Russia Media between
the West and the East
Professor Elena Vartanova
Faculty of Journalism
Moscow State University/
Aleksander Institute, Helsinki University
Basic Theoretical Frameworks
Authoritarian Theory: journalism as a political
instrument of elites
Leninist Theory: media as collective agitator
(education + political enlightenment), propagandist (common
ideology and culture), organizator (mobilization)
Dissident Approaches: media as a free voice of
intellectuals (intelligentsia), alternative arts (rock music,
chansons, elitist cinema)
The Soviet Media Theory




Normative character: media professionals have to be
Communist party affiliated, people’s oriented, ethical truthful and
educating
News and timeliness reporting: of minor importance compared
to feature polemic genres
Publicistics (political essays writing): at the core of journalists’
activity
A ‘must’ for journalists: an active citizen’s stand
Media Theories after 1985







Glasnost
Public Sphere
Open Society
Political Economy / Media Political Capital
Information / Network Society
Theory of Dual Transition
Globalization
Libertarian Theory and Glasnost
Western Approach: ‘Glasnost as the process of systematically,
continuously, and completely informing people on all spheres of life both
in the USSR and abroad, except for information constituting state of
other legally-protected secrets or violating the generally excepted
societal moral and ethical norms. It is an instrument for the leadership in
carrying through political reforms.’
Russian view:
adaptation of administrative-bureaucratic model to Western ideal
of free and open society
liberation of media ‘from the top down’
Authors: Nordenstreng, Paasilinna, Yassen Zassoursky
Public Sphere:
Who Responsible to Whom?
Habermas
public sphere as a forum for public debates
Russian approach:
Public sphere for discussions between the power and citizens
Concept of the State Information Policy:
Forth Power at the service of the State
Media for Dialog between the Power and Citizens
Information Security
Popper’s Open Society




Glasnost (lack of censorship) as a foundation of Russian open
society
Open access to information and mass media
Media accountability to the public prior to media accountability to
the State
Tolerance in Media
Political Economy:
Media Political Capital
Western approach
Balkanization of media: heavy state control, high degree of mass
media partisanship, + integration of TV and illegal business
through advertising for corruption
Russia view
media-political capital as an institute of corruption, media not a
business, but a source of political influence + integration between
media and political elites, no consolidation and shared
professional ethics among media professionals
Information or Network Society
Western Theories
informational society based on network structures which grow from
capitalism + economic and social flexibility
Russian approach



applicability of the network society concept to Russian
communication habits and media uses, but only to the most
advanced part of Russian society – fragments, fragmented
globalization
networks in Russian social and everyday life
digital divide as a form of modern inequality striving from the complex
of universal (socio-economic, geographical) and individual
(educational, cultural, personal, etc.) reasons
Theory of Dual Transition





Technological Transition
Transition in Legislation
Social Transition
Transition of Life Styles and Values
Professional Change
Globalization
Western concepts:
Glonationalization through adaptation of Western formats (program
genres, structure of TV programming, entertainization); absorbing
global elements and transforming them into national
Russian approach

in terms of economy Russian commercial media system falls under
general market laws: regionalization of the press markets tabloidization,
growing importance of national TV
 in media-politics relationship Russian media have inherited a
paternalistic pattern of relationship (decision-making Father – obedient
Child)
Different Types of
Media Models


Libertarian
 Social responsibility
Authoritarian
 Soviet propagandistic
Siebert, Schramm, Peterson (1956)



Liberal
Democratic Corporatist
Polarized
Hallin D., Mancini P. (2004)
Continuum of Post-Soviet: Variety of
Media Models




EU-oriented (Baltic states)
Eurasian etatist (Russia, Ukraine)
Eurasian paternalistic (Kazakhstan,
Uzbekistan, Byelorussia)
Eurasian depressive (Moldova, Caucasus
region)
‘Eurasian’ media model:
Basic Components
Anglo-American








Legislation (philosophy and principles) created in
a parliamentary way
Market laws introduced into the media industry
(profit-driven market activity, role of advertising,
growing importance of commercial motives in
content strategies of media), trends of
conglomeration and concentration
Role of NGOs, journalists and representative of
audience in forming media policy
Media as an element of culture and education
(enlightening role of media, audience
expectations) constructing the public sphere
Role of technology as a driving force for media
policy and a liberating force for audiences in
their relations with media
Standards of objective journalism and attention
to professional ethics
Rise of professional regulation, strive for
professional corporativism







