of dramatic events, natural disasters, plane crash, murders and wars.

    презентация [730,5 K], добавлен 17.05.2011

  • Theoretical basics of Internet advertising. The analysis of the media planning process. The establishing media objectives through developing media strategies and tactics. The effectiveness of the media planning in Internet. The example of the media plan.

    курсовая работа [64,2 K], добавлен 25.03.2014

  • "The Bauer media group". "The Bertelsmann" is a German multinational mass media corporation. "The Axel Springer Verlag". The German media industry. Company that is specialised in production and delivery of media in the form of digital, audio, video.

    реферат [18,9 K], добавлен 13.03.2014

  • Consideration of the mass media as an instrument of influence on human consciousness. The study of the positive and negative aspects of the radio, television, press, magazines, Internet. Advantages and disadvantages of the media in the Great Britain.

    дипломная работа [2,3 M], добавлен 14.10.2014

  • Influence of television on modern political practice. Nature of media power and its impact on political system of society, its character, practice and institutions. Dangers of new mediated symbolic politics for the democratic political practices.

    реферат [25,0 K], добавлен 28.05.2012

  • Понятие, определение и специфика социальной журналистики в "small media". Анализ социальной тематики, базовой структуры малых медиа, линейной схемы коммуникации. Принципы существования малых медиа, их распространение по разным мультимедийным платформам.

    курсовая работа [228,8 K], добавлен 06.05.2018

  • Сущность понятия имидж политического деятеля, принципы и mass-media каналы его формирования, анализ зарубежного опыта. Имидж председателя Законодательного Собрания Краснодарского края: исследование краевых печатных СМИ, перспективы позиционирования.

    курсовая работа [87,9 K], добавлен 09.06.2013

  • Особенности тенденции конвергенции СМИ в целом и явления, к которым приводит эта тенденция. История и направления деятельности медиа-холдинга "РосБизнесКонсалтинг". Реализация концепции конвергенции издательским домом Independent Media и "КоммерсантЪ".

    курсовая работа [99,7 K], добавлен 12.11.2010

  • Описание явления социальных сетей и современной ситуации на соответствующем рынке. Изучение видов взаимодействия в интернете и взаимодействия различных типов аудитории в социальных сетях. Рекомендации по продвижению СМИ на примере журнала "Катрен-Стиль".

    дипломная работа [2,6 M], добавлен 20.06.2014

  • Сущность, цели и принципы установления и поддержания связей с общественностью, определение термина "public relations". Функции общественного мнения, значимость связей с общественностью для органов власти в России при принятии управленческих решений.

    реферат [513,1 K], добавлен 19.10.2012

Работы в архивах красиво оформлены согласно требованиям ВУЗов и содержат рисунки, диаграммы, формулы и т.д.
PPT, PPTX и PDF-файлы представлены только в архивах.
Рекомендуем скачать работу.