Suchergebnisse

Information is considered one of the main factors of the current geopolitical dynamics. The information paradigm of geopolitics defines the canons of conquest and control of a global information space, as well as the nature of the relationship between geopolitical actors. It covers a range of issues related to geographic information policy, which includes the activities aimed at increasing the power of State information, including in the media. Helping people understand the changing world order has become the main goal of mass media. In an emerging global information field, the media no longer divide events into domestic and foreign ones. Russia's propaganda offensive is a carefully prepared strategy. The country built an array of soft power instruments and transformed them into effective weapons in a new information war with the West. Initially intended as a tool to enhance Russia's soft power, it quickly developed into one of the main instruments of Russia's new imperialism. The minimum task may be the integration of part of the post-Soviet space, whereas the maximum task is to unite civilizations into a single Eurasian continental block in order to restore civilization balance

The article reveals the role of the institute of mass media in the processes of formation of political consciousness and socio-political guidelines of modern youth. The formation of political consciousness and behavior of modern youth takes place in the context of the growing mobilization component of the global network, that is, the «mediatization» and «Internetization» of social life. These processes are characterized, on the one hand, by the growing interdependence of the world community in all spheres of life, primarily political, economic, and cultural ones, and, on the other hand, by the formation of a global media structure of these relations, connecting individual societies into a single system. The rapidly changing space of the Internet determines the specific vector of the socialization process of Russian youth. The analysis showed that the processes of Internetization and spread of modern information and communication technologies contribute to a significant increase in the effectiveness of interaction with the youth segment and social transformation. Therefore, not only the process of studying the behavior of the young generation in the context of the development of network technologies becomes relevant, but also the development of relevant tools and mechanisms for conducting political and public discussions in the conditions of politics mediatization, as well as more active and widespread inclusion of Russian youth in state construction. Modern processes of informatization of society and education have exacerbated the problem of information security of the individual in the educational environment. Propaganda of extremism and terrorism in social networks, the increasing negative role of prohibited information on the Internet, manipulation of the consciousness and behavior of the younger generation, and the lack of censorship of a significant part of the information space remain a social issue. It is justified that media educational technologies aimed at increasing media literacy of young citizens contribute to the implementation of their socio-political subjectivity and initiative in the interests of the state and civil society. The state should develop productive mechanisms of public control over the formation of spiritual values that meet the national interests of the country, the education of patriotism and civil responsibility for its fate.

The relevance of this paper is conditioned by the fact that the ideas and values broadcast through mass communication media influence both the development and socialization of an individual and the comfortable existence of the whole society. The aim of the paper is to analyze how the counterculture influences society through mass communication media. This goal mediates the implementation of the following tasks: to disclose the content of the concepts of "communication" and "mass communication"; to outline the main functions of mass communication media; to analyze the nature of publications of the "Topor" Telegram channel; to disclose the content of the term "counterculture"; to note its main functions. The basis of the study was formed by the works of Ya. Assmann, A.G. Donskikh, I.A. Zosimenko, V.V. Kasyanov, A.A. Kokorina, E.S. Muratova and others. As a result, it is concluded that the broadcasting of countercultural values by mass communication media, which is taking place today (which is confirmed by analyzing the publications of the "Topor" telegram channel), can lead to the limitation of the dominant culture, substitution of its principles, as a result of which the traditional values relevant to Russian society will be destroyed. For this reason, we believe that mass media, namely channels in the social network "Telegram", need additional control by supervisory authorities, which will allow levelling countercultural functions and preserving traditional values.

In the global informatization era, which began to develop in Russia in the 1990s, mass media acquire a decisive importance. The media became more influential due to its role as a serious component of political pressure, including the aim of forming a new democratic consciousness among the people. Throughout the perestroika period and the 1990s, a new model of interaction between the authorities and the media was formed, which continues to operate steadily today. The peculiarity of the modern period lies in the ever-increasing role of the media and its influence on the information security of Russia. From this point of view, it is important for us to draw lessons, both positive and negative, from the experience of the transitional period and the «vaccination» that Russian citizens received in the 1990s when organizing the activities and function of the media. The purpose of the article is to study the role of the media in the political life of one of the major regions of Russia – the Chelyabinsk region in the 1990s. Comparative, chronological, and systemic research methods were used to this end. The historical development and the role of the media of the transition period in Russia, in particular, the interaction of the media with the authorities of the region, as well as the influence of the media on reformatting the consciousness of the population of the region with the key role of the media in this process were analyzed. The formulated conclusions and practical recommendations will allow these scientific results to improve the model of interaction between regional authorities and the media in the framework of ensuring the national interests of modern Russia.

