Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Defence and security / / Articles
In the presidential administration are studying the television
Material posted: Publication date: 28-02-2017
For Sergey Kirienko has prepared a study on Russian television. managed to get acquainted with the results of a study of television in 2016. Analytics prepared for the presidential administration, in particular, the first Deputy head of the AP Sergey Kiriyenko. A study conducted by a commercial company, its goal is "to understand the picture of reality that creates TV" and find out how this picture meets the objectives of the modernization of Russia.

Studied the socio-political production: news (including "Vesti Nedeli" with Dmitry Kiselev on "Russia-1"), talk shows (e.g., "Central television" NTV "Right to vote" TVC, "the Fight", "Russia-1"), programs (e.g., "Man and law" of the "First channel", "Military secret" Ren-TV "PostScript" TVC), publicistic program (the"Line of defense" TVC, "the Special correspondent" "Russia-1").

Daily news releases, especially on "the First channel" and "Russia-1" in the opinion of the authors of the study, relatively balanced, in contrast to the analytical author's programs and especially the talk show. The talk show, according to the study, a strongly skewed in the direction of the foreign policy agenda is extremely emotionally charged and mostly on the theme of confrontation between Russia and the US, the West, Ukraine and so on with emphasis on military threat.

Outstanding representatives of public-political broadcasting, most fully Express his contemporary style, experts in the study believe Dmitry Kiselyov ("News of the week") and Vladimir Solovyov ("Sunday night", "Duel"). It is noted that Kiselyov uses the classic techniques of propaganda, while the nightingales are more inclined to the theatrical dramaturgiei on the "model drama in areal theater," in which some characters of his show represent "good" and patriotism, and other "evil" (usually foreign or "cartoon characters of the 90s").

The image of President Putin talk show and program authors glorify, but the way Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev folkloristics. As for the topic of modernization, it is treated by TV one-sidedly — from the perspective of technology, according to the study.

The findings of the study for Russian TV are disappointing.

"Federal television creates a common picture of the socio-political reality, the Central idea of which is the defense of national sovereignty in front of Russia's hostile foreign policy environment, state paternalism and Patriotic values, the justification of the economic and social problems of the outside threat. The personification of the state and dominant newsmaker is the President Vladimir Putin," the authors write, noting the disregard TV political agenda, public interest organizations, and individual citizens.

Nothing good, according to the authors of the study, it will not: "These programs are the main channel of the exaggeration of negative and alarming discourses, especially those that build black-and-white picture of the polar world and lead to the escalation of emotional tension," the study says.

Respondents experts admit that the problems with the Russian TV really is. Political analyst Gleb Kuznetsov believes that TV is the path of least resistance.

"They felt the most lightweight formats like noisy talk shows, where the lack of intrigue and drama kompensiruet total scandalous, and international news is often simply translated stories — says Kuznetsov. — But the life of the country, they have forgotten how to describe. The issue here is not whether the mobilization agenda, the problem is that people should be interested. But any show, from year to year using the same moves, you will start to lose popularity. This is what we see now with the socio-political TV. You just need something new," — said Kuznetsov.

The head of Fund "the Petersburg policy" Michael Vinogradov notes that on television, the obvious support unnecessary levels of aggression and preservation of the voter the feeling of "we are all experiencing, but not really experiencing anything". But this approach has its limits.

"The problem arose not yesterday, and perhaps her reason is just fighting for ratings. TV channels, apparently, in its reading the political situation and understand the risks but they are" — said Vinogradov.

The head of the Center for political technologies Igor Bunin says that TV is really gone from discussing the Russian to the Western, with the escalation of emotional tension in the society can bring any consequences until the civil war.

"TV, in my opinion, should be quieter, programmnie must be meanings and should not be tough punching one position. We are now in a situation when society is latently divided into many parts, and sooner or later the silent majority who vote for the government, begins to disintegrate, and any extremes will bring tremendous harm," says Bunin.

Head of the Department of public relations, MGIMO Professor Valery Solovey believes that an aggressive agenda of television was acceptable in 2014-2015, when the communication strategy was based on confrontation, but now the challenges are different.

"In the mode of confrontation was assumed that through the formation of enemy image and the maintenance of the artificial stress, you can mobilize the society, says Nightingale. But long in this state it cannot be, if you do not see a tangible enemy. Now, the topic of Ukraine won back, Syria is too far, the United States ceased to be a terrible enemy, and, whatever were the relations with the administration trump, hardly a confrontational discourse will be back. The people are tired of tension", — he said.

According to experts, once the presidential campaign, apparently, will be based on "referendum" scenario, the TV will have to prove to people that "thanks to the President, problem solved, we sailed between reefs and go for a big clean water." Nightingale adds that the fatigue from the aggressive rhetoric of the channels was noticeable a year ago and it cost a long time to give up, but then America was still the enemy, and the internal positive agenda was not. Therefore, the voltage maintained by inertia.

Rigidity, intolerance and hate speech — the most characteristic features of our television, the analyst says Abbas Gallyamov.

"The degree of intensity has reached such heights that became unprofitable by the authorities. It is obvious that the economy is in such an atmosphere will not grow. No sane businessman would invest in a country where opposition politicians are shot at walls of the Kremlin, where some officers close to the exhibition because they are insufficiently Patriotic, and the main men are Cossacks, bikers and outright fools of NOD, thinks Gallyamov. In such a country will not invest not just foreigners. Will withdraw money even realnejsie heads of state corporations," he said. But the townsfolk got tired of the hysteria, he said. "To stay long in this crazy impossible, and the dissonance between the screaming from the TV screens of professional "patriots" and ordinary people becoming more obvious," says Gallyamov.

But political analyst Vitaly Ivanov said the findings of the study biased. "Judging by the tone, the authors do not like our television, I can't stand Kiselev-Soloviev and others. Clearly, an objective assessment they are trying to give their own ideas about the propriety, efficiency, etc we are dealing with normal intellectual improvement, issued for the examination. This, of course, does not mean that our TV is good, but where in the world is it any good?" — rhetorically asks Ivanov.

RELATED MATERIALS: Defence and security