Media Matters: A Look Into The Use Of Media In Russia At The End Of The Twentieth

Century

Jessee Boullion

University of Alaska Anchorage

HIST 477/Senior Seminar (Prof. Dennison)

Fall Semester 2007

 2

Media Matters: A Look into the Use of Media in Russia at the End of the
Twentieth Century

"Liberty sets the mind free, fosters independence and unorthodox

thinking and ideas. But it does not offer instant prosperity or happiness and

wealth to everyone. This is something that politicians in particular must keep

in mind."1 Today Russians find themselves living a life more and more

reminiscent of the ones they led during the heydays of communism, even

though the Soviet Union has collapsed. This collapse of the Soviet Union

opened doors to the public about the private matters of the past century,

people were taken out from underneath the red shadow of ignorance and

compliance and many were suddenly hungry for answers, independence and

freedoms. Russian historical documents were uncovered and published and

the people wanted to know the intricate details of their past. The period

between the years 1989-1999 was a time of discovery and revelation, but by

the time President Vladimir Putin took control in 1999 that feeding frenzy of

interest in history had started to be replaced with apathy and numbness to

the past.2 In seven short years President Vladimir Putin has managed to

guide Russian life away from the freedoms so shortly enjoyed under his

predecessor back to a more authoritarian and repressed way of life. This new

authoritarianism is especially evident in Putin’s handling of the briefly

1
Boris Yeltsin. As quoted in Daniel C. Diller ed. Russia and the Independent States.
Congressional Quarterly: Washington, D.C., 1993.
2
Catherine Merridale, “Redesigning History in Contemporary Russia.” Journal of
Contemporary History 38, no. 1 (2003): 18.
 3

thriving industry of independent Russian media.3 Russia was at a cross roads

when it was freed from the Soviet Union's lingering grip; it had the option of

providing for its people democratic freedoms enjoyed by a majority of the

industrialized world. Instead Russia has both evolved and devolved back to

an increasingly authoritarian state while using the idea of its developing

democracy to stave off criticisms by the rest of the European West. Russia's

media has been especially hard hit with this increase in strong government

authority. The media went through a period of growth and relative prosperity

under the early rule of Boris Yeltsin. It is currently facing extinction as an

independent and unbiased source of information as Vladimir Putin's swift

hand controls the flow and content of any message that reaches his people's

ears. Without freedom of press there can be no hope of a true democracy in

Russia and due to Putin’s silencing of independent media outlets he is

leading his country to democratic failure.

Today in the United States, we currently face many restrictions on the

freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution.4 The most notable restriction on

the rights of our people came in the neutering of the 5th Amendment, the

right to due process, by current President George W. Bush this past June.5

3
Alex Lupis, "Freedoms Found & Lost." Russian Life 50, no. 1(January/February2007): 29.
4
Doug Thompson. “Bush on the Constitution: “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper.’ Capitol
Hill Blue. http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml (accessed
November 29, 2007). ““Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned
piece of paper!” President Bush reportedly said.
5
George W. Bush. “Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten
Stabilization Efforts in Iraq.” The White House.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html?1 (accessed December
1, 2007). This executive order removes the right of a person to keep their property unless
due process has been given to them. Due process has been revoked in America for persons
the government deems as being potentially undermining of the war effort in Iraq.
 4

Americans need to take heed of what is happening to the freedoms of the

Russian press. In the age of increasing governmental control over

information, its suppression, and the spin on the news provided by large

media conglomerates, we only need to look to Russia to begin to understand

what is happening here. Is it going to take the unlawful abduction of anti-war

journalists here in America, much like the anti-Putin journalists in Russia, for

us to stand up and address the problem? This topic is important because we

are eyewitnesses to the obvious lack of unbiased information by the

increasingly government controlled media outlets in Russia. By the

systematic control of media coverage in Russia, Vladimir Putin has been able

to manipulate the public to present the Unity Party and himself as the head,

in the best light. The U. S. government should feel compelled to condemn

such cases as the murder of Russian investigative journalist Anna

Politkovskaya and the countless other critical Russian media providers who

have disappeared or found murdered.6 Western Europe and American

complacency and unwillingness to call out Russia in situations of human

rights violations and mass censorship in the media has helped to usher in a

new era of non-democratic rule in post Soviet Russia.7 The opportunities for a

free and democratic Russia are slipping away before our eyes as little is

being done to stop the decline we are witnessing.

6
Lupis 28.
7
Sarah Mendelson, "Russians' Rights Imperiled: Has Anybody Noticed?" International
Security 26 (Spring 2002): 41-42.
 5

The themes that I will develop in this paper include the examination of

the development and subsequent decline of journalistic and media freedoms,

beginning with the ambitious early rule of Boris Yeltsin. Also important is the

public response to the volumes of information circulating freely, along with

the trend of people becoming distraught with the political situation in Russia.

During the past seven years, Putin’s media censorship under his restrictive

rule, the attack on journalists, and the manipulation of television

advertisements during elections have reduced the advances in media

freedoms gained in the past to mere footnotes in foreign journals. Russia’s

present struggle over glasnost is not new. This is a society with a long

tradition of censorship and authoritarianism; this is also a society that is slow

to evolve. The Russian “fourth estate” has never reached the level of

radicalism or independence that it has in the rest of the modern world.

There is a vast amount of information on the subject of censorship of

the media in Russia. I will be using a wide variety of sources both primary

and secondary covering attitudes and interpretations from Russian, European

and American journalists and their points of view on the current state of

Russian media and rights. There will be discussion on how the situation in

Russia is affecting the global political landscape. I will show the significance

that censorship of media and rights has on a nation and to accentuate the

urgency of needing to address these issues in a world public arena. I will

attempt to show how the Russian people were exposed to an as then

unheard of amount of information about their past and current events, how
 6

that might have contributed to the fact that as a people they became almost

desensitized and numb to the situation of the past while their country

experienced new hardships.

The Presidency of Vladimir Putin will undoubtedly be seen as another

turning point in Russian history. Russia's return to a more powerful central

government, the puppeteering of media coverage in elections, and the ever

increasingly open stance of returning to an authoritative rule for Russia are

all connected to Putin's presidency. There is much to be said about this man

in the late 1990s, and even today, towards the end of his rule, he is still

shaping his country to be something foreign to an authentic democracy. His

time in office and influence over the media is reminiscent of an earlier time

in Russian history. Throughout its past Russian autocrats have had a trend of

trying to control what information makes its way to the people. There have

been generations of state censorship of journalists, this continuity of

censorship reaches back to the times of Peter the Great. The real anomaly of

modern Russia is the power and freedom that leaders such as Mikhail

Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin allowed their people; their role in the distribution

of information was unprecedented for Russia. Unlike in places such as

America where journalists are considered the "watch dog" for the people or

the public consciousness, Russian journalists have never enjoyed that status.

