Introduction
Itis necessary to consider information needs of the modern person as need formessages of the certain maintenance and the form which are necessary for peoplefor orientation in the surrounding reality, specifications of a theworld-outlook, for a choice of a line of conduct and the decision of problemsituations, for achievement of internal balance and coordination with thesocial environment. Without satisfaction of these needs purposeful reasonableactivity of the person is impossible. Therefore a degree of development ofinformation needs and their satisfactions are closely connected to socialactivity of the person. As the data of sociological researches show,information needs in groups of an audience with the maximum degree of socialactivity are most intensively advanced and realized: members of electivebodies, public organizations, non-staff authors of mass-media, etc. It onceagain confirms the importance of inclusion of information needs in the numberof criteria of efficiency of mass media their role in satisfaction of thepopulation.
Thusit is necessary to distinguish concepts information needs and thematicinterests of an audience. Information needs are social by the nature andthey are also caused first of all by the maintenance, the structure of dailyactivity of the individual, including his objective characteristicsprofessional and public work.
Thematicinterests are the subjective reflection and the expression of informationneeds. They depend on the maintenance of the offered information and fromsituational social-psychological factors (such, as popularity, topicalcharacter, prestigiousness of the certain themes, persons, the phenomena,etc.). Not all the information needs are realized by the subject and areexpressed in his thematic interests and communication behaviour; some of themremain not realized and consequently non-realized for the lack of necessarydata, insufficiency of sources of the information, backwardness of communicativeskills, etc.
Aswell as any other needs, information raises the activity of people. If they arenot satisfied with the messages transferred by mass-media the audience orsearches for the necessary information in other channels, or suppresses needfor such information, and, hence, the activity in this sphere. Therefore it isimportant to know, how the satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) of the certaininformation needs can affect character and efficiency of daily activity ofpeople, on their activity in various spheres of a public life. In fact theinfluence of radio and TV on public consciousness is measured not by number (oreven quality) of pictures and ability of these means to induce a person or asocial group to join in activity of a society at various levels – from adirect, nearest environment before social movements of a world scale.
Thegeneral tendency, which accompanies distribution of the urbanized way of lifeand introduction of general secondary education to our country, is theincreasing of a variety of information needs, and the reference of theincreasing part of the population to various mass media. On the one hand, itcreates preconditions for increasing of system effectiveness of masscommunications, and on another hand, requirements to the maintenance andefficiency of transmitted messages raise.
1. Stages of development of the Russian mass-media
1.1Russian mass-media as the tool of democracy
Sincethe time of disintegration of the USSR in Russia people speak much aboutdemocracy in the country. But becoming of democracy in Russia experiences thecomplex period of formation. Perfection of methods of the state participationin economy, a guarantee of legitimate rights of subjects of managing,acceleration of social and spiritual development is necessary. It is especiallyactually because in new Russian statehood such democratic principles, as rightsand personal freedoms, variety of patterns of ownership, division ofauthorities, the responsibility before people, multi-party system, a priorityof the right and legality are incorporated. And one of three bases offunctioning of the democratic state is independent mass media.
InitialRussian substantiations of necessity a free press amazingly resembled theirAmerican predecessors. It was considered, that the independent fourth authoritywill open and investigate potential abusing and «mistakes» of executive,legislative and judicial branches of authority. She should provide citizenswith the full and objective information necessary for democraticself-management promote «clearing» of simple people from socialism, consolidatecitizens of the country in support of the government during the time of the mostdifficult political and economic changes.
mass media authority intervention1.2 The Russian law on mass-media of 1991
Thelaw «About mass media», signed by President Yeltsin in two days after formaldisintegration of Soviet Union in December, 1991, represented the version ofthe certain ideal in mutual relations of the state and mass-media. The lawproclaimed revolutionary positions for that period: freedom of the massinformation (free search, reception, manufacture and distribution ofmass-media, free establishment of mass-media, possession, using and the orderthem, etc.), Inadmissibility of censorship, inadmissibility of the requirementat registration of mass-media of other documents, except for specified in theLaw, are proclaimed rights on reception of the information and wide enoughrights of the journalist. At the same time the new law defined a zone ofnational interest in formation of public consciousness. Inadmissibility of useof mass media with a view of fulfillment of penal acts, for disclosure of thestate secret admitted, for an appeal to capture of authority, violent changeconstitutional building and integrity of the state, kindling of national,class, social, religious intolerance or break a set, for propagation of war.
