Прозоров В.В. Власть современной журналистики, или СМИ наяву

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

[ 221 ]

Ñàëòûêîâ-Ùåäðèí Ì.Å. Ñîáð. ñî÷.: Â 20 ò. Ì., 1974. Ò. 16, êí. 1. Ñ. 14.

Äåäêîâ È. Óæå îòêðûò íîâûé ñ÷¸ò. Èç äíåâíèêîâûõ çàïèñåé 1987  1994

ãîäîâ // Íîâûé ìèð. 2003. ¹ 4. Ñ. 133, 134, 135.

176

Ñîâåñòü  ðåãóëÿòîð ýòè÷åñêèõ êîíôëèêòîâ è ñïîðîâ â ìèðå

æóðíàëèñòèêè. Åñòü ñîâåñòü  ñ ýòèêîé â ÑÌÈ ïîðÿäîê.

À åñëè íåò? Åñëè ïðîïàëà? Èëè ïðèøëà â íåãîäíîñòü? Åñëè

íà ñìåíó åé ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñêðûòàÿ èëè îòêðîâåííàÿ áåññîâåñòíîñòü

ãîñïîä Òðÿïè÷êèíûõ íîâîé ôîðìàöèè? Åñëè ñâèíñòâî íàñòó-

ïàòåëüíî è áåçîãëÿäíî? Åñëè, êàê ïèñàë Äîñòîåâñêèé, «äóøè

ñâîåé íå õðàíÿò»?

Ïðîïàëà ñîâåñòü «Åù¸ â÷åðà ýòà íàäîåäëèâàÿ ïðèæèâàë-

êà òàê è ìåëüêàëà ïåðåä ãëàçàìè, òàê è ÷óäèëàñü âîçáóæä¸ííî-

ìó âîîáðàæåíèþ, è âäðóã  íè÷åãî! Èñ÷åçëè äîñàäíûå ïðè-

çðàêè, à âìåñòå ñ íèìè óëåãëàñü è òà íðàâñòâåííàÿ ñìóòà, êîòî-

ðóþ ïðèâîäèëà çà ñîáîé îáëè÷èòåëüíèöà-ñîâåñòü. Îñòàâàëîñü

òîëüêî ñìîòðåòü íà Áîæèé ìèð è ðàäîâàòüñÿ: ìóäðûå ìèðà

ïîíÿëè, ÷òî îíè, íàêîíåö, îñâîáîäèëèñü îò ïîñëåäíåãî èãà,

êîòîðîå çàòðóäíÿëî èõ äâèæåíèÿ, è, ðàçóìååòñÿ, ïîñïåøèëè

âîñïîëüçîâàòüñÿ ïëîäàìè ýòîé ñâîáîäû. Ëþäè îñòåðâåíèëèñü;

ïîøëè ãðàáåæè è ðàçáîè, íà÷àëîñü âñåîáùåå ðàçîðåíèå»

175

Òàê íå òîëüêî â çíàìåíèòîé ùåäðèíñêîé ñêàçêå, òàê  â

æèçíè. Îñîáåííî  â ýïîõè êðóòûõ, êàòàñòðîôè÷åñêèõ ïåðåìåí

è ãëîáàëüíûõ ïåðåñòðîåê.

Ïóáëèöèñò è ëèòåðàòóðíûé êðèòèê èç «øåñòèäåñÿòíèêîâ»

Èãîðü Äåäêîâ çàïèøåò â äíåâíèêå 29 ñåíòÿáðÿ 1993 ãîäà, â ñà-

ìûé êàíóí ðàññòðåëà ïðåçèäåíòîì ðîññèéñêîãî ïàðëàìåíòà:

«Ñëóøàþ ðàäèî è îïÿòü äóìàþ: ó âëàñòè  ìåëêèå ëþäè ñ ìåë-

êèìè ÷óâñòâàìè è ìûñëÿìè. È êàê ëåãêî æóðíàëèñòèêà ïåðå-

øëà (óæå äàâíî ïåðåõîäèëà) íà ÿçûê íåíàâèñòè ê «âðàãó» 

îôèöèàëüíàÿ ïîñëóøíàÿ õîëóéñêàÿ æóðíàëèñòèêà!»