They have always been at the whim of their government; they report what

they are told to report and have a long tradition of complying with

censorship.
 7

“General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek

prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization:

Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear

down this wall!”8 The symbolic beginning of the end for the Soviet Union and

communism was televised for the world to see, a free press allowed this to

happen on June 12, 1987. The wall dividing East and West Germany, not just

a physical boundary but one of politics, economies, and social ideologies was

torn down. The divider between the ideas of East and the innovations of the

West finally started to dissolve. With the introduction of the policies glasnost

(transparency of government) and perestroika (economic reconstruction)

Mikhail Gorbachev created an environment that allowed such revolutionary

actions to occur. This remnant of Cold War isolationism and communism that

was erected during the time of Nikita Khrushchev heralded a time of

freedom, however short lived.

In Soviet Russia all types of media were filtered through Communist

party censorship, the resulting sifted information was full of “Ideologically

appropriate opinions on every issue, and even...ideologically correct

wordings.”9 The media outlets were all owned by the state, be it newspaper,

periodicals, radio stations and television stations. All were subject to intense

and stifling State censorship. It wasn’t until 1990 that the Soviet Union saw

8
Ronald Reagan. “Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate: West Berlin June 12, 1987” Ronald
Reagan.com The Official Site. http://www.ronaldreagan.com/sp_11.html (accessed October
30, 2007).
9
Masha Lipman, “Constrained or Irrelevant: The Media in Putin’s Russia.”Current History104,
no. 684 (October 2005): 319.
 8

its first “nongovernment periodicals in 70 years begin to take shape.”10 A

year later the Russian people elected their first President, Boris Yeltsin.

Yeltsin took over in a time of turmoil and was expected to be the man to

make changes for the good of Russia; expectations were running very high

when he stepped into office.

Yeltsin was popular in Russia due to his aggressive attacks on the

current administration for not pursuing a more radical and rapid change

towards a better government. Shortly after being elected as President a coup

was staged against the Soviet Union’s Mikhail Gorbachev by people opposed

to the ineffective perestroika reforms. In a picture perfect example of the use

of media in this time of turmoil, Yeltsin makes his way to the top of a tank

amidst a mass of demonstrators and military troops.11 From his heroic

position atop the tank Yeltsin solidifies his popularity both at home and

abroad by calling to an end of the revolt for his people to display defiance

against it, he called for the military to not turn upon their own brothers.12

News stations from around the globe were there to witness this staged

speech and recorded the heroic imagery. Yeltsin’s character was shaped that

day and he became a symbol of positive progress for Russia to many

Westerners. Yeltsin also allowed the program of glasnost to continue in his

government. Media was free of state censorship and independent journalists

10
Ibid., 319.
11
See figure 1.
12
BBC. “On This Day 19 August 1991” BBC News.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/19/newsid_2499000/2499453.stm
(accessed November 30).
 9

had free reign to put whatever subject they deemed necessary in their

sights. This short period of time between the end of the Soviet Union and the

nomination of Vladimir Putin as the successor to Boris Yeltsin can be

considered the golden age of media freedom in Russian history. Much like a

flame though this time of media independence was intense only for a

moment then was smothered out by all the depressing realities Russia was

facing.

During Yeltsin’s time as president he tried to reinvigorate the stagnant

Russian economy. He was popular for being somewhat radical and he

intended to capitalize off of that.13 With his election there was an unspoken

promise made between the Russian people and Yeltsin, the people had put

him in the position of authority and now he had to ensure the improvement

of conditions in the motherland. Yeltsin surrounded himself with scholarly

western economist and political advisors to help him create a solution to the

problems Russia was currently facing. The idea that was formulated is known

as “shock therapy,” rightly so because it meant trying to rapidly liberate the

world’s largest socialist “planned” economies.14 This idea, the

implementation, and the results would soon turn disastrous both for Yeltsin

and for his people though. Yeltsin had delivered the “shock” to Russia but the

13
Andrei Tsygankov. “Boris Yeltsin as a Tragic Figure.” Johnson’s Russia List.
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/2007-98-15.cfm (accessed November 30, 2007).
14
Adi Ignatious. “Boris Yeltsin” Time in Partnership with CNN.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1615184,00.html (accessed November
25, 2007).
 10

“therapy” never took hold and the dark cloud of broken promises had started

to form on Yeltsin’s reign.

The enthusiasm for information and exercise of media freedom built

steam on the back of the perestroika and glasnost reforms started by Mikhail

Gorbachev that stimulated the sense of “change in the air.” Yeltsin chose not

to interfere with this surge of free press; it could be that this was his ultimate

sacrifice. For his country, he let the press have near free reign over headlines

and reporting and unfortunately the easiest target seemed to be Yeltsin’s

public blunders.15 He traded Russian freedom of press for his popularity as a

revolutionary leader. Yeltsin would never regain his status as a champion for

the people against the oppressive but crumbling communist regime even

though he would manage to win a reelection campaign.

During the time that the press was allowed to report on any corruption,

scandal, or topic they pleased President Boris Yeltsin was in the process of

selling out his country. Yeltsin was selling his countries natural resources to

the highest bidders; he effectively created a new generation of oligarchs that

at this present time “control an estimated 70% of the economy.”16 The

people started to see Yeltsin not as a leader for tomorrow, but a disgraced

traitor to Russia. Television broadcasters had a great deal of freedom in the

early 1990’s to “criticize the many problems faced by the new Russian

government” but as the decade passed by they were unable to support

15
Lipman, 321.
16
Fred Weir. “The excesses of Russia’s rapid privatization have come back to haunt the
nation’s tycoons.” Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p01s03-
woeu.htm (accessed November 30, 2007).
 11

themselves in this new “market economy” and were faced with the option of

going out of business entirely or becoming more dependant and friendly

towards the state for funding.17 At this time there were six major television

channels in Russia and their ownership was almost equally divided between

state and the private sector. The 1990’s continued to have economic

disasters coupled with military blunders that left the people of Russia

disgraced and disgusted to have such an ineffective President. The troubles

of real life started to take over the every day man, the need to stay alive and

out of massive debt started to set in. The need to keep up to date on political

activities, historical discoveries, and watching the evening news filled with

reports of wars, murders, and disaster was no longer something the average

person wanted to keep in their life. Yeltsin had become a disgraced leader;

