Re-examine post-soviet media theory: double matrix vs replacement of matrix

1
Re-examine post-soviet media theory double
matrix vs replacement of matrix

• Ilya Kiriya
• Ph.D. philology
• Ph.D. information and communication
• National Research University Higher School of
  Economics
• Moscow, Russia

2
1. No transition

• This paper tries to propose another framework to
  analyse current communication model in Russia
  instead the transitional one.
• Communication model has been formed long before
  soviet period. Soviet period has been a logic
  continuation of pre-soviet society.
• Soviet social factors has been represented by
  post-soviet researchers as a crucial factor of
  change influenced media
• No market (Has pre-soviet economics been
  market-oriented?)
• Paternalistic role of State (Is it really
  peculiarity of soviet period?)
• Propagandistic function of media (Has it really
  been ignored in Tsarist Russia?)
• Globalization and modernization in 1990 has been
  represented as a logic return to pre-soviet
  communication model and at the same time to
  occidental model of communication followed
  democratization.
• In reality Russia cant destroy this soviet
  factors because they are grounded to the social
  reality during centuries and represent a kind of
  non-formal institutions structuring social
  reality (North).

3
2. Two set of factors

• Commercialization (growing advertising market)
• Foreign ownership (limited)
• News journalism tradition
• Demand on western cultural products

• Big intrusion of the State into social life
  (Levada) which increase the pressure on media
• Content and news (Koltsova)
• Industrial structure (Mieckewicz)
• Tradition of accessibility for cultural products
  (Kiriya)
• Narrow character of public sphere

mergement
merging
4
3. State intrusion

• The modernizing and civilisational role of state.
  
• State initiative (the printing revolution has
  been initiated by the state to increase the
  orthodoxy in new attached regions and in 10
  years the state will banish from the country
  previously invited first printers). Before XVIII
  annual production about 1-2 titles per year (in
  Europe about 2000) Tarakanova Barbier and
  Bertho Lavenir?. The same logic of invitation of
  printers by the tsar and then their punishment
  has been demonstrated by father of Peter the
  Grate Alexey. Same logic in infrastructure
  (telephone, railways, telegraph)
• To maintain the possibility of intrusion actually
  the state should act in many ways
• In field of content to ensure state reforms
  promotion
• In field of ownership of media to ensure the
  control of content
• In field of financing media to resolve conflict
  between commercial and state interests.

5
4. Propaganda vs news journalism culture

• Big pressure on news editors and maintaining the
  system of self-censorship (Koltsova)
• Direct agenda setting (special departments within
  newsrooms responsible for presidential and
  prime-minister activitys coverage).
• State support for creating propagandistic fiction
  content.
• Interaction between classic news journalism
  culture (imported recently) and grounded form of
  paternalistic one.

6
5. Limited ownership vs foreign capital
Indirectly or partly owned
Directly owned
Total average daily share 21,8
Total average daily share 39,5
7
6. Limited ownership
TV
Press
30 of Ren-TV channel (about 4,6 daily share)
39 of CTC-Media (channels CTC-Media, Domashny
and DTV total daily share 13,1)
Among 10 biggest publishers
Limited order access the State doesnt allow the
presence of natural competition in the most
ideological area
8
7. Limited ownership

• The State ensured the limited access order to
  political reasons in mid 1990-s to ensure
  president Yeltsins re-election (Zassursky).
• Classic system used to transfer the state
  property into oligarchs property for their
  loyalty exchange.

9
8. State financing vs commercial

• Combining and recombining models.
• According to McChesney, news journalism culture
  and commercialization of media are different
  sides of the same coin.
• State owned channels are biggest players on
  advertising market. They receive at the same
  time subventions from the State (in structure of
  VGTRK revenues its about 50).
• State use mechanisms of distribution of grants
  for coverage of different events and kinds of
  topics. This parallel market represents in some
  regions, according to our survey (Kachkaeva,
  Kiriya), bigger than advertising parallel market.
  

10
9. Accessibility tradition

• Propaganda should be accessible to ensure the
  social pressure (soviet tradition).
• Actually it leads to the tolerance of different
  kinds of piracy and to social pressures on the
  state which should maintain such accessibility
  (advertising financed model is a better solution
  to ensure accessibility).
• Example of sport (after Putins reaction to the
  sell of broadcasting rights to pay channel,
  contract has been reexamined in favor of free
  broadcaster).

11
10. Mutation of public sphere

• Absence of public sphere in its Habermassian
  sense before soviet period. Reasons
• No wide audience (62 of illiterates in 1914)?
  Mironov, 2000
• Passivity of audience as a result of absence of
  political rights because about 90 of active
  population in XIX century represented serfs
  (Fedorov, 1966). No labour mobility. No
  particular need in information.
• Passivity of landlords for whom their lands
  distributed as privileges for the state service.
  Lands did not represented economical value.?
• Narrow dialogue in the press by very limited
  class of intellectuals from literature. Thats
  because history of Russian journalism of XIX
  century is at the same time history of Russian
  literature.
• Narrow or parallel public sphere (where some
  deprived from political rights narrow groups of
  people (dissidents) are discussing political
  issues (Mattelart).
• Informational ghettos limited access media with
  very narrow audience which ensure the social
  isolation of opposition.
• Internet social networks playing the same role.

12
Conclusion

• News culture ??Propaganda culture
• Open access to capital ?? Restricted access to
  capital
• Commercial financing ?? State financing
• Accessibility ?? Profitability
• Public sphere ??Public isolation