Oneof the first independent newspapers became the newspaper «Direct speech». Itsfounders were young journalists from a regional newspaper. The newspaper widelyrepresented becoming of parliamentary and legislature both on places, and at afederal level, and the newspaper was distributed in a few regions of thecountry.
Inautumn 1994 the State Duma approved the bill of amendments and additions to alaw in force, interfering federal and regional authorities to be founders ofmass media, except for those of them who publish only official documents.
Atthe same time the hand of the state is appreciable in with what meanness itworries about a way of the organization editorial (basically newspaper) theenterprises. The law illustrates the concern even internal newspaper hierarchy.It is expressed in the requirement of the contract between the founder and theeditor-in-chief, in the coordination of the rights and duties between the editor,the founder and journalists, in too much underground group of duties of thefounder, the editor, edition, and journalists.
Insummer 1994 the bill of the state support of mass media was developed. Itaspired to resolve a lot of problems and needs of growing independent press.This law represented a cross between the American tradition of non-interferenceof the state in activity of mass media and practice of the Soviet past. Thislaw entered the following changes:
Revolutionson realization of production of mass-media, editorial, publishing andpolygraphist activity on manufacture of newspapers, magazines and productionconnected to formation, a science and culture were released from the VAT;
Editionswere released from the profit tax regarding the federal budget and regarding,directed by them on financing incomes; the periodical press and bookproduction, and also a paper, polygraphist materials and the equipment werereleased from the customs;
Editionsof mass-media acquired the right to use post, telephone and cable communicationunder the tariffs stipulated for the budgetary organizations, pay a rent in thebuildings being the federal property, under tariffs and the rates which are notexceeding cultures established for the organizations.
However,this law could not any more rescue the newspaper, which did not sustain thebegun inflation. The financial need has quickly put a significant part of newprivate press on a side of existence and has made its more and more dependentfrom the governmental grants.
1.3Disputes around the new law and returning of censorship
In1992 the conflict around the distribution of authority in the society becamedeeper. The law of 1991 concerned mostly immunity of press from thegovernmental intervention. But disagreements inside the ruling building haveshown disputes about the control over groups of interests, that the purpose ofimmunity is not achieved. The main center of struggle and politicaldelimitation became redistribution of the control over mass media and especiallythe control over TV that as a result has led to storm of Ostankino. Fights forthe control over mass media became sharper in 1992 and in the beginning of1993. They were reflection of fatal enmity between the President andParliament.
Yeltsin’sdecree «About guarantees of information stability and requirements to tele-andradio – broadcasting» on the one hand protected TV reporters, from another one;its aim was the compulsion of press to loyalty to the President, but not toParliament. Minister of Press and information, Michael Fedorov, retired onAugust, 21, 1993, having accused in all mortal sins the parliamentarysupervisory councils which, under his statement, have been already founded andhave started to work everywhere in regions: «They have already distributed abroadcasting time. They solve, who can be shown, and who is not present. Listsof desirable and undesirable announcers … the Ultimate goal of this gameconsists of introduction of censorship of freedom and freedom of censorship». Toone of principal causes of this hot opposition between the President and theSupreme Soviet in summer and autumn of 1993 became a question on the controlover mass media. And though nobody meant, that the mass media are necessary forthe construction of the democratic state as there was an ordinary struggle forthe authority, invocations of all parties to a duty to protect freedom of pressnevertheless were typical.
Signingby Yeltsin on September, 21 the decisions on the postponement of activity, andthen and on dissolution of Parliament led to immediate introduction ofcensorship. At least ten newspapers were closed in Moscow after the events ofthe beginning of October, 1993, and at first all newspapers which have beenobliged before the publication were exposed to censorship to represent thematerials on check in the Government. Referring to the law on mass-media, onSeptember, 23 Council of Ministers disposed about time closing additionalnumber of mass-media, namely newspapers, magazines, radio and televisionprograms of the Supreme Soviet. The shift from law to force was characterizedby bloody fight in Ostankino, becoming one of last certificates of the conflictbetween the President and Parliament. To the television cameras, which showedthe stages of route and destructions, were able to show as well, that thecontrol proceeding from the law was only a thin veil under which the armedmarch, capture of the tower-transmitter or an arbitrariness of censorship werealways ready to arise.
