Critical analysis of Soviet mass communication model (Propaganda) in context

of Soviet republic of Georgia at early 80-ies.

1. Management style and features of communications

Media in totalitarian regime includes Soviet TV broadcasting. Often it differs from

authoritarian state regimes. In the former element it is implied one state authority located on
the top of the power pyramid, which controls informational flow and is oriented on obtaining
status quo. “Totalitarian media doesn’t only control information in system but it is fully
involved producing services and goods in order to transform entirely society” 1. There are two
types of western libertarian theoretical models in media: first stands for pluralistic point of
view, which implies freedom of speech, where each individual has its own subjective truth
and accordingly has the right to express it. and the second journalistic tradition is inclined to
stay mostly on factual standpoint and leave the space for individuals to judge them. In both
cases media broadcasting is represented as a mosaic view.

The resonance theory of Tony Schwarz considered that media is more with its audial effects
than content.

Western and Soviet media theorists in the 50-ies relied on so-called “Hypodermic needle
theory”. Given model was grounded and influenced by behavioral studies, which has been
denied by empirical data. After that Soviet media theorists also refused it: “The hypodermic
persuasion model of mass media effects is now well buried under a mound of rhetoric—topped
off by a layer of supportive data. Null findings from media campaign studies have testified to
the inadequacy of this simple learning model, which predicts that repetitive exposure of media
messages is sufficient to change the attitudes and behaviors of large numbers of people in
important ways. At its worst, this model makes the tacit assumption that media content equals

1
A Handbook of Media and Communication Research Qualitative and quantitative methodologies, Klaus
Bruhn Jensen, London and New York, გ ვ .277
audience effect”. (Split signals Television and Politics in the Soviet Union Ellen Mickiewicz,
New York Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1988 გვ,181).

It is worth mentioning that Soviet media propagandist and theoretical Spartak Beglov
considered non-ideological information (mostly referring to western pop-culture) as an
anticommunist stance. Thus he thought it was necessary to immunize soviet youth with leftist
ideology. But at the same time he marked that soviet population mostly in peripheral areas did
not care at all such political terms as are “leftist forces”, “Colonialism”, “Imperialism” and so
forth.

On the other hand, banning music and generally cultural information was the result of
imperfect perception of reality. As if the “hypodermic” model was functional and just by
merely mechanical isolation from undesirable information could give any results. Considering
the monopolistic character of the political regime on information and knowledge we must
suppose that the effect of TV broadcasting could be high. According to different sources it is
clear that media credibility in conditions of informational vacuum increases during the crisis.
(Case of Chernobyl tragedy it is evident that media was the first to get involved in this crisis)

Canadian media theorist Marshall McLuhan often expressed in his public lectures his opinion
about colonial wars and compared it to some kind of cultural and civilization upbringing
process. According to his argument colonizer (in that case American towards Vietnamese)
brings its militaristic and educational traditions altogether. We can draw the same parallels
with Soviet TV as such educational instrument towards its republics. Soviet TV did not lack
heroic tone with slight fusion of sentimental forms of lyricism. We will analyze these forms
in terms of the Teleiconic concept.

American media researcher Ellen Mickiewicz describes quite unambiguously that Soviet
media, especially the printing press: Perhaps the most distinctive element of the Soviet media
system is the understanding of what is newsworthy. That understanding is not something that
the television studio or the newspaper defines for itself; it has already been set by overarching
doctrine and Party policy. The denial of plural (competing, equally valid) approaches is derived
from the notion that the ruling doctrine is based on science. Lenin's understanding of Marx's
"scientific socialism" requires that a new idea or theory be judged correct or incorrect
(scientific or unscientific) and that if correct it displaces any other that has preceded it. It is
perhaps a primitive way of conceiving scientific method, but that dichotomous view of the
scientific and the non-scientific is a strong one in Lenin's writing. He considered the co-
existence of a variety of ideas simply unscientific. Once an advance is made, the previously
held positions must be wholly canceled. To do otherwise would be as frivolous or harmful as,
say, according to equal validity to the Ptolemaic and Copernican views of the universe.
Marxism as science must, therefore, supersede all previous (and unscientific) models of history
and society. It is in this sense that the newspaper Pravda prints what its name means: truth.
As might be imagined, the charge given to the media is education (broadly conceived) in this
"scientific" view. (Split signals Television and Politics in the Soviet Union Ellen Mickiewicz,
New York Oxford Oxford University Press, 1988 p,29).

If we convert this opinion into McLuhan’s theoretical system, we get the following -
Establishing a printing medium in totalitarian regime aimed at homogenization of different
systemic elements. The primacy of printing and visual medium is clearly evident in regard to
different endemic ethnicities, which mostly tended on audial and face to face communication
culture. As McLuhan notes, unlikely from soviet printing monolith system printing medium
in American culture is a creator of communal image, and in Europe it has established within
massive areas a nations and language identities. In Russia, where has never happened
fragmentation of political power and always has prevailed collective conscious on individual
thought printing press took absolutely different role comparing to America: It served to
homogenize whole communication space. (Marshall McLuhan Understanding Media The
extensions of man London and New York 1964). On the path of homogenization, it was
necessary to create a common space of assimilation for different ethnical and linguistic
elements. According to him Soviet policy was directed to maintain its own market and power
structures by transferring local endemic cultures in a unitary printing medium.

