Stages of Transformation of the Communication Culture of Power and Society in the Digital Public Policy Era | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Stages of Transformation of the Communication Culture of Power and Society in the Digital Public Policy Era
Vol. 22 (2021) No. 1, Public Politics
Vol. 22 (2021) No. 1
Public Politics

Stages of Transformation of the Communication Culture of Power and Society in the Digital Public Policy Era

Knyzhova Z.Z.
Saratov State Law Academy
ORCID ID 0000-0001-5941-5380
Suslov I.V.
Saratov State Law Academy
ORCID ID 0000-0003-0991-6368
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-1-34-46
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-1-34-46

How to Cite Array

Knyzhova Z.Z., Suslov I.V. (2021) Stages of Transformation of the Communication Culture of Power and Society in the Digital Public Policy Era. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (1), pp. 34-46. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-22-1-34-46 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2021-02-04
Accepted Date 2021-03-06
Published Date 2021-08-09

Copyright (c) 2021 Зарина Закиевна Кныжова, Иван Владимирович Суслов

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The authors of the article address the evolution of the culture of mass-elite communication in the context of digital development. The culture of communication here refers to the norms and values that govern the public interaction of authorities with citizens. Three stages (2010–2013, 2014–2017, and 2018 to present) are distinguished in the evolution for the demands of society and the state for public (online and off-line) behavior of representatives of regional political elite. The main part of the article explores the evolution of demands for speech and behavior of the regional elite on the part of the State and society, in view of the increasing pace of digitization of public space. In the first phase (2010–2013), scandals and communicative failures with the political elite were usually humorous, did not get on the current information agenda, and rarely elicited the official reaction from top officials of the state. In power discourse, the Internet was defined as a universal means of broadcasting the openness of the state, and social activists published examples of mass-elite communications that presented politicians in an unattractive light. At the second stage (2014–2018), there was an increase in public criticism of ethical errors committed by politicians and officials in public mass-elite communications, and an increase in digital activity of ordinary users of the Internet space. The humorous style characteristic of the first stage of mass-elite communication in digital public space goes back to the past. Demand for social justice is gaining ground in Russian society. Since 2014, the federal and regional authorities of the Russian Federation have taken certain steps to improve the ethical relationship between power and society. The third stage (since 2018) is characterized by public attention to the culture and ethics of communication of representatives of the political elite online, namely in social networks. The State has begun the process of formalizing the Internet activity of the power elite by including this indicator in the performance criteria and adopting a number of laws regulating Internet interaction.

Keywords

political elite, regional elite, political culture, regional power, political rhetoric, digitalization of politics, political communication

Acknowledgements

The study was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research within the framework of the scientific project “Violation of ethical norms in regional mass-elite communications during the digitalization of public policy” No. 20-011-32253.