his economic and military policies had failed. Then in 1993 Yeltsin used

television to deliver an address to his nation to inform them that he would

take on special powers in order to better implement his reform docket, there

was a backlash and the 9th Congress of People’s Deputies attempted to

impeach him. This failed attempt lead to another television address, this

time to disband his opposition the Congress of People’s Deputies and the

Supreme Soviet. Yeltsin even went so far as deploying tanks and troops on

the Russian White House in order to shoot down the opposition in the

“September Revolution” of 1993 that was broadcast globally.18 Still, Yeltsin

17
Sarah Oates and Laura Roselle "Russian Elections and TV News: Comparison of Campaign
News on State-Controlled and Commercial Television Channels." Harvard International
Journal of Press/Politics 5, no. 2 (Spring 2000): 31.
18
Lilia Shevtsova. "The Two Sides of the New Russia." Journal of Democracy 6.3 (1995): 6-7.
 12

was able to win reelection in the face of economic disaster, social and

political unrest, the aftermath of the Chechnya debacle, and reports of failing

health and increased alcoholic tendencies. How did he manage do pull off

this miracle? He did so by the use of spin. Yeltsin’s reelection campaign had

to adhere somewhat with the national policies of the time that stated “The

national television and radio channels were required to distribute one hour of

free time daily to be spread among the forty-three parties on the ballot in

1995,” studies have shown that Yeltsin received much more on air time and

drastically less critical analysis of his term than other candidates.19 This was

a godsend for Yeltsin because for the majority of his reelection campaign he

was in such dire health that he was unable to “get out of his sickbed to

campaign” because he was on the brink of a heart attack, the press though

captured Yeltsin in drastic contrast to reality for the sake of his campaign.20

In an odd twist of fate during the nation’s parliamentary election’s the

television channels, utilizing their freedom to report on issues they deemed

necessary, spent a majority of their time reporting on the atrocities in

Chechnya and on the murder of Christian Democratic Union leader and

candidate, Vitaly Savitsky (something that was played up in the media as

“the first murder of the campaign” despite the lack of evidence of foul

play).21 Left to suffer was the serious coverage of the policies of the

candidates and their representative parties. What was covered on this

19
Oates and Roselle, 33-34.
20
Anne Nivat. "Russian Presidential Campaign Coverage." Harvard International Journal of
Press/Politics 5, no. 1 (Winter 2000): 92. See figure 2.
21
Oates and Roselle, 39.
 13

subject was Yeltsin “promoting the election process rather than any

particular candidate or party.”22 Yeltsin utilized the very popular private

television network NTV to gain steam in his reelection campaign, adding the

head of the station Igor Malashenko, as the head of his campaign team.

Yeltsin secured positive “favorable” treatment during airtime on NTV, as well

as governmentally controlled station ORT. He was played up as being well

liked by the people and having strong policies that will improve the country.

NTV was considered one of the most well respected independent media

outlets in Russia at the time and pulled in the top percentage of viewers

boasting that it could reach “a potential audience of 70 million viewers,

about half the Russian population.”23 So when Yeltsin was portrayed in such a

soft light by this respected independent channel, the views listened. Yeltsin

had an amazing comeback and defeated the “Communist contender who

was openly hostile to a free press.”24 Even though NTV showed some bias in

this election they did so with the best intentions, for “it could be argued –

and in fact it was contended by many in Russia – that the media needed to

support Yeltsin to protect their very right to survive,” had the communist

candidate been elected there would be no more freedoms in press.25 The

press made Yeltsin out to be a candidate worth electing in an effort of self

preservation.

22
Ibid., 39.
23
Ibid., 32.
24
Ibid., 47.
25
Ibid., 47.
 14

Once Yeltsin had enough of the political life, and survived another

failed impeachment attempt, he made some decisions that will affect Russia

for a long time. On December 31, 1999 Boris Yeltsin suddenly announced his

retirement and endorsed a successor “a former KGB man from Leningrad,”

Vladimir Putin. Put had recently been involved with cleaning up the media

mess left by Yeltsin in response to a comment made by President Clinton,

"Yesterday, Clinton permitted himself to put pressure on Russia. It seems he

has for a minute, for a second, for half a minute, forgotten that Russia has a

full arsenal of nuclear weapons. He has forgotten about that."26 Putin, then

acting as Prime Minister was able to downplay Yeltsin’s comments and

smooth over the incident. According to some accounts Yeltsin made an

agreement with Putin that he would nominate him as his successor and

“vanish from the political scene as long as Putin didn’t pursue corruption

cases against him.”27

Joseph Stalin reportedly made the comment, “It doesn’t matter how

they vote, just how we count.”28 That sentiment seems to shadow Putin’s

unwritten policy of “it doesn’t matter what you do, just what you let them

see.” This can also be seen through the eyes of a young Russian child when

they were asked what they thought about learning history in school, “Why do

we need history? Tomorrow will be a different era and everything will change

26
Wikipedia contributors, "Boris Yeltsin" Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boris_Yeltsin&oldid=175700050 (accessed
December 1, 2007).
27
Ignatious. “Boris Yeltsin”
28
Joseph Stalin. As quoted in Anne Nivat. “Russian Presidential Campaign Coverage.” 92.
 15

anyway.”29 With all the rapid changes in their country effecting how they

remembered past events, Russians were in a state of disbelief and rather

than leaving themselves open to the shock of political scandals they started

to tune out reports of unpleasant issues. Boris Yeltsin’s abrupt resignation six

months before the next scheduled Presidential election and the fact that

Putin was appointed as the man to fill the duties of President until the next

elections played a significant role in the success of Putin’s campaign. Putin

was able to have time to anticipate the departure of Yeltsin and capitalize off

of the momentum he had going for him now. The election were moved up by

three months and to the public Putin was the man to elect, after all he was

already successfully in office and administering policy without problem and

that is what the public was in need of – a smooth transition.

