The Russian mass media system has experienced tremendous change since the Soviet era. It has been argued that some similarities still exist between the old Soviet system and the new post-Soviet media, such as the practice of self-censorship. Pressure has been mounting on the mass media's level of editorial freedom since the late Yeltsin era, beginning with a raft of new laws introduced under the guise of keeping the media ‘honest’. One contemporary influence constraining and shaping media de velopment is Russia's ‘war on terrorism’. Ever since the infamous apartment bombings of August 1999, over 1000 people have been killed and scores more physically and emotionally scarred by acts of terrorism on Russian soil. The political, social and economic costs have been considerable. Russia's ‘war on terrorism’ has provided the authorities with ample excuses to curtail media reporting, such as protecting the work of the security forces in combating terrorist activity, stopping the spread of terrorist ‘propaganda’ and protecting victims of terrorist acts. Numerous bills have been debated in the Duma on prohibiting activity by the mass media during an incident. Senior representatives from the mass media have been involved in talks with the authorities on the issue and in drawing up industry guidelines for reporting on a terrorist act.

There is an increasing amount written on the decline of professional journalism around the world. One of the factors that are used to illustrate the decline of journalism is the interaction and collaboration between journalists and public relations (PR) practitioners in the production of mass media news content. On a theoretical and conceptual level, the aims and goals of the two professions are quite different, even though there are a number of superficial similarities between these forms of mass communication. Studies of the interaction between journalism and PR in the United States reveal a certain underlying tension, yet simultaneous mutual dependency. An indicative survey was conducted across different cities in the Russian Federation to understand the perception of professional journalists and PR practitioners on the current level of interaction between their professions. The answers were remarkably similar and reveal a deep concern for the direction of journalism, which many viewed as being subordinated to PR.

No abstract

The current political crisis in Ukraine has become markedly visualized not only due to the very contradictory situation in this country but also following its coverage in the Russian media. The situation initiated new information tendencies which seem to be illustrative for understanding not only the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, but also the development of the media sphere and its role in the contemporary Russian politics. This article envisages the reasons of why the Russian media look fully dependent on the political hierarchy in this country. Following this, journalism in Russia seems to be fading and giving way to propaganda which has nothing in common with media non-partisanship. Following this, the media coverage of the events in SouthEastern Ukraine explicitly shows that this information gravitates to a simplified understanding of the conflict and stimulates the existence of stereotypes and myths as being a background for media manipulation. The coverage of the Ukrainian situation is being reflected in the presence of manipulative tools in the media as a mechanism of controlling people's mindsets which is detrimental for Russian society and the media themselves.

The terms perestroika (literally, "transformation") and glasnost (literally, "transparency ") refer to the social change that took place in the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. Then USSR leader, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev, introduced perestroika as a necessary action to improve the nation’s economy and its international relations. Glasnost was meant to promote effective discussions regarding the country’s existing problems and shortcomings. However, only a few years following their instatement, both processes did not improve the sociopolitical situation. On the contrary, they led to the country’s collapse. This article seeks to answer why gracious intentions, meant to actualize the hopes and dreams of the Soviet people, eventually resulted in tremendously difficult times. Special attention is paid to the role of the Soviet media, which became a catalyst for many social problems. The authors raise the issue of the media’s level of responsibility during this social transformation, which appeared to be one of the most crucial conditions for its successful implementation. Keywords: authoritarian culture, social transformation, civic society, perestroika, glasnost, Soviet media