È óæå ïîñëå êðîâàâîé äðàìû 34 îêòÿáðÿ íîâàÿ çàïèñü:

«Ýíòóçèàñòû ðàçðóøåíèÿ ñâîèì êðèêîì è ãðîõîòîì, òîðæå-

ñòâóþùèì âèçãîì ïîñòàðàëèñü çàïîëíèòü âñå ïå÷àòíî-âèçóàëü-

íîå ïðîñòðàíñòâî». È êàê ïå÷àëüíûé èòîã ðàçìûøëåíèé: «À

íóæíà ëè íàì ÷åòâåðòàÿ âëàñòü  íå ÷åðåñ÷óð ëè ìíîãî âëàñ-

òåé. .. ×åëîâåê ïåðåä ëþáîé âëàñòüþ ÷óâñòâóåò ñåáÿ áåççàùèò-

íûì. È ÷åòâåðòàÿ  íå èñêëþ÷åíèå»

176

175

[ 222 ]

Ñëàá ÷åëîâåê. «Ñëàá è ïîäë», óòî÷íèò Èâàí Êàðàìàçîâ ó

Äîñòîåâñêîãî.

Ïîñëåäíåå óïîâàíèå  íà ñóä ÷åñòè, êîãäà íàðóøèòåëü ýòè÷åñ-

êèõ íîðì îòâå÷àåò ñîáñòâåííûì èìåíåì çà ñâîé òðóä è ñâîè ïðå-

ãðåøåíèÿ ïåðåä êîëëåãàìè ïî öåõó, ïåðåä îáùåñòâîì.

Èñïîëíèìîå ëè äåëî?

Äëÿ òîãî ÷òîáû ñóä ÷åñòè äåéñòâîâàë, íåîáõîäèìî ñóùå-

ñòâîâàíèå íåêîåãî ïðîôåññèîíàëüíî-îáùåñòâåííîãî ìíåíèÿ,

ñïîñîáíîãî îñóäèòü áåññîâåñòíîãî.

Íî ñóä ÷åñòè âîçìîæåí ëèøü òàì, ãäå ðåàëüíî æèâ ñòðàõ

îáùåñòâåííîãî ïîðèöàíèÿ.

Ãðóñòíî çâó÷èò ñåãîäíÿ ñïðàâåäëèâîå ïðèçíàíèå Àëåêñåÿ

Ñèìîíîâà: «Ïðèòîê â ïðîôåññèþ íåïðîôåññèîíàëîâ, ìåññè-

àíñòâî ìåòðîâ, ñëàäîñòü êîìïðîìàòà, áîðüáà çà ðåéòèíãè, à

ãëàâíîå  äåíüãè, îñîáåííî ãóñòî òåêóùèå â ðåäàêöèè â ïåðè-

îä âûáîðîâ, âñ¸ ýòî ïîäòà÷èâàåò óñòîè çàêîíà (ðå÷ü î «êîäåê-

ñàõ, õàðòèÿõ è êîíâåíöèÿõ», ïðîâîçãëàøàþùèõ ýòè÷åñêèå

íîðìû ïîâåäåíèÿ æóðíàëèñòà.  Â.Ï.). Æóðíàëèñòàì òàê è

íå óäàëîñü ñîçäàòü ïðàâèëà ÷åñòíîé èãðû è, âûïîëíÿÿ èõ,

ïîðîäèòü â ñîîáùåñòâå äóõ ñâîáîäíîé êîðïîðàöèè, ãäå ðå-

øàþùèì ìåðèëîì óñïåõà ñëóæèëà áû íåçàïÿòíàííîñòü ðå-

ïóòàöèè»

177

Íè÷åì íå ñòåñí¸ííàÿ ñîáñòâåííàÿ ñâîáîäà îáîðà÷èâàåòñÿ

æ¸ñòêèì îãðàíè÷åíèåì ñâîáîäû äëÿ äðóãèõ.

Âïðî÷åì, ñâîáîäà ïî-ðàçíîìó ïîíèìàåòñÿ â íàøåì ìèðå.