Purpose of the study: to form an objective understanding of the socio-political issues of integrating Industry 4.0 technologies into modern society in general and Russian society in particular. Methodology. The author, using a wide range of the latest domestic and foreign sources, conducts a consistent analysis of the most general issues related to the topic of the work, gives a general description of the theoretical discourse on the integration of Industry 4.0 technologies into society, and considers the interpretation of socio-political aspects in a (joint) "smart" production of Industry 4.0, explores pressing problems with compliance with established socio-economic practices in joint intelligent production, explores the presence of "fear of the future" in society, attitude towards breakthrough innovations of Industry 4.0, using the example of a survey of European society, the attitude of Russian society to the perception of Innovation 4.0 is outlined. Conclusions. Based on the results of the analysis, the author comes to the logical conclusion that the traditional system of established socio-economic practices will undoubtedly face a whole range of new challenges that may lead to a change in views on its form and content, both theoretical and theoretical. and applied it. in terms of compliance and execution of the plan. Especially, according to the author, this can be clearly manifested in the corporate sphere, which in the foreseeable future will become increasingly complex, and in the judicial sphere, where it will be unclear who to file claims against as a result of a trial for restoration or compensation for harm based on the results of an established violation of civil law.

The article is dedicated to the 30th anniversary of the Russian Mass Media Law, adopted on December 27, 1991. This Law is proposed to be considered as innovative, which laid the foundation for a number of innovations in national legal science and legislative practice. Among these innovations are: the author's nature of drafting, consolidation of the thesaurus of the Law in a separate article of the Law, the establishment of a cumulative liability mechanism, etc. Over the next three decades, the Law has undergone numerous changes that have predetermined law enforcement practice. The article analyzes the trends of the ongoing transformation: the expansion of the concept of abuse of freedom of the media, expansion of diversity of types of mass media, etc. As part of considering the future prospects of the Law, the need is revealed to bring it into terminological compliance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Civil and other codes, to eliminate legal and logical defects formed in the process of its creation and subsequent adjustment. The necessity of the Law transformation into the Mass Communications Law is substantiated.

This book provides a multi-faceted picture of the many complex processes taking place in the field of contemporary Russian media and popular culture. Russian social and cultural life today is strongly individualised and consumers are offered innumerable alternatives; but at the same time options are limited by the new technologies of control which are a key feature of Russian capitalism. Based on extensive original research by scholars in both Russia itself and in Finland, the book discusses new developments in the media industry and assesses a wide range of social and cultural changes, many o