It was a matter of days after election to office that Putin started to

unravel the delicate balance of free press and nongovernmental controlled

media. Putin was stung by the journalists who were still reveling in the

effects of the glasnost era. In what is considered “acts of disloyalty” that

proved the need for government control, Russian journalists’ reported on

such events as the submarine Kursk catastrophe and the 2002 Moscow

theatre hostage crisis. In the incident with the submarine the 118 sailors

aboard drown. In the Moscow Theatre crisis 130 of the hostages held by

Chechen terrorists were left dead, not by the hands of the abductors but due

to the combination of the use of a potent knockout gas implemented by the

29
National Geographic Videos, "Russia's Last Tsar: Grandeur, Romance, Intrigue...Terror!"
November 28, 2007 (originally aired 1994).
 16

state and the failure to provide medical attention or information afterwards.30

Journalists exposed the lies that government officials were giving in regards

to both of these situations, their attempt to conceal reality failed due to

independent media outlets. Vladimir Putin lashed out at the reporters

blaming them for “subverting the Russian army and navy” and accusing

them of “cynical profit-seeking” by taking advantage of the tragedy to sell

more papers and gain more viewers.31 These incidents proved fatal to

independent media in Russia, especially for NTV. “Shortly afterward, the top

manager…whose coverage especially enraged Putin was replaced by a loyal

director, to whom the Kremlin’s instructions were a much higher priority than

the ethics of the journalistic profession.”32

Masha Lipman, editor of Moscow-based Carnegie Center sponsored Pro

et Contra recalls that “In the spring of 2000, within days after President

Vladimir Putin’s inauguration, the government launched a campaign to take

influential media under state control. The campaign began with a raid by

masked security men on the offices of Media-MOST, the largest privately

owned media group: three years later all national television networks were

controlled by the state.”33 In fact with the help of “media tycoon” Boris

Berezovsky, a highly successful smear campaign was undertaken to discredit

all of Putin’s rivals even before he won the election. Berezovsky was able to

control the media to take down the rivals of his employer and Putin obviously

30
Lipman, 320.
31
Ibid., 320.
32
Ibid., 320.
33
Ibid., 319.
 17

realized that the media is something he wants to have his thumb on as

President. It must have occurred to Putin that it would be too easy for

businessmen and media moguls to lose their feelings of loyalty to him and

start leaking information that might demonize him. Lipman’s article states

that President Putin held only one press conference a year and that the press

stopped asking hard hitting questions at this event. Similarly, other high

ranking officials rarely make public appearances that air live and are never

asked the sort of questions reports from the west would ask.34 A great

example of the failure for media to rise up against the strict rule of Putin and

his censorship is when the Federal Security Service (FSB is the successor of

the KGB) appeared on TV after the terrorist attacks in Beslan for the first

time, they and Putin were not asked even a single question about the

incident.35 Even while the story was breaking the now government controlled

NTV initially showed live coverage but switched shortly after airing it to be

replaced with pre-recorded material and then only later on went back to

edited coverage of the incident. Putin has successfully created an

environment where he would not be put in danger of tarnishing his image;

journalists have become weak and complacent with the choke hold that the

Kremlin has on the media. “Putin is a television president” who now controls

the content of the airwaves.36

34
Ibid., 321.
35
Telegraph.co.uk. “Putin’s Media Censorship.” Telegraph.co.uk.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/09/07/dl0702.xml&sSheet
=/portal/2004/09/07/ixportal.html (accessed November, 2, 2007).
36
Lupis, 32.
 18

“But this means that we also need to build our home and make it

strong and well protected. We see, after all, what is going on in the world."37

– Putin. You cannot say that Putin is not a fiendishly clever man; he has

managed his country exactly how he planned to. By the time he took office

there were three major television networks that provided news coverage for

Russia, the most opposition to government action was reported on by NTV

which was still privately owned. Putin changed this; NTV was turned into a

government friendly network run by newly rich media moguls who benefitted

from Yeltsin late term sell out policies. Putin now had all three networks in his

pocket and coverage of any issue was to be filtered through his people

before airing.38 Putin and his cabinet are now shown on television often,

never in compromising situations, always hard at work.39 These sources of

news never show the government in a negative light, this policy was

extended to both radio and online chat rooms in April of 2007. “At least 50

percent of the reports about Russia must be ‘positive.’ And in addition,

opposition leaders could not be mentioned on the air and the United States

was to be portrayed as an enemy,” this comes from the heads of the Russian

News Service.40 Reports to back this up say that “the number of Russian

37
Vladimir Putin. “Annual Address to Lawmakers”
38
Telegraph.co.uk. “Putin’s Media Censorship.”
39
Sebastian Smith. “Unreality Television: How Putin has remade the Media to Suite his
Needs.” U. S. News & World Report.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060709/17russia.htm (accessed November 4,
2007).
40
Andrew E.Kramer.”50% Good News Is the Bad News in Russian Radio.” New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/world/europe/22russia.html?_r=1&ei=5065&en=d4929f
91a6c5b2aa&ex=1177819200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin (accessed
November 7, 2007).
 19

radio stations carrying news programs from the U.S.-funded Voice of America

and Radio Liberty fell from 72 to nine since September.”41

Putin does not need to personally implement such radical measures

into his propaganda machine; his loyal associates do it willingly for him. This

is the perfect situation for Putin to be in, sitting back with positive news

coverage by a media that is self censoring and pandering to his preferences.

The journalists themselves comment "You basically know what's prohibited

it’s clear to all of us which camp the owner [of the media outlet] belongs to,

and what information is allowed. I cannot write anything concerning

Berezovsky himself, or his business partners or ventures, and of course I

cannot touch the Kremlin. With Luzhkov, I cannot write about Moscow or the

city authorities.”42

A recent incident in 2007 where in the streets of the capital city “54

people were beaten badly enough by the police that they sought medical

care” not a single news report reached the airwaves of NTV. Instead they

decided to “lead its newscast last Sunday with Mr. Putin attending a martial

arts competition, with the Belgian actor Jean-Claude Van Damme as his

guest.” This tactic of shielding the public from negative news coverage in

41
Jefferson Morley. “Putin’s Russia – Case Study in Media Control.” Washington Post.
http://blog.washingto
npost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/07/putins_russia_case_study_in_me.html (accessed
November 7, 2007).
42
Emma Gray. “Putin’s Media War: Independent Journalism is under siege in Russia, where
President-elect Vladimir Putin surfed to victory on a wave of docile press coverage.” The
Committee to Protect Journalists.
http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2000/Russia_analysis_March00/Russia_analysis_march00.html
(accessed November 7, 2007).
 20