2. From model of face to face agitation to “Electric agitator” in soviet apartments

In order to grasp Soviet TV character, it is important to mention its earlier model of

communication. This model was based on transportation communication theory, which is
described pretty simply and implies three types of propaganda methods:

a. Collective propaganda, implies converting one's ideology on the scales of individuals or

groups. Such communication mainly is oriented on intellectual and professional issues. The
propagandist should explain advantages of party ideology, argue by opinions and be well
informed by different articles. It is called a two-step flow model in America and was used as
marketing technologies, although it has lost its scientific importance because of absence by
empirical groundings. (Split signals Television and Politics in the Soviet Union Ellen
Mickiewicz, New York Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1988 p.183).

b. Collective agitation is counted on masses and higher scales, it needed special oratorical skills
and not a lot of factual knowledge. Hyperbolization as a technique was applicable in these
terms. Since the revolution people became literally more educated on the first stage and on
another got access to television. This technologic transformation affected on propaganda as
well, so role of agitator adopted TV set and face to face mass agitation let his dominant role.
(Glasnost, Perestroika and the Soviet Media, Brian McNair, London and New York 2006 p.
14).

c. “Newspaper is not just a collective propaganda instrument, but it is a collective organisator

as well” - wrote Lenin (V.I Lenin, where to begin? 04.05.1901 Iskra N4). Collective
organization includes establishing centers of party and activities on local level: Media and
political party represent unitary organization. It was a forgery apparatus for new staff as they
gained practice in publishing or involved casual political affairs. It can be said that Lenin
highlighted the mosaic collective engagement of the printing press.

Postulates of Lenin about the media included more. Since revolution he elaborated four types
of short guidance statements for soviet journalists: 1. Party engagement/Ideas. 2. Connection
to masses (Masses/popularly mass). 3. Defending right side and objectivity (impartiality). 4.
Openness (Glasnost).

Soviet mass communication forms more and more lacks face to face contact (one of the levels
of communication) and transforms more on “popular level”, “masses” and collective. Attitude
of media towards soviet citizens is determined merely by social identity and speciality
(proletarian workers, collective workers (“kolkhoz”), intelligentsia, students etc.) During
Stalin's period powerful collective industrialization formed the information space and
homogenized fully in visual terms, it was an end to the traditional communication model
named transportation scheme. Simultaneously in scale of soviet republics was developing
local-cultural heritage as a subcultural entity, which enforced education massively within its
ethno-linguistic traditions.

American media researchers quickly observed that soviet journalists (who culturally are more
inclined to audial and face to face communication) prefer to use paper notes and write down
information at their duties unlike Americans who communicated via telephone lines and
utilized tape recordings. Soviets were more oriented to literary tools; however paradoxical it
appears for us. We can suppose that technological skills were progressing slower in this case.
As McLuhan notes, commercialization of the printing medium in America required an
accelerated flow of information and thus electronic communication technologies were quickly
assimilated in the media. Although the same condition in the USSR has never been required,
which worked even in the opposite way and slowed down flow of information. Soviet
modernization project primary was based on printing medium and not TV or radio
communication, though they were quite developed, both were literary centrist
(“литературщина”). Book as a monologue discourse, which comes quite close to didactics is
associated with heightened tonality and has affection for reunite nations. Since Khrushchev’s
economic plans of Kosygin failed Soviet Union faced to stagnation period so called “Zastoy” in
times of Brezhnev. It was evident that the system couldn’t sustain functioning merely by its
resources. Pre-planning process of space, linearly projected architecture and infrastructure
caused with big losses. Ruling class lacked not knowledge or competence but real life
information and modern technologic skills (Split signals Television and Politics in the Soviet
Union Ellen Mickiewicz, New York Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1988 p.187). Only in the
later 80-ies political life of Soviet Union “returned” to Lenin’s initial forms of mass
communication on an individual level, however in the electronic era. Technologic revolution
created necessity of operational speed, simultaneous action and involvement effect on
spectator. Consequently, this “return” to changes was already inevitable. It was established by
the central committee of communist party on 27-28 of July in 1987 and offered more open
media policy in order to accelerate informational metabolism in communication channels. At
the same time TV broadcasting formats on republic level were progressing in the free flight
regime. TV broadcasting in Georgian Soviet republic started from earliest times: “Since 60-ies
TV actively tried to use expressive means of visual media culture. Though we recognize a
negative trend in TV broadcasting as well: Big amounts of information in oral speech mode
impoverished visual material and made it look like the annual reports format. Newsreel format
lacked connectivity due to its impersonal mode of narration (news at earlier stages did not
have an anchor or announcer - the voice was merely recorded on video chronicle) 2

However, it appeared that the importance of the announcer carried different functions than
the upcoming role of journalist (commentators): “... replacing announcers by commentators
had further implications related to credibility of news. Announcer is just a medium persona
between information and public, when commentator, journalist represents carrier source of

2
2012 №17 Eldar Iberi, Development dynamics of news in Georgian television (1959-2004), Intercultural
communications, 2012, №17
information and it increases credibility in eyes of spectator. Principle of personification focuses
him/her in the center of attention and so he/she should be able to interpret important events
and facts, reveal their position and skill of improvisation…Some attempts of personification to
news programs are already seen at early 80-ies: changing announcers and newsreaders by
journalists3.

As we see, trials of personifications and appearances of journalists on TV hardly preceded the

period of “Glasnost”. Real reason for it was newly emerged technologies. Live streams still
weren't available yet, so most of them were tape recorded, which was quite an expensive
means for local TV stations in Georgia. Only since invention of magnetic audio cassettes
became possible to edit raw material without economy and consequently create more
ideologically righteous production.

In addition, we should say that besides establishing massive typographic, urbanistic-

architectural, agrarian or other types of industrial centers carried local audialy resonated
mediums in Georgian speaking spaces. Public space was dominated by acoustical mediums and
quite strongly resonated in speech, singing, dance, painting and etc. which expressed itself
through ideological apparatus and ideological clichés.

3
2012 №17 Eldar Iberi, Development dynamics of news in Georgian television (1959-2004), Intercultural
communications, 2012, №17