Forced Attraction?

Rotaru, Vasile

doi:10.1080/10758216.2016.1276400

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whereas in the Netherlands, both sectors are comparatively disconnected (Groenhart & Evers, 2017), the Brazilian media landscape is closely connected to the political sphere, depending on the outlet and the respective political actor in terms of either proximity or harsh opposition (Lima, 2011;Matos, 2009). Even more noticeably, the Russian state has an extensive influence on the media system, amongst others through the strong paternalistic tradition and intense instrumentalisation of the mass media by the ruling elites to secure political gains both domestically and internationally (see, for instance, Akhrarkhodjaeva, 2017;Rotaru, 2018;Vartanova, 2012).…”

Section: Country Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explanations of news personalisation across countries and media types

Bastian¹,

Makhortykh²,

Harambam³

et al. 2020

Internet Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

News outlets worldwide increasingly adopt user-and system-driven personalisation to individualise their news delivery. Yet, the technical implementation of news personalisation systems, in particular the one relying on algorithmic news recommenders (ANRs) and tailoring individual news suggestions with the help of user data, often remains opaque. In our article, we examine how news personalisation is used by quality and popular media in three countries with different media accountability infrastructures -Brazil, the Netherlands, and Russia -and investigate how information about personalisation usage is communicated to the news readers via privacy policies. Our findings point out that news personalisation systems are predominantly treated as black boxes that indicate a significant gap between practice and theory of algorithmic transparency, in particular in the non-EU context. Issue 4

show abstract

Section: Country Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explanations of news personalisation across countries and media types

Bastian¹,

Makhortykh²,

Harambam³

et al. 2020

Internet Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…47 2014'te, Rusça bilen ve Çarlık Rusya, SSCB veya Rusya Federasyonu'nda yaşamış/ yaşayan en az bir akrabası olanlara vatandaşlık verileceği ilan edilmiştir. 48 Görüldüğü üzere, Rus vatandaşlık kanunları sıkça değişikliğe uğramıştır. Bu politikalarda Lohr'un, 'çek ve tut' 49 olarak tabir ettiği yaklaşım gözlemlenebilmektedir.…”

Section: çArlık Sscb Ve 1991 Sonrası Vatandaşlık Politikalarının Tarihçesiunclassified

İnşacılık, Kimlik, ‘Üretilmiş’ Vatandaşlar: Rusya’nın Abhazya ve Güney Osetya’da Vatandaşlık Politikaları

Ekinci

2019

Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bu makalenin tüm hakları Uluslararası İlişkiler Konseyi Derneği'ne aittir. Önceden yazılı izin almadan hiçbir iletişim, kopyalama ya da yayın sistemi kullanılarak yeniden yayımlanamaz, çoğaltılamaz, dağıtılamaz, satılamaz veya herhangi bir şekilde kamunun ücretli/ücretsiz kullanımına sunulamaz. Akademik amaçlı alıntılar bu kuralın dışındadır. Yazıda belirtilen fikirler yalnızca yazarına/yazarlarına aittir. UİK Derneğini, editörleri ve diğer yazarları bağlamaz. ÖZETMevcut çalışmada, devletçi/pragmatist ve medeniyetçi ekollerin etkili olduğu 1991 sonrası Rus dış politikasında önemini korumuş olan Yakın Çevre'de büyük güç kimliğiyle nüfuzu koruma hedefinin, bölgede bazı aktörlerle yerleşik kolektif kimliklerden faydalanarak vatandaşlık verme politikasıyla pekiştirildiği İnşacı perspektiften tartışılmaktadır. Rusya'nın, kadim büyük güç kimlik algısı üzerinden eski kolektif kimlikler aracılığıyla bazı halklara vatandaşlık vermesi, yeni icat edilmiş ve geçici bir politika olmayıp, köklerinin Çarlık döneminden bu yana gözlemlenebilen nüfuz amaçlı tabiiyet/vatandaşlık politikalarını yansıtması; Yakın Çevre'nin Rusya açısından vazgeçilmez bir bölge olduğu ile gelecekte uygulamayı başka Yakın Çevre aktörleriyle de gerçekleştirebileceği savını güçlendirmektedir. ABSTRACT This paper discusses through a Constructivist perspective that the aim of maintaining influence via great power identity in the Near Abroad which preserved its significance in the post-1991 Russian foreign policy under the statist/pragmatist and civilizationist schools' influence, is reinforced through citizenship policies due to established collective identities with certain actors. The fact that Russia's conferral of citizenship to certain peoples through old collective identities via long-time great power identity is not a newly invented and ephemeral policy but that its roots reflect influence-driven subjecthood/citizenship policies since the Tsarist times, strengthens the assumption that the Near Abroad is an irreplaceable region for Russia which may practice similar policies towards other actors in the Near Abroad in the future.

show abstract

“…A shared history does not always bring nations together, and in Russia's case, the former Soviet republics can cast it in an unfavourable light. Recent examples include Ukraine's ban on fourteen Russian journalists and TV channels claiming they do not respect equidistance and equilibrium (Rotaru 2017). Kazakhstan has begun promoting English far more as a second language and has switched to the Latin alphabet.…”

Section: A Shared History As An Answer Security Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Belarus and Ukraine are viewed as part of the core of the Russian World. Both Belarus and Moldova belong spiritually to the same Russian Orthodox Church and as the Russian Patriarch argues the heart of the Russian World is Russian Orthodox faith and that 'spiritually we [Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova] remain one nation' (Rotaru 2017). In Ukraine, The Russian Orthodox Church contentiously remains the largest branch with the most followers, as well.…”

Section: Russia's Past Future and Foreign Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The annexation also involved a questioning of history to legitimise Russia's actions alongside the messages of historic glories coated in patriotism. The Kosovo precedent was an attempt by the Kremlin to use the recent past against the West in order to justify its annexation, citing that it was a case "created by our Western colleagues" in a "very similar situation" (Rotaru 2016). As Kosovo was able to separate from Serbia after 500 years, Russia argued the Crimean people should also be able to decide their own fate.…”

Section: The Past As Justification For the Annexation Of Crimeamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Defending Russia, Securitising the Future: How the Past Shaped Russia’s Political Discourse Regarding Crimea

Pearce¹,

Yuchshenko²

2018

EUROPOLITY

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper shows how Russia framed the annexation of Crimea from the securitisation theory perspective, with a focus on the shared past as the key argument. This paper discusses how the idea of shared past in general and the concept of brotherhood among nations in particular were utilised to justify the annexation, along with how the Crimean discourse was framed for the domestic Russian consumption. This includes an analysis of why a shared past is so important to the Kremlin, how this was applied in its foreign policy approach and later justified the annexation and the various methods the Kremlin used to win over public support.

show abstract

Forced Attraction?

Cited by 17 publications

References 13 publications

Explanations of news personalisation across countries and media types

Explanations of news personalisation across countries and media types

İnşacılık, Kimlik, ‘Üretilmiş’ Vatandaşlar: Rusya’nın Abhazya ve Güney Osetya’da Vatandaşlık Politikaları

Defending Russia, Securitising the Future: How the Past Shaped Russia’s Political Discourse Regarding Crimea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About