References

  1. Bannykh, S. (2013, November 29). Zvezda YouTube Mikhail Gulevskiy: “Da chto vy pristali ko mne s etoy dorogoy!” [YouTube Star Mikhail Gulevsky: “Why are you Bothering me with this Road?”]. Komsomolskaya Pravda [Komsomol Truth]. Retrieved from https://www.lipetsk.kp.ru/online/news/1598950/
  2. Bartels, K. (2013). Public Encounters: The History and Future of Face-to-face Contact Between Public Professionals and Citizens. Public Administration, 91(2), 469–483. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467–9299.2012.02101.x
  3. Bory, P. (2020). Challenging the Network Ideologies. In The Internet Myth: From the Internet Imaginary to Network Ideologies. London: University of Westminster Press, 117–128. DOI:10.2307/j.ctv12fw7sn.9
  4. Brahms, Y. (2020). Philosophy of Post-Truth. Institute for National Security Studies, Tel Aviv-Yafo.
  5. Cernison, M. (2019). Social Media Activism: Water as a Common Good. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
  6. Chekunova, M. A. (2018). “Diskursivnaya demokratiya” i spetsifika gosudarstvenno-vlastnogo diskursa v usloviyakh razvitiya tsifrovykh kommunikatsiy [Features of The State and Imperious Discourse in the Conditions of Development of Digital Communications]. Tsennosti i smysly [Values and Meanings], 6(58), 22–48. DOI: 10.24411/2071-6427-2018-00023
  7. Dorofeev, K., Ladinova, E. (2017, February 17) Gubernatoram predstoit komandnaya igra v sotssetyakh [The Governors are in for Team Playing in Social Media]. Izvestiya [Izvestiya]. Retrieved from https://iz.ru/news/665137
  8. Engelstad, F. (2017). Strategic Communication and Institutional Change. In Fredrik Engelstad et al. Institutional Change in the Public Sphere: Views on the Nordic Model (pp. 139–141). De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston.
  9. Enjolras, B., Steen-Johnsen, K. (2017). The Digital Transformation of the Political Public Sphere: A Sociological Perspective. In K. Steen-Johnsen, F. Engelstad, H. Larsen et al. Institutional Change in the Public Sphere: Views on the Nordic Model (pp. 105–113), Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
  10. Gekker, A. (2019). Playing with Power: Casual Politicking a New Frame for Political Analysis. In R. Glas, S. Lammes, M. De Lange. In The Playful Citizen: Civic Engagement in a Mediatized Culture (pp. 387–419). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctvcmxpds.25
  11. Gerbaudo, P. (2019). The Platform Party: The Transformation of Political Organisation in the Era of Big Data. In D. Chandler, C. Fuchs In Digital Objects, Digital Subjects: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Capitalism, Labour and Politics in the Age of Big Data (pp. 187–198). London: University of Westminster Press.
  12. Gould-Wartofsky, M. A. (2015). The Occupiers: The Making of the 99 Percent Movement. N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
  13. Grachev, M. N. (2011). Politika: kommunikacionnoe izmerenie [Politics: The Communication Dimension]. Tula: Izdatel’stvo Tul’skogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. L. N. Tolstogo.
  14. Gubanov A. V., Zotov V. V. (2017) Sotsial’nye seti kak novyy instrument gosudarstvennogo i munitsipal’nogo upravleniya v Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Social Networks as A New Tool of State and Municipal Management in The Russian Federation]. Kommunikologiya [Communicology], 5(4), 83–92.
  15. Kendall-Taylor, A., Nietsche, C. (2020). Combating Populism: A Toolkit for Liberal Democratic Actors. Washington: Center for a New American Security.
  16. Komarov, D. (2015, October 27). Deputatov otsenyat po-svoemu. V dume Ekaterinburga sozdaetsya komissiya po etike [Deputies will be Assessed at True Value. A Commission on Ethics is Created in the City Duma of Yekaterinburg]. Kommersant [Kommersant]. Retrieved from https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2841163
  17. Koryakin, I. (2017, November 15). Zhiteley Khakasii otpravili v les. Chem zapomnilas’ “Pryamaya liniya” gubernatora respubliki [The Inhabitants of Hakasia were Sent to the Forest. What has Stayed in People’s Memory after the Governor of the Republic’s Direct Address?]. Kommersant FM [Kommersant FM]. Retrieved from https://www.kommersant.ru /doc/3468140
  18. Mitchenkov, M. (2015, February 17). ZHKKH — eto tri veselye bukvy [HCS (Housing and Communal Services) — is Three Fun Letters]. Kommersant FM [Kommersant FM]. Retrieved from https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2669506
  19. Morozov E. (2014) Setevye illyuzii. Temnaya storona svobody v Internete [Network Illusions. Dark Side of Internet Freedom]. Moskva: AST: CORPUS.
  20. Murashchenkov, S. V. (2016). Sotsial’nye seti kak instrument organizatsii effektivnoy politicheskoy kommunikatsii grazhdanskogo obshchestva i organov vlasti v sovremennoy Rossii [Social Media as a Tool of Effective Political Communication of Civil Society and Public a Uthorities in Modern Russia]. Izvestiya TulGU. Gumanitarnye nauki [Izvestiya Tula State University], 4, 35–40.