favor of upbeat reports that show off the President as a strong and popular

leader is custom made for its intended audience, the Russian people who are

tired of seeing the ugly side of life. “The Russian President does not regard

the media as a self-sufficient public institution, but as a tool for manipulation

which must be used in the interests of what he sees as the greater public

good,” Putin’s government sees itself as both giving the people what they

want and what they need in the form of edited news coverage.43

According to U. S. based human rights group, Freedom House, “Russia

[ranks] 158th out of the 194 countries and territories for press freedom”

since Putin has taken office. His policies of having the Press Ministry (set up

immediately after Putin’s election to control all forms of media and their

content and in early 2007 expanded to explicitly control all journalism

appearing on the internet in Russian44) be in charge of allotting subsidies to

newspapers based off of their compliance and “support of government

policies” has helped Russia’s rank sink so low.45 In 2005 it was found that in

the annual report of Reporters Without Borders “Working conditions for

journalists in Russia continued to worsen alarmingly in 2005, with violence

the most serious threat to press freedom. The independent press is shrinking

because of crippling fines and politically-inspired distribution of government

43
Andrei Babitsky. “Putin regards media as a tool for manipulation.” Guardian Unlimited.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/freepress/story/0,,479997,00.html (accessed November 7,
2007).
44
Reuters. “Putin Decrees Creation of a Media and Internet Regulator.” International Herald
Tribune. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/15/business/russmedia.php (accessed
November 6, 2007).
45
Gray. “Putin’s Media War: Independent Journalism is under siege in Russia, where
President-elect Vladimir Putin surfed to victory on a wave of docile press coverage.”
 21

advertising. The authorities’ refusal to accredit foreign journalists showed the

government’s intent to gain total control of news.”46

Another poll conducted in 2007 by the All-Russian Public Opinion

Center brings to light in certain terms some of the issues facing Russian

people today in regards to the relationship between the media and politics:

More than half of Russians – 60% - mention that they are not interested
in politics (including 24% of those who are totally indifferent to this
issue). 37% of respondents show interest in politics. The respondents
of 45 years of age and older display more interest (43-45%), than
respondents aged 35-44 years (34%) and, especially, than those aged
18-34 years (28-30%). 40% of respondents participate in discussions
devoted to politics. Another 17% indicate that these topics are being
discussed in the bosom of their family and friends, but they themselves
do not take active part in them. Political discussions are least popular
among young people of 18-24 years of age (28% among them
participate in discussions like that); whereas they are most common
among the respondents aged 45 years and older (46-47%).47

This poll shows that there is a wide spread disinterest in the discussions of

politics in Russia. The study goes on to present findings that indicate people

have a very low regard for the media presenting information on politics. In a

list of six options ranging from the opinion of family members, the President,

other politicians, journalists, and heads of educational institutions the media

ranked fifth in “deserving respect.”48 The people of Russia no longer rely on

their media to give them information about their political officials to help

46
Reporters Without Borders for Press Freedom. “Russia – 2006 Annual report.” Reporters
Without Borders for Press Freedom.
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=17476&Valider=OK (accessed November 5, 2007).
47
All-Russian Public Opinion research Center. “How mass Media Influence Russians’ Political
Views” Press-release No. 791 of VCIOM (All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center).
http://wciom.com/archives/thematic-archives/info-material/single/8971.html (accessed
October 24, 2007). See figure 3.
48
Ibid.
 22

them develop opinions about the issues. The people are barely exerting

effort to develop opinions about their government, period.

Another take on this poll could be that one the reaches back to the late

1800’s, a time when peasant life was depressing and life expectancy short.

In the first hand account, Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia, the author

documents her interactions with peasants in rural Russia.49 She lays out a

picture that there is an inherent indifference in the people of Russia to look

back into history or to even look forward to the future because the conditions

of the present are so horrible. The youth especially are not willing to look at

their past or plan for their future because they are concerned with the here

and now, how will I live, what will I eat, where will I find it. These peasants

did not even count on living past the next crop season much less dwell on

issues of policies and government. The peasants of late 19th century Russia

refused to waste time thinking of the future or dwell on the past due to the

dismal realities of today. This pattern of thinking may very well be repeating

itself with the youth of modern Russia.

“History became front-page news” for the first time after the fall of the

Soviet Union and there was a revolution of information and an influx of

documents shedding light on topics long since buried by the government.50

Writer Catherine Merridale presents an apathetic modern Russian culture in

her article about “redesigning history in contemporary Russia.” Russians

49
Olga Semyonova Tian-Shanskaia. Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. Edited by David L.
Ransel. Translated by David L. Ransel with Michael Levine. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1993, 1-172.
50
Merridale, 16.
 23

were yearning for knowledge about their past, but it seems that after reading

all these documents and being reminded of all the horrible things that had

occurred they were pushed into a state of shock; they retreated from this

information age and “preoccupied with mere survival” became fixated on

escapism via television programming like Santa Barbara.51 The Russian

people lost their will to seek out this history, they passed that blasé outlook

onto the youth of Russia, and evidenced by the VCIOM poll that showed

merely 5-6% of 19-34 year olds had a great interest in their history.52

Students in Russian Universities seem to be simply looking for the right

answer to be told to them and scoff at the idea that history is something that

needs to be investigated and looked at from all angles. “You seem to think

that there can be more than one right answer,” remarks a student in

response to prodding by an adult attempting a class discussion.53 The

Russian people no longer have a need for uncovering their history. They have

no universal need for journalists to keep them informed on politics. They are

leading themselves to a very dark future. A society simply cannot ignore its

past and be unmoved by media censorship. The public’s level of disillusion

with their journalists, who are trying desperately to uncover stories of truth

only to find government censorship or worse, is disheartening.