Asian
Implementation of legislation by statemarket complex having strong informal
control and intervention in the media
Lack of transparence in market activities of
media companies (closed ownership data
and balance sheets), elements of bribery
and corruption among journalists (concealed
advertising), suppressed commercial
motives in activities of many media
enterprises
Dominant role of state agencies in shaping
media policy (a notion of state media policy)
Instrumental (service) use of media by
‘state-market complex’/power elites/clans/,
evident media clientelism
State-media relations: combination of
repression and conciliatory measures
(strong unofficial control)
Partisan (often informal and hidden)
connections of journalists to power elites
Stimulation of self-regulation ‘top-down’
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Asian
Anglo-American

Philosophy and principles of
media legislation created in
a parliamentary way

Implementation of
legislation by state-market
complex having strong
informal control and
intervention in the media
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Anglo-American
Market laws introduced into the
media industry (profit-driven
market activity, role of
advertising, growing
importance of commercial
motives in content strategies of
media), trends of
conglomeration and
concentration
Asian
Lack of transparence in market
activities of media companies
(closed ownership data and
balance sheets), elements of
bribery and corruption among
journalists (concealed
advertising), suppressed
commercial motives in
activities of many media
enterprises
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Anglo-American
Role of NGOs, journalists and
representative of audience
in forming media policy
Asian
Dominant role of state
agencies in shaping media
policy (a notion of state
media policy)
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Anglo-American
Media as an element of culture
and education (enlightening
role of media, audience
expectations) constructing the
public sphere + media (formal)
independence in agenda
setting and framing the reality
Asian
Instrumental (service) use of
media by ‘state-market
complex’/power elites/clans/ +
evident media clientelism +
State-media relations:
combination of repression and
conciliatory measures (strong
unofficial control)
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Anglo-American
Asian
Standards of objective
journalism and attention to
professional ethics + rise of
professional regulation,
strive for professional
corporativism
Partisan (often informal and
hidden) connections of
journalists to power elites +
stimulation of self-regulation
‘top-down’
‘Eurasian’ media model: Comparison of
components
Anglo-American
Asian
Role of technology as a driving
force for media policy and a
liberating force for
audiences in their relations
with media + market as a
regulator
Role of technology as a liberating
force for audiences in their
relations with media + state as
a regulator + problems of
information inequality
The Russian Mass Media Law




Adopted in 1991
Creation of new legal environment
Influenced by Anglo-American watchdog philosophy
Basic points
 The impermissibility of censorship
 The right to create privately owned media
 The independence of editorial bodies and journalists´
collectives
Evolution of Russian Media Model
‘Oligarchization’ (1991-1996)
•
political model: emergence of integrated political-business elite + TV as a
political party
•
media regulation model: liberal legislation + strong informal mechanisms for
manipulative use of mass media (corruption, personal relations)
‘Balkanization’ (1996-1999)
•
political model: structurization and redistribution of ownership,
•
media regulation model: poor legislative activity (Broadcasting Law) +
emergence of industrial regulation + low level of professional selforganization
Neo-authoritarianism (2000 - ):
•
political model: reemergence of state bureaucracy + search for national
idea
•
media regulation model: renewal of legislation activity (advertising law,
regulation for coverage of terrorism, etc.)
Russia

Eurasian etatist (Russia, Ukraine): mixed
state-market regulation + a certain degree of
public interference+state agencies as major
media policy makers+low level of respect to
the state by citizens+growing distrust to
media by audience
The ‘Holy Trinity’ of
Post-Soviet Media Regulation

The State: legal framework (access to information, coverage
of terrorism) + informal pressures (upon information flows,
HR) + cooperation with media professionals (how to stimulate
self-regulation?)

Media Business: lobbying for profits (new editions of Media
Law, Advertising Law, introduction of digital TV) + search for
market liberalization (non-commercial partnerships in print
media distribution),

Increasing role of society (=audience): demands for ethical
norms in media contents (censorship or self-regulation) +
setting up non-commercial priorities (cultural and socially
oriented content)
Technology Matters?




Debates on Information society as an agent for the
new media policies
New understanding of democracy and freedom of
speech: the role of users
Dual approaches to government regulation: no
interference, importance of self-regulation +
attempts to control the content
Pressures from audiences
Basic Features of
Russian Media Policy




Features of old regulatory models and approaches
(strong influence of historical traditions) remain
State and political elite keeping the key role
Uneasy introduction of market regulation
Technology (mainly) and disappointment in media
stimulates regulation from the audiences
RMM: Forces of Change
- conflict of paternalistic and authoritarian (old)
versus democratic and non-hierarchical (new)
political cultures;
- diverse and often competing economic forces,
- new media technologies,
- increasing indentities of audience groups