1.4Strengthening the rights of mass-media and their restriction
Afterfight for Ostankino the condition reminding leadership of the right wasrestored. In January, 1994 the Governmental order «Questions of maintenance ofthe edition and distribution of mass media, production of polygraphistmanufacture» was issued. For the development of pluralistic broadcast systemsof Russia the important step was Yeltsin’s order to license for a televisionannouncement of the private company of NTV. Then, in 1994 the Law on the state supportof mass media about which we spoke above was also developed.
However,despite of rhetorical independence, regular counteraction to growth ofnongovernmental TV was observed though many years have passed after thedisintegration of Soviet Union. In 1994 when the company of NTV began tothreaten strongly to the domination of the Central TV in display of news, theGovernment has threatened to withdraw its license because of ostensiblyunfavorable representation of Yeltsin’s military campaign in the ChechenRepublic. In 2001 NTV closed, after it TV – 6 was also closed. It is possibleto speak as much as necessary about the economic reasons of closing of thesebroadcasting companies, however the interest of authority in their absence inthe information market was too obvious.
Manymunicipalities both local and regional received the channels or began toparticipate in the private channels organized as joint venture. Besides thegovernment has disposed in spring 1994, that the state channels should havelimited time given to the independent organizations for an announcement oftheir materials. On the market of advertising the manipulations directed oncausing harm to small independent enterprises whereas large state channelsincreased number of advertising minutes. In this atmosphere the Agency of theUSA on the international development has decided to carry out the program ofsupport of independent TV, broadcasting and press of Russia in hope for thatrole which they can play in expansion and strengthening of democracy. Theagency defined the purposes: Financial practical and politically independentnongovernmental sector of mass-media is the basic mechanism of maintenance ofthe responsibility of the democratic government for the actions; such sector isuseful to maintenance of truthfulness of existing state mass-media, such sectorprotects freedom of press. The agency wanted to reduce the influence, whichstate could render on nongovernmental press due to the economic control overtypographical capacities, distribution and information networks.
2.Mass-media in Russia after 2000
2.1 Role of the state in becoming mass-media
«Inbecoming of mass-media in Russia as a tool of democracy the major role belongsto the state. Therefore the state doctrine is necessary concerning mass media.In this doctrine it is necessary to define precisely, that the state institutesfrom mass-media as want the tool of becoming of a democratic society,»professor of the Moscow State University, the doctor of sociological sciences M.P. Bocharovsaid. At the same time he noted, that in a society in ten years of democracyoccurs reconsideration of democracy and of the role of mass media. Mass mediaas the tool of democracy is that that have made to promote formation of themain tool of democracy – the civil society.
Certainly,the TV in new market conditions remains the major resource. According tostatistics, 91% of the population of the country the watch TV every day. Everysecond person in Russia switch on TV as soon as enters into the house. 55% haveTV at home. So it is possible to say that TV is a fundamental instrument oflife-support, which alongside with «paper» mass media gives representationabout significant persons, treatment of an economic and political situation,representation about social values, priorities, habits, stereotypes, myths. Buttoday mass media do not solve with this problem.2.2 Latent forms of the state intervention
Problemsexisting today in sphere of mass-media are based on the fact that the state,having declared about freedom of press, in practice constantly interferes withactivity of mass media, does not give an opportunity of high-grade developmentof independent mass-media. This intervention is expressed in an ambiguity oflegislative formulations, in an establishment of discrimination taxinstallations for objectionable mass media.
Fromthe point of view of a principle of leadership of the right there exist threebasic attributes of the estimation of language of the laws concerning tomass-media: 1) simplicity and clearness, 2) a way of distribution, 3)availability. In the United States the idea of simplicity and clearness isfixed in the doctrine, which says, that the law has no validity in case of hisvagueness. One example from practice of the Russian mass media shows us thesituation in our country. According to law №191 from 1.12.95 «About the statesupport of mass media», editorial, publishing on manufacture … newspaperproduction are released from the tax to the added cost. On the basis of thespecified laws the State Tax Service has issued the instruction for thedivisions in which «deciphers» positions of laws: «Can be released fromtaxation on the added cost а) revolutions on realization of production of massmedia; б) the means acting from advertisers-customers also are not assessed onthe added cost». Comparing to the positions of laws and instructions, theunequivocal conclusion arises: tax specialists got to know, that gathering byedition of means from advertisers-customers is editorial activity onmanufacture by newspaper production. As gathering and publication ofannouncements of physical persons is precisely the same activity for edition,as gathering and publication of advertising (authors of announcements arephysical persons and legal persons differ only), the edition found lawful tonot assess the VAT as well the means, which have acted from physical persons.