51
Ibid., 17.
52
All-Russian Public Opinion research Center. “No More Than 2% of Adult Russians Would be
Able to get an A in the EGE History Test” Press-release No. 783 of VCIOM (All-Russian Public
Opinion research Center). http://wciom.com/archives/thematic-archive/info-
material/single/8914.html (accessed October 31, 2007).
53
Merridale, 23.
 24

In an article that dealt with international reason why Russian citizens

are losing their free press rights and are indifferent to this fact, Sarah

Mendelson places a great deal of blame on the shoulders of the rest of the

Western world. Mendelson is the Director of International Politics at the

Fletch School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University as well as being

Senior Fell in the Russia/Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and

International Studies; she has a strong history in foreign policy and human

rights.54 Her studies have found that the “muted response of international

organizations (IOs)…does further damage. In terms of foreign policy, high-

level Western government support that overlooks or minimizes

noncompliance with international norms and treaties helps to reinforce

Soviet-era norms hostile to democracy.”55

It is argued that the actions of policy makers and countries eager to

see Russia become a strong democratic nation have actually helped to

create a negative environment for the very thing they want to cultivate. By

ignoring Russia’s government when it violates human rights and civil liberties

laws, all the while praising it for its overall superficial show of

democratization, we have reinforced the idea that it is ok to not fully adhere

to democracy. In a quote from the director of the Moscow Helsinki office it is

said that “there is not a single region in Russia where the observance of

human rights would meet international requirements” including such things

54
Mendelson, 39.
55
Ibid., 42.
 25

as “intimidation, forced disappearances, and torture.”56 Yet the world seems

to coddle Russia, not wanting to anger it and risk it regressing even more

into a mixture of Soviet-democracy. Some of the external barriers to the

diffusion of social norms, the spread of true democracy and freedom of

speech can be summarized as follows: Russia makes a “show” to be a

country that cares about inalienable human rights and that pacifies the

Western world into ignoring its blatant civil liberty violations. Differing

agendas from countries trying to bring democracy to Russia undermine the

treaties they are trying to instill by not creating a unified stance on issues.

The fact that Russia is still a power to be reckoned with militarily, along with

their possession of nuclear weapons, leaves policy makers believing “little

can be done to curb its human rights abuses ,” fear takes over and wins in

this example.57

Not to take the entire fault away from the Russians themselves, there

were some internal issues that were inhibiting a potential democratic state.

Russian people’s views seem to be that “state security [is] much more

important than individual rights.”58 Polls are cited that show that Russians are

becoming more nostalgic for the strong leadership of the Soviet-era and

especially for Soviet era figures such as Stalin. The article concludes that

even “a decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union, gains in human rights

and democracy have yet to be consolidated in Russia. Instead there has been

56
Ibid., 49.
57
Ibid., 55-56.
58
Ibid., 59.
 26

increasing regression.”59 Russia’s civil liberties violations that have not been

addressed by national agencies, reports of false attempts at

democratization, and the strengthening of a pseudo-Soviet government have

ensured that democratic ideals have not been able to blossom due to

lingering Soviet-norms that are being reinforced by the government.

In a way the effect of the Western world not following through on

keeping Russian democracy democratic is severe. Russian government is like

a calculating spoiled child feigning at an attempt to act mature but really

manipulating those around it. Those in the position to deal out reprimands do

nothing to punish the child for fear of a massive tantrum; Russia has the

world right where its government officials want it, slowly realizing there are

issues that need to be dealt with but unable to address them for fear of what

they once and could be capable of again.

Even if he is now no longer a revered icon of the Russian people, Boris

Yeltsin did once have the right idea about freedom of press in his country. We

can only hope, for the sake of the free and democratic future of Russian

citizens, that one day information will flow freely from the source to the

people without the interruption of agenda pushing bureaucrats. "…Our

mindless unanimity will bring us to an even more hopeless state of

stagnation. It is especially important to encourage unorthodox thinking when

the situation is critical: At such moments every new word and fresh thought

59
Ibid., 39-69.
 27

is more precious than gold. Indeed, people must not be deprived of the right

to think their own thoughts."60

60
Boris Yeltsin, Against the Grain, trans. Michael Glenny (New York: Summit Books, 1990)
172.
 28

History 477

Annotated Bibliography

Primary Sources

All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center. “How Mass Media Influence

Russians’ Political
Views” Press-release No. 791 of VCIOM (All-Russian Public Opinion
Research Center). http://wciom.com/archives/thematic-archive/info-
material/single/8971.html (accessed October 24, 2007).

VCIOM uses government statistical information, archives of previous

statistics, “face-to-face interviews, telephones interviews, focus groups, in-
depth interviews, expert studies, product, packaging and advertising tests,
diary studies, and retail trade audits” and other methods to take opinion
surveys throughout all of Russia. This survey conducted in 2007 shows the
opinion of the surveyed Russians on the subject of interest in politics, source
of information about politics, and the biggest influence on individuals vote in
elections.

All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center. “No More Than 2% of Adult

Russians Would be
Able to get an A in the EGE History Tests” Press-release No. 783 of
VCIOM (All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center).
http://wciom.com/archives/thematic-archive/info-
material/single/8914.html (accessed October 31, 2007).

VCIOM conducted a survey on general public interest in Russian

history. Their study showed a general lack of great interest in the subject.
Subjects over the age of 60 showed a more of an interest of the subject than
the age groups 34 years of age and below.

Associated Press. “1991_coup_yeltsin.jpg” Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1991_coup_yeltsin.jpg (accessed
October 30, 2007).
This image has a copyright by the Associated Press; it is an image of
Yeltsin on top of a tank in front of the Russian White House giving an address
to protestors and media crews.
 29

Babitsky, Andrei. “Putin regards media as a tool for manipulation.” Guardian

Unlimited.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/freepress/story/0,,479997,00.html
(accessed November 7, 2007).

Andrei Babitsky is a journalist whose coverage of the conflict in

Chechnya leads him to be arrested, detained, and considered a traitor of
Russia.

BBC. “On This Day 19 August 1991” BBC News.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/19/newsid_249
9000/2499453.stm (accessed November 30).

The BBC is known worldwide as a reliable source of information. This

page is dedicated to the events of August 1991 when a coup was staged
against Soviet Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin made his famous speech
from a tank.

Bush, George W. “Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who

Threaten
Stabilization Efforts in Iraq.” The White House.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html?1
(accessed December 1, 2007).

On July 17th, 2007 President Bush displays an executive order that

effectively abolishes parts of the 5th Amendment. There is no way around the
fact that the right a person has to not be deprived of property without due
process, with his executive order Bush has taken away due process for any
person who he or his government thinks may be promoting efforts in
undermining the war in Iraq.

National Geographic Videos, "Russia's Last Tsar: Grandeur, Romance,

Intrigue...Terror!"
November 28, 2007 (originally aired 1994).

This video documents the fall of Nicholas II but also has quotes from
Russians in the early 1990’s about their opinion of history. This quote is from
a school aged child in 1991.

Pulitzer. ”Russian President Boris Yeltsin dancing at a rock concert during his
campaign for re-
election” http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1997/feature-photography/works/
(accessed November 2, 2007).