Â ñòðàíàõ ñîöèàëüíî è ëèáåðàëüíî îáóñòðîåííûõ, â ñòðàíàõ

ïîâûøåííîé êîìôîðòíîñòè ïðîæèâàíèÿ ôèçè÷åñêîå ïðîñòðàí-

ñòâî âîêðóã êàæäîãî îòäåëüíî âçÿòîãî ÷åëîâåêà, ïðèìåðíî

ðàâíîå ïîëóìåòðó, ïîëàãàåòñÿ ñâÿùåííî ñâîáîäíûì.

Ó íàñ â Ðîññèè  äðóãîå. Â áèòêîì íàáèòîì âàãîíå òðàìâàÿ

èëè òðîëëåéáóñà, â ëþáîì îãðàíè÷åííîì ïðîñòðàíñòâå, ãäå ïðè

âõîäå îáðàçóåòñÿ «æèâàÿ» (è ïëîòíàÿ) î÷åðåäü, òî è äåëî ñëû-

øèøü: «×åãî âñòàëè! Ïðîõîäèòå! Âïåðåäè ñâîáîäíî!!». À âïå-

ðåäè òàê òåñíî è äóøíî, ÷òî íåðàçëè÷èìûé «çàçîð» ìåæäó

Ñèìîíîâ À. Ïðàâèëà îõîòû íà çàéöåâ. Âçãëÿä ëèáåðàëà // Èçâåñòèÿ. 2003.

13 ìàðòà. Ñ.7.

177

[ 223 ]

ëþäüìè äà¸ò êàæäîìó øàíñ íà íåïîëíûé è òðóäíûé âäîõ-âû-

äîõ, âäîõ-âûäîõ, âäîõ-âûäîõ

Îáðåòøèé òàêóþ ïðèòåñíèòåëüíóþ, áåç ïðîäûõà ñâîáî-

äó âäðóã íà÷èíàåò  â öåëÿõ ñàìîîáîðîíû è ñàìîñîõðàíå-

íèÿ  îæåñòî÷àòüñÿ: à ÷òî, ìîë, îñòà¸òñÿ?! äûøàòü âåäü íàäî!

È ëþáîå ìîðå  ïî êîëåíî. À çíà÷èò, «âñ¸ ïîçâîëåíî» è

ìîæíî  âñ¸.

Ìîæíî: ñàìîìó ïëåâàòüñÿ, êóñàòüñÿ, ñòðîèòü ðîæè, ãðè-

ìàñíè÷àòü, êðèâëÿòüñÿ, òîïèòü, ìî÷èòü, óñåðäíî âãëÿäûâàòüñÿ

â ñîñåäñêóþ çàìî÷íóþ ñêâàæèíó, èñõîäèòü ñëþíîé ïðè âèäå

áóäîðàæóùèõ ïîäðîáíîñòåé èç æèçíè çíàìåíèòîñòåé, èçúÿñ-

íÿòüñÿ ñ îïîðîé íà îêîëî  èëè âîâñå íå íîðìàòèâíóþ ëåêñè-

êó, ïóáëè÷íî äåìîíñòðèðîâàòü ÷àñòè òåëà, îáû÷íî ïðèêðûâà-

åìûå íå òîëüêî îò ìîðîçà

Ìîæíî: ñàìîìó ïðèñâîèòü ñåáå, ñêàæåì, ýêñêëþçèâíîå ïðàâî

ãîâîðèòü  îòêðûòî è ãðîìêî  êîìïëèìåíòû ñâîåìó õîçÿèíó-ïàòðîíó;

ìèìîõîäîì, íî ÷óâñòâèòåëüíî è, êîíå÷íî æå, îò èìåíè è ïî

ïîðó÷åíèþ òåëåâèçèîííîé àóäèòîðèè, ðàäèîñëóøàòåëåé, ÷è-

òàòåëåé ðåãóëÿðíî óÿçâëÿòü åãî íåäîñòîéíûõ è ïðåïàêîñòíûõ

îïïîíåíòîâ.