An attempt to define the degree of media freedom in contemporary Russia leads to contradiction between the declaration of the mass media freedom provided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union heritage of unequivocal control of the press by the government, described by Siebert et al. (1984) as the Soviet-Communist Press Theory. The reason for this ambiguity could be explained by the great deal of different factors that exert an influence on the journalism, such as features of mass media legislation, governmental control of the media, the diversity of media ownership, sources of media incomes, and traditions of censorship in Russia. The current development of the media legislation in Russia shows no improvement regarding the freedom of speech. In the beginning of the third presidential term in 2012, Vladimir Putin has signed several laws that reduced the freedom of speech through the limitation of public assembly, criminalization of defamation in the mass media, and intensification of governmental censorship on the internet. On the other hand, the contemporary press freedom that appeared in conditions of the new market economy in the beginning of the 1990s has brought discredit as to the conception of an exclusively positive impact of unconditional freedom on the mass media since the newspapers, television and radio channels were controlled by several powerful oligarchs who used the owned mass media to spread and support their political influence. However, after the authorities' reference in the 2000s the balance was not regained. As a result, the majority of the media outlets in Russia became co-owned or fully controlled by the government. Another crucial aspect of the mass media freedom as the cultural phenomenon should be kept in mind: seven decades of severe censorship could not be erased from the journalism professional community's memory in several years. The negative experience of predecessors transforms censorship into self-censorship in modern Russia. ; An attempt to define the degree of media freedom in contemporary Russia leads to contradiction between the declaration of the mass media freedom provided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union heritage of unequivocal control of the press by the government, described by Siebert et al. (1984) as the Soviet-Communist Press Theory. The reason for this ambiguity could be explained by the great deal of different factors that exert an influence on the journalism, such as features of mass media legislation, governmental control of the media, the diversity of media ownership, sources of media incomes, and traditions of censorship in Russia. The current development of the media legislation in Russia shows no improvement regarding the freedom of speech. In the beginning of the third presidential term in 2012, Vladimir Putin has signed several laws that reduced the freedom of speech through the limitation of public assembly, criminalization of defamation in the mass media, and intensification of governmental censorship on the internet. On the other hand, the contemporary press freedom that appeared in conditions of the new market economy in the beginning of the 1990s has brought discredit as to the conception of an exclusively positive impact of unconditional freedom on the mass media since the newspapers, television and radio channels were controlled by several powerful oligarchs who used the owned mass media to spread and support their political influence. However, after the authorities' reference in the 2000s the balance was not regained. As a result, the majority of the media outlets in Russia became co-owned or fully controlled by the government. Another crucial aspect of the mass media freedom as the cultural phenomenon should be kept in mind: seven decades of severe censorship could not be erased from the journalism professional community's memory in several years. The negative experience of predecessors transforms censorship into self-censorship in modern Russia.

An attempt to define the degree of media freedom in contemporary Russia leads to contradiction between the declaration of the mass media freedom provided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union heritage of unequivocal control of the press by the government, described by Siebert et al. (1984) as the Soviet-Communist Press Theory. The reason for this ambiguity could be explained by the great deal of different factors that exert an influence on the journalism, such as features of mass media legislation, governmental control of the media, the diversity of media ownership, sources of media incomes, and traditions of censorship in Russia. The current development of the media legislation in Russia shows no improvement regarding the freedom of speech. In the beginning of the third presidential term in 2012, Vladimir Putin has signed several laws that reduced the freedom of speech through the limitation of public assembly, criminalization of defamation in the mass media, and intensification of governmental censorship on the internet. On the other hand, the contemporary press freedom that appeared in conditions of the new market economy in the beginning of the 1990s has brought discredit as to the conception of an exclusively positive impact of unconditional freedom on the mass media since the newspapers, television and radio channels were controlled by several powerful oligarchs who used the owned mass media to spread and support their political influence. However, after the authorities' reference in the 2000s the balance was not regained. As a result, the majority of the media outlets in Russia became co-owned or fully controlled by the government. Another crucial aspect of the mass media freedom as the cultural phenomenon should be kept in mind: seven decades of severe censorship could not be erased from the journalism professional community's memory in several years. The negative experience of predecessors transforms censorship into self-censorship in modern Russia.

An attempt to define the degree of media freedom in contemporary Russia leads to contradiction between the declaration of the mass media freedom provided by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Soviet Union heritage of unequivocal control of the press by the government, described by Siebert et al. (1984) as the Soviet-Communist Press Theory. The reason for this ambiguity could be explained by the great deal of different factors that exert an influence on the journalism, such as features of mass media legislation, governmental control of the media, the diversity of media ownership, sources of media incomes, and traditions of censorship in Russia. The current development of the media legislation in Russia shows no improvement regarding the freedom of speech. In the beginning of the third presidential term in 2012, Vladimir Putin has signed several laws that reduced the freedom of speech through the limitation of public assembly, criminalization of defamation in the mass media, and intensification of governmental censorship on the internet. On the other hand, the contemporary press freedom that appeared in conditions of the new market economy in the beginning of the 1990s has brought discredit as to the conception of an exclusively positive impact of unconditional freedom on the mass media since the newspapers, television and radio channels were controlled by several powerful oligarchs who used the owned mass media to spread and support their political influence. However, after the authorities' reference in the 2000s the balance was not regained. As a result, the majority of the media outlets in Russia became co-owned or fully controlled by the government. Another crucial aspect of the mass media freedom as the cultural phenomenon should be kept in mind: seven decades of severe censorship could not be erased from the journalism professional community's memory in several years. The negative experience of predecessors transforms censorship into self-censorship in modern Russia.