Inspite of existing of judicial precedents, strangely enough, that acceptance ofother, opposite decisions was not affected. Here is important that the authorof clause in «the Russian newspaper» writes that it is possible to prove, thatneither balances of the enterprises, nor announcements of employment also arenot assessed with the VAT. But judiciary practice in Russia is extremelyambiguous.
Itis even easier to manipulate mass media at a local level because officials havealmost unlimited the circle of their opportunities. Such opportunities openmany ways in manipulation the laws, which have been not directed, literally,against the maintenance, but at the seeming neutrality in relation to themaintenance actually giving an opportunity to influence decision-making processby editors of mass media.
Theattempts to restrain freedom of press were undertaken during the last years.One of the last was the initiative of Legislative assembly of the NizhniyNovgorod area about modification in clause 16 «the Law on mass-media». Thechanges concern increasing of the responsibility of mass media for the insultof honour and advantage of physical persons. As the new edition declare, anycitizen can start an action and insist on liquidation of this or that massmedia which during a year touched his honour and advantage, giving to thepublic the false data. Thus the facts of such behaviour of mass media should beconfirmed with court. Chairman of Legislative assembly Dmitry Bednjakov noted,that this initiative starts to be effective more and more because of theprofessionalism at mass media that frequently is not sufficient. In spite ofthe fact that the last edition of clause 16 precisely enough registers theorder of the termination or stay of activity of mass media, the next attempt isdone to restrain more mass media in their rights, to put in dependencepractically on any person. There is no doubt, that the State Duma that willgive advantages for elimination of objectionable editions could accept thisaddition. It is necessary to hope only, that deputies of the State Duma aremore democratic to reject the specified initiative of the Nizhniy Novgorodmembers of parliament.2.3 Monitoring by authority of regional editions
When theRussian mass media just started to come to the senses after the shock events ofthe middle of 90th years, The August default of 1998 burst. Practically on theorder the price for paper grew, the advertising market fell. The press againappeared in an economic hole. It was necessary to use the advantage ofpolitical forces to buy up mass media, to receive control above them. It’sknown, that the control carry out basically powerful political or economicgroups. But as the «big» economy is inseparable from a policy and it isnecessary to speak only about political control.
Thereare the data showing, that in each of regions of Russia there are newspapers(from one and more). From them 67 (79,8% of regional newspapers) or directlyare founded (and, accordingly, are financed) by municipal institutions of localgovernment, or with participation of a share of the municipal property. Ninenewspapers (10,7% from the general number) represent the industrial enterprisesor groups of the industrial enterprises. And only six newspapers (7% from thegeneral number of regional press) are private.
Thus,if to start with a parcel, that free mass media – the tool of democracy, thenin the whole country (not considering mega cities) there’s no more democracytoday than seven percent.
2.4Necessity of changes for sphere of mass media
Todaythe distribution of mass information gradually becomes a unique sphere ofenterprise activity (certainly, the question is the notorious seven percent ofprivate newspapers). However in this sphere successful private enterprises arecompelled to compete to the unprofitable monsters founded by the stateauthorities and management. The budgetary funds directed on a covering oflosses of mass-media, for example, in Mordovia, can be comparable to charges onall youth policy, all cultures and all sports, taken together. A similarsituation can be found in other regions. For example, in budget of area ofNizhniy Novgorod in 2002 it was planned to allocate 36 million 114 thousandrubles on the maintenance of mass media while, for example, on development ofphysical culture and sports this year the area has planned to exhaust 34821thousand rubles. And the comparison of charges of the regional budget shows,that, for example, in 2000 on mass media it was spent 947 thousand rubles (theexcess from planned was 349%) while on major overhaul to structures of housingand communal services of area it is allocated 777 thousand rubles (it isfinanced from the plan of 9,06% of percent), under clause «physical culture» – 55thousand rubles (are financed only 20% from the plan). And at the same time itis necessary to mention, that despite of financial injections, the state andmunicipal mass media do not consult with the problems, the main of which is theformation of public opinion. Nowadays the state mass media can assert any intereststhat are necessary to satisfy, but not the interests of the state. Basicallypublic funds are spent for the protection of quite concrete private interestsof officials. That one pre-election campaign ИБ lead to the Mordovianmass-media «All Russia» when the only propaganda number of the newspaper «Newsof Mordovia» was issued by circulation in thousands of copies though usualcirculation is necessary in some thousands only.