Ìîæíî: ñàìîìó áåçíàêàçàííî ïåðåõîäèòü íà «ÿçûê âðàæ-

äû», ñàìîóâåðåííî è áåçîãëÿäíî ñóäèòü è îñóæäàòü «äðóãèõ»

(÷àñòî êîìïåíñèðóÿ ýòèì ÷óâñòâî ñîáñòâåííîé óùåðáíîñòè),

âíîñèòü ñâîé ïîñèëüíûé âêëàä â ñîçäàíèå àòìîñôåðû ðàçäîðà,

ïîäîçðèòåëüíîñòè è âçàèìíîé íåïðèÿçíè.

Äà ìàëî ëè ÷òî åù¸ ìîæíî  ñàìîìó

Â ïîñëåäíåå âðåìÿ íåâåðîÿòíî óíèâåðñàëüíûé ñìûñë ñòà-

ëè ìû âêëàäûâàòü â õèòðîóìíîå ñëîâî-ïîíÿòèå «èíòåðåñû».

Ó âñåõ ñâîè èíòåðåñû. Èíòåðåñàì íåñòü ÷èñëà. ×óòü êòî êà-

êóþ ïîäëîñòü ñîâåðøèòü õî÷åò, òóò æå íà÷èíàåò â îïðàâäàíèå

ñâî¸ î ñîáñòâåííûõ èíòåðåñàõ òîëêîâàòü.

Èíòåðåñ  îïðàâäàíèå ëþáîé íå÷èñòîïëîòíîñòè è ëþáîãî

âåðîëîìñòâà. Ñôåðà ýòèêè  ïîëå, îïàñíî çàìèíèðîâàííîå ñå-

ãîäíÿ ÷àñòíûìè èíòåðåñàìè.

Â ñåãîäíÿøíèõ ðîññèéñêèõ ïåðåâîðîòèâøèõñÿ ñîöèàëüíî-

ýêîíîìè÷åñêèõ îáñòîÿòåëüñòâàõ ìû âñå  ñâèäåòåëè ë¸ãêîé ïîä-

ìåíû íåçûáëåìûõ ìîðàëüíûõ îðèåíòèðîâ íàñêîðî èçãîòàâ-

[ 224 ]

ëèâàåìûìè ñóððîãàòàìè ýòè÷åñêèõ öåííîñòåé. ×àñòíàÿ ñîá-

ñòâåííîñòü ñëèøêîì äàæå ÷àñòî ïðèõîäèò â ÿâíîå ïðîòèâîðå-

÷èå ñ ÷åñòíîé ñîáñòâåííîñòüþ «Ìîðàëü íà íàñ íàâîäèò ñîí»

Íî åñëè âñ¸ æå

Åñëè âñ¸ æå ìû õîòèì îñòàòüñÿ ëþäüìè â ñâî¸ì ïðîôåñ-

ñèîíàëüíîì äåëå è â ñâî¸ì âîñïðèÿòèè ïðîôåññèîíàëüíîãî

äåëà,

åñëè ïîíÿòèå ïîðÿäî÷íîñòè íå æåëàåì ïîäìåíèòü ïîíÿòè-

åì ïðîäàæíîñòè,

åñëè íå íàñòðîåíû âîâñå èçæèòü ïðåäñòàâëåíèÿ î ñòûäå è

ñîâåñòè,

åñëè â ñîñòîÿíèè áåññòûäñòâî íàçûâàòü áåññòûäñòâîì, õàìñòâî

 õàìñòâîì, íàãëîñòü  íàãëîñòüþ,

åñëè íå óìàëèì â ñåáå èíñòèíêò îòòîðæåíèÿ çëà,

òî ïîñòåïåííî è íàä¸æíî äîëæíû æå âñ¸-òàêè âîçîáëàäàòü

(âîçîáëàäàþò ëè?!) â êîðïîðàòèâíîì è ìàññîâîì îáùåñòâåííîì

ìíåíèè îò÷¸òëèâûå ïðåäñòàâëåíèÿ î òîì, êòî ÷åãî ñòîèò è êòî

÷åãî íå ñòîèò, êòî äóøó çàïðîäàë, à êòî ïî ñîâåñòè òðóäèòñÿ,

ó êîãî ðåïóòàöèÿ äóòàÿ, à ó êîãî  ÷åñòíàÿ.