Russian photojournalist Alexander Zemlianichenko won his second

Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography with this submission of President Boris
 30

Yeltsin dancing at a concert. Yeltsin was actually in rapidly failing help at the
time the picture was taken but was in the midst of a re-election campaign.

Putin, Vladimir. “Annual Address to Lawmakers” as quoted in Eckel, Mike.

”Putin Calls Soviet
Collapse a ‘Geopolitical Catastrophe’.” San Diego Union-Tribune. April

26, 2005.

Vladimir Putin comments on the fall of the Soviet Union in a televised

speech to the nation in 2005 were reported on by the San Diego Union-
Tribune.

Reagan, Ronald. “Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate: West Berlin June 12,
1987” Ronald
Reagan.com The Official Site. http://www.ronaldreagan.com/sp_11.html
(accessed October 30, 2007).

President Reagan’s famous speech made in West Berlin on June 12,

1987.

Shevtsova, Lilia. "The Two Sides of the New Russia." Journal of Democracy
6.3 (1995): 56-71.

This article written by the director of the Center for Political Studies in
Moscow deals with what Russia has become since the fall of the Soviet
Union. That is, its evolution from a communist state to a complex hybrid
democracy. The article also deals with contemporary myths of Russian, the
power of those in charge, and the use of media (especially in Chechnya).

Thompson, Doug. “Bush on the Constitution: “It’s just a goddamned piece of

paper.’ Capitol Hill
Blue. http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml
(accessed November 29, 2007).

Doug Thompson is a respected journalist and wrote about a meeting

between President Bush and several Republican Congressional leaders. He
has stood by his article and produced the names of cooperative witnesses to
Bush’s statements mentioned in his article.

Tian-Shanskaia, Olga Semyonova. Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia. Edited

by David L. Ransel.
Translated by David L. Ransel with Michael Levine. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1993.
 31

Firsthand accounts of village life at the end of the 19th century by a

female Russian
Ethnographer. Edited by author and Professor of History at Indiana
University, David L. Ransel.

Wikipedia contributors, "Boris Yeltsin," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boris_Yeltsin&oldid=1757000
50 (accessed December 1, 2007).

Used as a source for a quote made on public television, unable to find

original source information.

Yeltsin, Boris. Against the Grain. Translated by Michael Glenny. New York:
Summit Books, 1990.

Boris Yeltsin’s autobiography translated from Russian by Michael

Glenny. Discussions of Yeltsin’s life, career, rise to power, and politics are the
topics of his writing. Written, obviously, to cast a positive light on his life but
also to shed light on the inside world of Soviet and Post Soviet Union politics.

Yeltsin, Boris. As quoted in Diller, Daniel C. ed. Russia and the Independent
States.
Congressional Quarterly: Washington, D.C., 1993.

A book revised from the previously published “The Soviet Union”

(1990. 3d ed.) to reflect the development of the early nineties. Part one of
the book covers Russian/Soviet history through the historic 1991 coup
attempt. Part two discusses the “Commonwealth” of newly independent
states, their economy, and defense capabilities. Part three shines a spotlight
on the independent republics on a case by case basis. Quotes from Boris
Yeltsin are found within the book and are used as primary sources.

Secondary Sources

Gray, Emma. “Putin’s Media War: Independent Journalism is under siege in

Russia, where
President-elect Vladimir Putin surfed to victory on a wave of docile
press coverage.” The
Committee to Protect Journalists.
http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2000/Russia_analysis_March00/Russia_a
nalysis_
march00.html (accessed November 7, 2007).

This website collects articles and information about the violation of

rights for journalists around the world. They collect information via firsthand
 32

account of reports stationed throughout the world and distribute their

information with other organizations dealing with freedom of press by the
International Freedom of Expression Exchange e-mail network. This article
specifically deals with the issues facing journalists in modern Russia with
Putin’s censoring of the media.

Ignatious, Adi. “Boris Yeltsin” Time in Partnership with CNN.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1615184,00.html
(accessed November 25, 2007).

Time Magazine’s online version profiles Boris Yeltsin’s career and the
incidents he had to face as a government official.

Kramer, Andrew E.”50% Good News Is the Bad News in Russian Radio.” New
York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/world/europe/22russia.html?_r=1
&ei=5065&en=d4929f91a6c5b2aa&ex=1177819200&partner=MYWAY
&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin (accessed November 7, 2007).

The New York Times reported on the news that President Vladimir Putin
has announced that “50% of the reports about Russia must be ‘positive’” as
well as “opposition leaders [can not] be mentioned on the air and the United
States was to be portrayed as an enemy.” The article follows with summaries
of the state of censorship in Russian media and uses Russian journalists for
quotations.

Lipman, Masha, "Constrained or Irrelevant: The Media in Putin's Russia."

Current History 104, no. 684 (October 2005): 319-324.

An article written by a Moscow based journalists, this deals with mass

media in the Putin regime, freedoms of media, and the use of television as a
political tool.

Lupis, Alex, "Freedoms Found & Lost." Russian Life 50, no.
1(January/February2007): 28-39.

An article from Russian Life Magazine that deals with the loss of
freedom of press that it gained in the early 1990's as well as the expanded
state power that has occurred since Putin's took office.

Mendelson, Sarah. "Russians' Rights Imperiled: Has Anybody Noticed?"

International Security 26 (Spring 2002): 39-69.

Article that deals with the reasons why after the fall of the Soviet Union
the process of democratization has not taken a firm hold in Russia as well as
commenting on society and their views in modern day Russia.
 33

Merridale, Catherine. “Redesigning History in Contemporary Russia.” Journal

of Contemporary History 38, no. 1 (2003): 13-28.

This article deals with the perception of Russian history in modern day
Russia as well as the feelings of citizens, the apathy they have, and social
procedures of modern day schooling in regards to Russian history.

Morley, Jefferson. “Putin’s Russia – Case Study in Media Control.” Washington

Post.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/worldopinionroundup/2006/07/putins_r
ussia_case_study_in_me.html (accessed November 7, 2007).

The online edition of the Washington Post is no less respectable than

its print version, one of the leading daily newspapers in America. This article
cites specific reports that give information on the worsening conditions of
journalists in Russia. It also mentioned the media tycoons who are in control
of the vast majority of media outlets under Putin.

Nivat, Anne. "Russian Presidential Campaign Coverage." Harvard

International Journal of Press/Politics 5, no. 1 (Winter 2000): 92-97.

