Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the journal > Requirements for publication > Editorial collegium > Peer-review process > Policy of publication. Aims & Scope. > Article retraction > Ethics > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Publication in 72 hours: How do we do it? > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Open access publishing costs > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Editorial board
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

72 - !
. 72 DOI .
!
MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Philosophical Thought
Reference:

From dialogue to manipulation: critical analysis of modern media practices
Druzhinin Andrey Mikhailovich

PhD in Philosophy

Senior Scientific Associate, Research and Development Sector, Academy of Media Industry

127521, Russia, Moskva, g. Moscow, ul. Oktyabr'skaya,, 105 korp.2

www-222@yandex.ru

 

 

Abstract.

 
This article presents the history of emergence of manipulative forms of social management. The correlation between manipulation and dialogical forms of interaction of the individual is determined. The author reveals the essence of manipulations as a destructive phenomenon, within the framework of which the audience of contemporary mass media is views as passive object of influence. The analysis of existing at present stage approaches towards the phenomenon allows conditionally highlighting two directions in its examination: humanitarian-philosophical and engineering. Humanitarian-philosophical approach suggest the ethnical assessment of manipulation, which excludes the application of manipulative technologies of social managements. Engineering approach reviews society as the object of implementation of manipulative communications, and as a result, leads to degradation of the dialogue on all levels. The article initiates discussion with the researchers, who supports the “engineering” views upon the social management. The main method of this research consists in critical analysis. Such approach towards the problem manipulation lies in interconnection of the three levels of examination of this question. Firstly, manipulative communication is the type of social interaction, which generates the abuse of authority. Secondly, it is being realized by means of texts and audiovisual images. Thirdly, this phenomenon must be considered in the context of examination of the cognitive abilities of a human, because it actively forms the image of thinking, mental world, as well as intrudes into the sphere of inexplicit knowledge of a specific individual. The analysis of various phenomena in these three platitudes allows determining the features of manipulative communication in one or another case. The author reviews the transformation of dialogical genres of mass media into the monological expression. It is proposed to metaphorically name such texts as “mono-dialogue”. Imitation of dialogue, which hides the author-creator, is demonstrates as one main instruments of the hidden impact upon the society. Based on M. Bakhtin’s theory about isolation of one or another fragment of text (discourse), and Gadamer’s ideas regarding the questions of interpretation, the author detects the mechanism of control over the information, cognitive, and social space of the mass media dialogical genres, and interview in particular.
 

Keywords: media, discourse, power, democracy, Interview, polysemantic, dialogue, manipulation, communication, text

DOI:

10.7256/2409-8728.2017.1.18534

Article was received:

29-03-2016


Review date:

03-04-2016


Publish date:

09-02-2017


This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian here .