Âå÷íîå ñòîëü ÷óâñòâèòåëüíî ñêàçûâàåòñÿ â ñêîðîïðåõîäÿ-

ùåì, ÷òî ëþáàÿ çàìåòíàÿ ïîïûòêà äèñêðåäèòàöèè áûòèéíûõ

êîíñòàíò â ÑÌÈ äîëæíà æå êîãäà-íèáóäü ïîïàäàòü ïîä âëàñò-

íûé è ñîëèäàðíûé ñóä ïðîôåññèîíàëüíîé ýòèêè ñàìèõ æóðíà-

ëèñòîâ è âíèìàþùåãî èì ñîîáùåñòâà, ïîä ñóä ïîñòåïåííî íà-

áèðàþùåé ó íàñ ñèëó æóðíàëèñòñêîé êðèòèêè?

Ê æåëàííûì öåëÿì ìîæåò ïðèâåñòè è âñÿ÷åñêîå «ïîîùðå-

íèå ýòè÷åñêèõ äèàëîãîâ» (Ýäìîíä Á. Ëàìáåò), îòêðûòûõ, ïóá-

ëè÷íûõ ñïîðîâ íà òåìó, ÷òî òàêîå õîðîøî è ÷òî òàêîå ïëîõî â

ñîâðåìåííîé æóðíàëèñòèêå

178

Êàê ïèñàë â 1904 ãîäó Äæîçåô Ïóëèòöåð, «òîëüêî ñàìûå

âûñîêèå èäåàëû, ñàìîå äîáðîñîâåñòíîå ñòðåìëåíèå ïîñòóïàòü

ñïðàâåäëèâî, ñàìîå òî÷íîå çíàíèå ïðîáëåì, ñ êîòîðûìè åé

Èìåÿ â âèäó ïåðñïåêòèâû ðàçâèòèÿ æóðíàëèñòñêîé êðèòèêè â ñîâðåìåí-

íîì ìèðå, Ý. Á. Ëàìáåò ïðîðî÷åñòâóåò: «×åòâåðòàÿ âëàñòü, âîçìîæíî, íà-

õîäèòñÿ íà ïîðîãå òîãî, ÷òî âíóòðè å¸ ïîÿâèòñÿ ñîáñòâåííàÿ ïÿòàÿ âëàñòü»

(Ëàìáåò Ý. Á. Ïðèâåðæåííîñòü æóðíàëèñòñêîìó äîëãó. Îá ýòè÷åñêîì ïîä-

õîäå â æóðíàëèñòñêîé ïðîôåññèè. Ì., 1998. Ñ. 174).

178

[ 225 ]

Öèò. ïî: Ñèáåðò Ô.Ñ., Øðàìì Ó., Ïèòåðñîí Ò. ×åòûðå òåîðèè ïðåññû. Ì.,

1998. Ñ. 126  127. Ñì. òàêæå: Pulitzer J. The College of Journalism // North

American Review. 1904. May. ¹ 178. P. 641  642.

179

ïðèä¸òñÿ ñòîëêíóòüñÿ, è èñêðåííåå ÷óâñòâî îòâåòñòâåííîñòè

ñïàñóò æóðíàëèñòèêó îò ðàáîëåïñòâà ïåðåä êëàññîì èìóùèõ,

ïðåñëåäóþùèõ ýãîèñòè÷åñêèå öåëè è ïðîòèâîäåéñòâóþùèõ

îáùåñòâåííîìó áëàãîäåíñòâèþ»

179

Ñïóñòÿ ñòîëåòèå ýòîò ìàêñèìàëèñòñêèé íàêàç îáðåòàåò ó

íàñ â Ðîññèè îñîáóþ àêòóàëüíîñòü. Â íåì çàêëþ÷åíà ïðîãðàì-

ìà î÷åíü òðóäíûõ è, êàê ïðèíÿòî òåïåðü ãîâîðèòü, íåïîïó-

ëÿðíûõ äåéñòâèé  âî ñïàñåíèå ÷åñòè ÑÌÈ.

«Òàêàÿ óæ ïðàâäà ïðîñòàÿ»

È äðóãîãî ïóòè íåò.