An article written by a correspondent based in Moscow, as the title

suggests, deals primarily with the Russian presidential campaign coverage
and gives short descriptions of people in power and their background.

Oates, Sarah and Roselle, Laura. "Russian Elections and TV News:

Comparison of Campaign News on State-Controlled and Commercial
Television Channels." Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 5, no.
2 (Spring 2000): 30-51.

This article deals with the use of media in modern Russia as a tool of
politicians. This article deals with the use of television in elections, especially
during that of President Putin's campaign.

Reporters Without Borders for Press Freedom. “Russia – 2006 Annual report.”
Reporters
Without Borders for Press Freedom.
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=17476&Valider=OK
(accessed November 5, 2007).

Reporters Without Borders presents information that has been

thoroughly checked with multiple sources before giving reports about the
state of media censorship in places around the world. The 2006 report for
Russia cites multiple journalist murder/disappearance cases and their status,
as well as the lack of broadcasting diversity with the government run news
channels.
 34

Reuters. “Putin Decrees Creation of a Media and Internet Regulator.”

International
Herald Tribune.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/15/business/russmedia.php
(accessed November 6, 2007).

The International Herald Tribune is described as the “international

voice of the New York Times”. The article discusses the proposed creation of
an agency that will regulate media as well as internet in Russia, potentially
making it much easier for government to censor all forms of information
exchange in Russia.

Smith, Sebastian. “Unreality Television: How Putin has remade the Media to
Suite his Needs.”
U. S. News & World Report.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060709/17russia.htm
(accessed November 4, 2007).

The online version of the U. S. News & World Report contains all
articles that also appear in print form. The article cited the strategies
employed by President Putin to control the flow of media and the spin that is
put on the information. It points out that after such propaganda has been
unleashed on the people and the independent newsmakers have been
silenced so efficiently it creates a need for less censorship amazingly, due to
the people’s fears of being further punished for unapproved thoughts.

Telegraph.co.uk. “Putin’s Media Censorship.” Telegraph.co.uk.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/09/0
7/dl0702.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/09/07/ixportal.html (accessed
November, 2, 2007).

This article from British based online newspaper, Telegraph, cites a

specific situation where government controlled news stations chose not to
inform its viewers of the Beslan incident. Other free media outlets such as
independent foreign television stations were the only source of information
on the event.

Tsygankov, Andrei. “Boris Yeltsin as a Tragic Figure.” Johnson’s Russia List.

http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/2007-98-15.cfm (accessed November
30, 2007).

Johnson’s Russia List is an online newsletter that deals with Russian

issues on a daily basis. Funding and support for articles is provided by such
organizations as the Center for Defense Information and the nonprofit
 35

organization World Security Institute. This article deals with both the flaws
and successes of Boris Yeltsin in the eyes of the West and in the eyes of
native Russians.

Weir, Fred. “The excesses of Russia’s rapid privatization have come back to
haunt the nation’s
tycoons.” Christian Science Monitor.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1128/p01s03-woeu.htm (accessed
November 30, 2007).

The Christian Science Monitor is an international daily newspaper that

has been in existence since 1908, based out of Boston, Massachusetts it is
published by the First Church of Christ, Scientist. They have writers based in
Russia who report directly without the aid of such organizations as AP or
Reuters. This article talks about the sins of the past, the selling off of Russian
assets during the privatization in the 1990s.
 36

Figure 1. Associated Press. “1991_coup_yeltsin.jpg” Wikipedia, The Free

Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1991_coup_yeltsin.jpg
(accessed October 30, 2007).

Figure 2. Pulitzer. ”Russian President Boris Yeltsin dancing at a rock concert

during his campaign for re-election”
http://www.pulitzer.org/year/1997/feature-photography/works/ (accessed
November 2, 2007).
 37

Figure 3. All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center. “How Mass Media

Influence Russians’
Political Views” Press-release No. 791 of VCIOM (All-Russian Public
Opinion Research Center). http://wciom.com/archives/thematic-
archive/info-material/single/8971.html (accessed October 24, 2007).

Please, identify, if you are interested in politics.

Total Age, years
respondents 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60 and older
I am most definitely interested 7 4 6 7 8 11
I am to a certain degree interested 30 24 24 27 37 32
I am rather not interested 36 36 41 41 32 31
I am not interested at all 24 32 26 22 20 24
Hard to say 3 3 3 3 3 2
Are politics related questions being discussed in the bosom of your family, friends and
colleagues, and if so, do you take part in these discussions?
Total Age, years
respondents 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60 and older
They are discussed and I take part in
40 28 35 39 47 46
these discussions
 38

They are discussed, but I do not take

17 21 20 18 15 11
part in discussions like that
No, they are not being discussed here 39 46 43 39 33 40
Hard to say 4 5 2 4 5 3
Whose opinion on political issues do you consider most important and deserving respect?
(Up to two responses)
Total Age, years
respondents 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60 and older
The opinion of my family members
28 33 26 24 29 26
and relatives
The opinion of the President of
23 17 23 19 25 31
Russia
The opinion of my close friends, co-
workers, fellow-students, colleagues 16 15 14 17 19 12
from the service
The opinion of well-known and
11 8 10 13 10 11
respected politicians
The opinion of journalists,
5 6 5 5 7 4
commentators, anchors
The opinion of head of my
educational institution, enterprise, 2 4 2 3 3 0
establishment
The opinion of head of the region,
2 2 3 2 2 2
city, district
The opinion of loved and respected
actors, sportsmen, scientists and 2 3 2 2 2 3
workers of culture
The opinion of other people is of no
31 27 35 36 30 26
importance to me
Hard to say 8 10 7 6 5 11
If we remember the latest elections to the State Duma, who (or what) influenced your
choice decisively?
Political Party Supporters
Total
respondents „Unified Communist LDPR „Fair
Russia" Party, KPRF Russia"
Family, relatives 13 16 10 11 14
Television, newspapers, radio 9 8 12 11 17
Friends or acquaintances 6 6 10 4 10
Recommendations of respected
3 4 2 2 2
people
The candidates' public addresses 3 4 2 5 7
 39

The candidates' onscreen debates 3 3 5 3 -

The candidates' pre-election
2 2 - 1 1
propaganda
Publications of the candidates'
1 1 - - 1
ratings
No propaganda influenced my
decision, it was perfectly 33 33 30 28 35
independent
I always vote for these candidates 5 6 13 14 1
Other 7 6 4 6 -
Hard to say 16 10 10 14 11