Thereare arguments against the deprivation of the state and municipal mass media ofstate grants: there should be the newspapers reflecting the point of view ofauthorities. Journalists of the newspapers, deprived grants, will stay withoutwork. Closing of any mass media is the pressure upon a freedom of speech. Atthe present stage all the existing and possible arguments are quite fairbecause there is nothing to object on similar socialist demagogy. The fact,that the state press doesn’t exist in really democratic countries, and,probably, never existed, will not convince officials.
Grantsof the state press are the money, which has been spent in vein. Editorialcollectives got used to getting some money state that made themnonprofessional, in editions there is no economic planning, debts for municipalservices, rent, polygraphist services grew. The position on the market ofadvertising is very weak. Popularity among readers is low. In editions there isno elementary management, nobody thinks of minimization of expenses(alternative distribution, minimization of expenses on the stage ofpreparation, an optimum, flexible, stimulating payment, etc.) As an example itis possible to compare today’s circulations of the private and statenewspapers. The difference in circulation as a parameter of popularity amongreaders, confirms everything that was said before.
Conclusion
Thestate policy existing today in Russia in sphere of mass media is inefficient,does not stimulate the occurrence of free, independent editions. Absence offree press as a tool of democracy does not promote development of a genuinedemocracy in the country, especially on places. Individual independent editionscannot affect in a due measure the deepening of democracy. The system of massmedia existing today serves basically the interests of officials, politicalforces and oligarchs (including the regional level), serves as the tool ofstruggle for authority, elimination of objectionable contenders in sphere of apolicy and the big business. The state and municipal grants in privatemass-media brake the development of competition in this sphere, do not promoteoccurrence of professional journalists and becoming of the market of mass mediaas spheres of business. The judicial system as a whole is imperfect, that isnegatively reflected and in activity of mass media.
It’sconsidered that such actions are necessary for continuation of democraticprocesses, as:
1.The further perfection of judicial system in the direction of objectivity,legal independence of the state.
2.Privatization in sphere of printed mass media, especially on places. The stateprogram on privatization of local editions, gradual liquidation of thenewspapers incorporating founders the state and municipal bodies.
3.The program on preparation in higher educational institutions of managers ofmass media.
4.Introduction of competitive system of distribution of budgetary funds tonewspapers for the publication of official documents and statutory acts.
5.Universal creation of the unions, associations of free, independent mass mediafor the joint decision of existing problems in this sphere.
6.Popularization at a federal level of system of free mass-media, theorganization in the state scale of seminars, an exchange of experience withmass media of the democratic countries.
7.Revision of a tax policy concerning mass media, prohibition (up toadministrative, criminal sanctions) unreasonable pressure upon mass-media onthe part of the state, municipal bodies.
8.Encouragement (including the increasing of deductions from the budget of higherorganizations) those subjects and municipal formations where creation of free,independent mass media is encouraged.
9.Restoration of the system of operative reaction (to recollect the traditions ofSoviet time) on the part of federal bodies and subjects of the RussianFederation on the publication and the message on illegal activity of officialsof all levels.
Undercondition of realization of these proposals the increase of efficiency ofactivity of modern Russian mass media is probably possible. The efficiency ofactivity of mass media can be investigated and appreciated only in comparisonto the purposes that are put by society for these means. The realization ofthis problem is inextricably linked with more exact account of needs of people,their increased social, spiritual and political inquiries. The attention ofsociologists to this aspect of efficiency has already noticeably increasedrecently.
Thesatisfaction of information needs of an audience is necessary for including innumber of the purposes of mass media as purpose-means for achievement of other,administrative problems of mass influence.
Literature
1. Арсюхин Е. На всякого судью довольноподмастерьев // Российская газета. 27.11.2001. №232.
2. Васильев А.А. Государственноеуправление. Курс лекций. М., 2002.
3. Ворошилов В.В. Правовые иэстетические нормы в журналистике. СПб., 1999.
4. Ворошилов В.В. Историяжурналистики России. СПб., 1999.
5. Кодзасова И. Кто на ТВ хозяин. //Аргументы и факты. 20 февраля 2002. №8 (1113).
6.МонроПрайс. Телевидение, телекоммуникации и переходный период. М.: ИздательствоМосковского университета, 2000.
7. Осовский М. Дерегулирование в сфере СМИ. //http://www.ruj.ru/osovsky.htm
8.ЭлектронныеСМИ: современное состояние и развитие. Тезисы научно-практической конференции.СПб., 2002.