References
1.
Bakhtin M. Voprosy literatury i estetiki: Issledovaniya raznykh let. M. 1975. - 504 s.
2.
Belousov A. B. Edvard Berneis: ot manipulyatsii obshchestvennym mneniem k inzhenerii soglasiya // Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. 2012. 4. S. 143-148.
3.
Boltaevskii A.A., Pryadko I.P. K voprosu ob istokakh metodologii sotsial'nogo poznaniya Al'freda Shyutsa // Filosofskaya mysl'. 2015. 1. S. 1-8.
4.
Boltaevskii A.A., Pryadko I.P. Paradigmy otechestvennoi intellektual'noi kul'tury i stanovlenie ratsional'nosti rossiiskogo obshchestva v 1910-30-e gg. M. 2015. - 111 s.
5.
Boltaevskii A.A., Pryadko I.P. Pervaya mirovaya: pervaya informatsionnaya // Sborniki konferentsii NITs Sotsiosfera. 2015. 15. S. 40-42.
6.
Voinov D.A. Istoki obshchestvennykh predstavlenii o politicheskom uchastii v Drevnerusskom gosudarstve v IX-XII vekakh (po materialam pis'mennykh istochnikov) // Aktual'nye problemy gosudarstvennogo upravleniya, ekonomiki, yurisprudentsii i psikhologii. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 1.-M.: Institut upravleniya i prava. 2015. S.24-42.
7.
Voinov D.A. Printsipy deliberativnoi demokratii i rossiiskaya politicheskaya praktika // Aktual'nye problemy sovremennogo gumanitarnogo znaniya: teoriya, metodologiya, praktika. Materialy mezhregional'noi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii. M.: NOU VPO Institut upravleniya i prava, 2014. S. 84-97.
8.
Voinov D.A. Protsessy zarozhdeniya gosudarstva i gosudarstvennogo upravleniya v drevnikh apolitiinykh obshchestvakh // Problemy gosudarstvennogo upravleniya, ekonomiki, yurisprudentsii i psikhologii. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 1.-M.: Institut upravleniya i prava. 2014.-S. 119-131.
9.
Voinov D.A. Kreativnost' internet-kommunikatsii kak sposob individual'nogo politicheskogo uchastiya grazhdan // Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Politologiya. 2012. 1.-S. 117-126.
10.
Gadamer Kh.-G. Istina i metod. M. 1988.-704 s.
11.
Druzhinin A.M. Kommunikatsii: sozidatel'nye i destruktivnye // Trudy Instituta sistemnogo analiza Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. 2010. T. 55. S. 172-182.
12.
Druzhinin A.M. Upravlenie smyslami v manipulyativnykh kommunikatsiyakh // Problemy gosudarstvennogo upravleniya, ekonomiki, yurisprudentsii i psikhologii. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 1. M. Institut upravleniya i prava. 2015. S.57-67.
13.
Druzhinin A.M. Psevdoistiny v sisteme kommunikativnykh otnoshenii // Problemy gosudarstvennogo upravleniya, ekonomiki, yurisprudentsii i psikhologii. Sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Vypusk 1. M. Institut upravleniya i prava. 2014. S.114-119.
14.
Zaitsev A.V. Dialogika Yurgena Khabermasa: ponyatie i sushchnost' // NB: Filosofskie issledovaniya. 2012.- 2.-S.75-98. DOI: 10.7256/2306-0174.2012.2.148.
15.
Kara-Murza S.G. Manipulyatsiya soznaniem. M.: Izd-vo EKSMO-Press, 2002.-832 s.
16.
Knyazeva I. V. Istoricheskaya evolyutsiya form manipulyatsii obshchestvennym soznaniem // Nauchnye vedomosti BelGU. Seriya: Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Pravo . 2010. 14. S.220-225.
17.
Kroichik L.E. Dialogovye resursy publitsistiki // Voprosy teorii i praktiki zhurnalistiki. 2015. T. 4. 2. S. 139-148.
18.
Moskovichi S. Vek tolp. Istoricheskii traktat po psikhologii mass. M.1998. -480 s.
19.
Negodaeva O. B. Izuchenie problemy manipulyatsii soznaniem v kontekste riska // Problemy Nauki . 2012. 4 (14). S.51-53.
20.
Nuridzhanov A. E. Tekhnologii manipulyatsii v sisteme upravleniya personalom sovremennykh biznes-organizatsii Rossii (na primere respubliki Bashkortostan) // Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2013. 33 (324). Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Kul'turologiya. Vyp. 30. S. 108111.
21.
Obysov A. N. Upravlenie chelovecheskoi deyatel'nost'yu v sovremennom mire kak Manipulyatsiya soznaniem // SISP . 2011. 3. S.64.