[ 226 ]

SUMMARY

Current life abounds in metaphors and metaphoric phrases like power

of mass media, authoritative functions of journalism, mass media

 the fourth power, etc. The book by Valery Prozorov, professor, the

head of the Chair of general literary studies and journalism at the

University of Saratov, reveals the intricate and topical entirety of mean-

ings in similar commonplace, worn-out metaphors.

Special attention is paid to the semantic horizons of the con-

cept of power in Russian national cultural tradition. The cate-

gory of Power turns out to be applicable to the super-universals

of existence characterizing not just the governing structures of the

state and society. Unlimited altitude is rendered to the concept of

power in Russia from the time immemorial. At least three vast

and interpenetrating meaning spectra in the universal concept of

power might be recognized within the native valuation-semantic

space, these are:

first, power in moral-psychological sense  as the entire diversi-

ty of inner personal, interpersonal, kinship, family, friendly, busi-

ness, amicable, opponent, hostile and similar relations (power of

the Lord; selflessness; self-control; power of prejudices; power of

memory; parental power; power of ethics, law, authority; power of

egoism, delusion, passions; respecting power, putting ones trust

to power, being in ruptures over power, independence of power);

[ 227 ]

second, power in the social-political, socially-structured sense

 as governing the state, as designation of ruling political, econom-

ic and public institutions and functionaries; historical transforma-

tion of these institutions;

third, power as the most complicated and indefinitely multino-

mial aggregate of metaphorically manifested features and functions

inherent in diverse life phenomena and objects (natural and social);

power as the most substantial and permanently realized key proper-

ties of variously directed phenomena, sources and means of commu-

nication (power of nature, power of freedom, power of word, power

of capital, wealth, power of dark forces; power of property, etc.).

The power of mass media exists in conformity with all the shades

and entireties of meaning of the super-universal key concept of

power. The author is interested in the real perceptibility of the

mass-media power, both, from the point of view of journalists, i.e.

media-production makers, and from the point of view of probable

recipients  readers, audience, professional critics.

Historically, journalism was made up as a political-power means

of influencing society and social conscience. In a more or less sta-

ble democratic society, the press provides a serious opposition to

the authorities with the purpose of assisting the executive and leg-

islative power in adjusting and maintaining complicated feed-back

with electorate, population, people. Otherwise, we have to do with

pocket, socialite journalism, imitating professionalism and in-

dependence with all its might.

In the period of new social-market conditions coming into be-

ing, journalism experiences the influence of sponsors, commercial

guardians, advertisers: the lack of economical freedom entrails pro-

fessional dependence. There is one more significant aspect of rela-

tionship  the power of consumer (readers, audience) over mass

media. In any case, under any informational press (negative or

positive), there are diverse variants of influence and disposal in the

relationship systems of mass media  power institutions and

mass media consumers:

mass media are subordinate to the necessity of incessant com-

munication of the news on the Power initiatives or Power efficien-

cy, on the interrelations of society and Power;

[ 228 ]

the authorities strive to compel mass media to obedience and

conveying of certain political interests;

mass media guide me, my imagination and general state, influ-

ence the frame of mind of mass audience;

I can (if I manage to) master the situation in a dialogue with

mass media by breaking communication instantly or using the

interactive resources

A special aspect of the problem associated with the meaning bulk

of the metaphoric phrase the power of mass media  corporative

self-adjustment of journalism, voluntary submission of the press, ra-

dio and TV to certain rules, codes of honour. It is essential in the

socially crucial work to follow the ancient principle: Do not injure!

Possible answers to the following questions are discussed: what

are the inner resources of the power of journalism? What is their

nature? What are the ways of its manifestation in press, radio, TV,

world net? What are the means of maintaining the special magne-

tism of the mass media influence on the reading, listening and

watching individuals? What are the controversial links between the

fundamentals of journalist education and settled ideas-prejudices

that may be described as the absolute power of professional ego-

ism in mass media?

At the boundary between the second and the third millennia,

the almost fateful dependence of people and society on mass me-

dia has become most appreciable. In other words, mass media shape

our everyday concepts, the ideas of life, the picture of life as it is

and, at the same time, as it is formed in our imagination  in-

flamed and gradually getting ready to anything.