  21. Naerland, T. U. (2020). The Political Significance of Data Visualization: Four Key Perspectives. In M. Engebretsen, H. Kennedy (Eds) Data Visualization in Society (pp. 63–74). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI:10.2307/j.ctvzgb8c7.10
  22. Obedin, V., Petrova, V. (2018, February 19) Glava Yakutii povzdoril s “Aeroflotom” [The head of Yakutia Quarreled with Aeroflot]. Kommersant [Kommersant]. Retrieved from https://www.kommersant.ru /doc/3554272
  23. Ovakimyan, M. A. (2012). Problemy i perspektivy vzaimodeystviya munitsipal’noy vlasti, predprinimatel’stva i mestnoy vlasti: opyt Rossii [The Problems and Perspectives of Cooperation of Municipal Power, Entrepreneurship and Local Community: Russian Experience]. Gosudarstvennoe i municipal’noe upravlenie. Uchenye zapiski [State and Municipal Management. Scholar Notes], 2, 38–45.
  24. Raidt, J., Tauscher, E. (2017). Whither America? A Strategy for Repairing America’s Political Culture. Washington: Atlantic Council.
  25. Segaard, S. (2017). The Institutional Anchoring of Social Media Venues as Arenas for Local Political Communication: Perceptions by Voters and Politicians. In K. Steen-Johnsen, F. Engelstad, H. Larsen Institutional Change in the Public Sphere: Views on the Nordic Model (pp. 118–138), Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
  26. Shestirikova, M. (2018, December 28). Ministr sotsrazvitiya Samarskoy oblasti predlozhila odinokim mamam vyrashchivat’ edu na ogorodakh [The Minister of Social Development of the Samara Region Suggested that Single Mothers Grow Food in Their Vegetable Gardens]. Komsomolskaya Pravda [Komsomol Truth]. Retrieved from https://www.samara.kp.ru /daily/26926/3974072/
  27. Shilova, S. (2013, July 9). I.o. glavy upravy Mar’ino podal v otstavku iz-za konflikta zheny [The Acting head of Maryino Resigned Due to His Wife’s Conflict]. Rossiyskaya gazeta [Rossiyskaya gazeta]. Retrieved from https://rg.ru/2013/07/09/maryino-site-anons.html
  28. Shulepova E. (2012, November 9). Prokuratura trebuet nakazat’ deputata [The Public Prosecutor’s Office Demands the Punishment of the Deputy]. Rossiyskaya gazeta [Rossiyskaya gazeta]. Retrieved from https://rg.ru/2012/11/09/reg-cfo/deputat.html
  29. Thorikov, B. A., Kornev, V. V. (2018). Internet-kommunikatsii gosudarstvennykh grazhdanskikh sluzhashchikh: mezhdunarodnyy opyt i rossiyskaya praktika [Internet Communications of State Civil Employees: International Experience and Russian Practice]. Nauchnye vedomosti Belgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Pravo [Scientific Statements of the Belgorod State University. Series: Philosophy. Sociology. Right], 4, 633–639.
  30. Timmermans, J. (2015). Playing with Others: The Identity Paradoxes of the Web as Social Network. In V. Frissen, S. Lammes, M. De Lange Playful Identities: The Ludification of Digital Media Cultures (pp. 289–290). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt14brqd4.20
  31. Trottier, D. (2017). Digital Vigilantism as Weaponisation of Visibility. Philosophy & Technology, 30(1), 55–72. DOI: 10.1007/s13347–016–0216–4
  32. Trottier, D. (2018). Revisiting Privacy in Public Spaces in the Context of Digital Vigilantism. Surveillance, Privacy and Public Space. Taylor and Francis.
  33. Vasterman, P. (2005). Media-hype. Self-Reinforcing News Waves, Journalistic Standards and the Construction of Social Problems. European Journal of Communication, 20(4), 508–530. DOI:10.1177/0267323105058254
  34. Volkova, A.V. (2014). Sovremennaya publichnost’ i publichnye tsennosti: rossiyskie i zarubezhnye praktiki [Contemporary Public Sphere and Public Values: Russian and Foreign Practices]. Vestnik SPbGU [SPbSU Bulletin], 6(1), 111–118.
  35. Volkova, A. V. (2019) Tsifrovaya bditel’nost’: etika setevoy kommunikatsii i predely grazhdanskogo kontrolya [Digital Vigilance: The Ethics of Network Communication and the Limits of Civilian Control]. Evraziyskaya integratsiya: ekonomika, pravo, politika [Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics], 3, 59–64.
  36. Volkova, N. (2012, October 31). “Ya vam protru glaza”. Glava rayona obmateril inspektora GIBDD. Rossiyskaya gazeta — Stolichnyy vypusk [”I’ll Show you Who is Who.” The District Chief has Badmouthed the SRS (State Road Safety) Inspector]. Rossiyskaya gazeta [Rossiyskaya gazeta]. Retrieved from https://rg.ru/2012/10/30/reg-pfo/glava.html
  37. Wien, C. (2018). Much ado about nothing Five Media Hypes in a Comparative Perspective. In Vasterman P. From Media Hype to Twitter Storm (pp. 1–6). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt21215m0.11
  38. Yurshina, M. (2017, March 13). Zakonotvorchestvo vyshlo v sotsseti [Lawmaking was Published on Social Networks]. Izvestiya [Izvestiya]. Retrieved from https://iz.ru/news/669813