22.
Petrakova A. S. Issledovanie predelov manipulyatsii soznaniem lichnosti v antichnoi filosofii // Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya . 2012. 9. S.42-45.
23.
Pryadko I.P. Konfessional'naya leksika v rechevoi praktike sovremennykh SMI // Zhurnalistika i kul'tura russkoi rechi. 2005. 2. S. 61-73.
24.
Pryadko I.P., Moroslin P.V. Problema ispol'zovaniya bibleiskoi leksiki sredstvami massovoi informatsii i kommunikatsii // Obshchestvo-yazyk-kul'tura: aktual'nye problemy vzaimodeistviya v XXI veke. Doklady Vtoroi mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii. Moskovskii institut lingvistiki; Kirillina A.V. (otv. red.). 2008. S. 93-102.
25.
Pryadko I.P. Kamo gryadeshi: ob osobennostyakh ispol'zovaniya konfessional'noi leksiki v rechevom prostranstve SMI // Aktual'nye problemy filologii Materialy Pervykh Kirillo-Mefodievskikh chtenii v Mezhdunarodnom gumanitarno-lingvisticheskom institute. Avtonomnaya nekommercheskaya organizatsiya vysshego professional'nogo obrazovaniya Mezhdunarodnyi gumanitarno-lingvisticheskii institut. M.: MIL, 2008. S. 82-87.
26.
Puyu Yu. V. Istoki i genezis fenomena manipulirovaniya // Izvestiya RGPU im. A.I. Gertsena . 2008. 72. S. 15-25.
27.
Sorina G.V. Voprosno-otvetnaya protsedura v argumentatsionnoi deyatel'nosti// Teoriya i praktika argumentatsii. M. 2001. S.72-90
28.
Sorina G.V. Kommunikativnyi kharakter upravlencheskoi deyatel'nosti//XII vserossiiskoe soveshchanie po problemam upravleniya VSPU-2014 Institut problem upravleniya im. V.A. Trapeznikova RAN. 2014. S. 7865-7870.
29.
Khabermas Yu. Moral'noe soznanie i kommunikativnoe deistvie. SPb. 2001.-377 s.
30.
Chernikova V. E. Manipulyatsiya massovym soznaniem kak fenomen informatsionnogo obshchestva // Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya . 2015. 3. S.141-144.
31.
Shestakova E.G. Ob odnom iz paradoksov dialogichnosti kul'tury serebryanogo veka // Tvorchst' V.Solov'ova v kontekst kul'turi srbnogovku. Materali Mzhnarodno naukovo konferents, prisvyachenno 145-rchchyu vd dnya narodzhennya V.Solov'ova. Drogobich, 1998. S. 80-88.
32.
Bernays Edward L. Manipulating Public Opinion: The Why and The How. American Journal of Sociology, Volume 33, Issue 6 (May, 1928), 958971.
33.
Chomsky N. 1997. Media Control. The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda. N.Y. 105 r.
34.
Destructive Organizational Communication: Processes, Consequences, and constructive ways of organizing/Ed. by Lutgen-Sandvik P., Sypher B. D. New York. 2009. 424 r.
35.
Dumoulin, M. (2003) Les Forums Electroniques: De´libe´ ratifs et De´mocratiques?, in D. Moniere (ed.) Internet et la Democratie, Montre al: Erudit. 107-125
36.
Ferrara E., Varol O., Davis C., Mencer F., Flammini A. 2014. The rise of social bots. ArXiv preprint arXiv:1407.5225.
37.
Goodin R. E., Niemeyer S. J. 2003 When Does Deliberation Begin? Internal Reflection versus Public Discussion in Deliberative Democracy. POLITICAL STUDIES: VOL 51, 627649.
38.
Kim J., Kim E. J. Theorizing Dialogic Deliberation: Everyday Political Talk as Communicative Action and Dialogue. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x
39.
Melo M. and G. Baiocci 2006 Deliberative Democracy and Local Governance: Towards a New Agenda International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Volume 30.3587600 DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00686.x
40.
Van Dijk T. A. 2006. Discourse and manipulation // Discourse & Society Vol 17(2): 359383 doi: 10.1177/0957926506060250
41.
Wilhelm, A.G. (1999) Virtual sounding boards: how deliberative is online political discussion? in B.N. Hague and B.D. Loader (eds.) Digital Democracy. Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age, London: Routledge. pp. 90-108.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.
"History Illustrated" Website