The mass-media texts, like poetic texts, do not just reflect the

reality, but mould it actively, create it. Mass media are our perma-

nent bridge between the inner and outer worlds, between the real

and the imaginary. Mass media jointly create and actively thrust

artistic-figurative illusion of reality on us. Mass media provide us

with a real opportunity to comprehend the world as an image 

through a polysemantic complex of indirectly and directly caused

moods, feelings, impressions.

Creators of media-products are not always aware of the proba-

ble response to their words or pictures. A media-product carries

[ 229 ]

the norms of its interpretation within. The so-called interactivity

of a media-text should be indisputably recognized among the most

important norms.

Imparting magical authoritative powers to mass media is sim-

ilar to ancient beliefs in special power of arts, in ideas of art hold-

ing sway over people; such ideas used to be regarded as trustwor-

thy until recently (compare: poets and literary critics  sovereigns

of thoughts, literature  life manual, etc.).

It is significant, however, that the very nature of communica-

tion, having acquired absolutely new technical outfit and enor-

mous popularity, is still almost the same in its innermost qualities.

Epos, lyric poetry and drama are still the key universal catego-

ries that may rightfully used to describe the language of current

printed and electronic means of mass communication.

In the XIXXX centuries, printed mass-media text (newspa-

pers, journal) with immense diversity of rubrics and genre, and

paradoxical equality of their rights begins (and goes on nowadays)

to act as Epos. Being absolutely dynamic, a newspaper faces facts

and events of diverse importance degree, that have already passed,

though quite recently. An invincible distance is inevitably preserved

between what has already occurred and the moment of communi-

cation-report, a distance between the time of the event and the

time of reporting on the event. The point lies in domination form

of the past tense  epic by its nature. The main feature of a printed

mass-media text is striving for looking back at what has just hap-

pened, being faithful to the time that has just passed. Newspapers

and journals realize their communicative willingness by means of

silent, reserved words. The silence is illusory. As a matter of fact, a

newspaper cries silently, appeals in silence  by all the means avail-

able  to readers attention.

Radiotext, as it has shaped itself by the present, seems to play,

diligently and unobtrusively, the role of lyrical type in mass and

individual perception. Radio exploits word and the whole of the

word-organized culture. Voice is the most powerful tool of radio-

communication. Sound quality, timbre - the entire sonic complex

employed by radio, are peculiar for increased semantic load. Suc-

cession of radio sounds (word  song  music), various voices, di-

[ 230 ]

verse speech timbres and intonations make specific acoustic world

that causes immediate subconscious, deep intimate and spontane-

ous compassion.

Of the three types of verbal art, the TV text in its current form

is most close to drama. It is full of dialogic video-activity. TV is the

most widespread and most acutely conflicting of all modern mass

media. Dynamics, contest, game, paradoxical suddenness, unex-

pected approaching and collision, excitement, shock, improvisa-

tion constitute its element. What will happen in a moment  that

is important in TV. Similar to drama, the category of future tense

is important, exploited in breaks for commercials, as well.

The features of epos, lyrical literature and drama are, of course,

inherent in press, radio and TV. The author believes it important

to determine the prevailing, dominant peculiarities in each type of

mass communication.

In the epoch of mass communications, the ancient concept of

poetry expands to approach the current extent of mass media.

The future professional journalists must be perfect experts in all the

methods conductive to creation of texts intrinsic to newspaper,

radio, TV.

The power of modern journalism correlates, first of all, with

professional conscience, with the norms of corporative self-control

and self-adjustment, with voluntary ban system for everything pro-

voking mutual hostility, malice, enmity. This is not the way to the

pre-determined, desired and irrevocable aim  mass-media self-re-

strain. This is an uninterrupted process of self-surmounting, a con-

tinuous and extremely complicated (in a want of habit) way of

intra-corporative self-restrain, promising great finds to gifted and

honest journalist. This is a constant striving for being in control

of oneself for the sake of utmost and competent fulfillment of

ones duties for the benefit of readers, listeners, watchers, Internet

users. Certain rules of honour should be recognized by each jour-

nalist in person and by the entire journalist community. It is only

on condition of working in accord with such rules (which is incred-

ibly hard nowadays) that journalists may combine power and free-

dom in Russias mass media and communication means for mutu-

al benefit.