“National heritage” of “nation of tele-viewers: the transformation of Russian Television”, 2014- 2016 (by Anna Kachkaeva). The article offers an in- sight into the structure of Russian media scene and the main strategies media holdings choose to follow in the new communication media space. All major business deals in 2013-2015 were made by the three major groups of companies – NMG, GPM and VGTRK. Those deals usually involved emerging media or content providers. All groups worked to- ward the integration between each other and within the structures, building a complete management cycle of cinematographic and TV content – from pro- duction to distribution. They would either purchase production companies or channels, or launch addi- tional thematic channels and included them in the cable TV packages of major media holdings. Radio stations and TV channels of small media groups not associated with a small groups of large owners, were bought out. In some cases, the buyer would acquire a blocking stake at Satellite Service Provider Com- pany, or video-on-demand services would merge with the largest distribution network of legal content in Russian internet segment, which would then post the video on Russian online mediums, including VKontakte social network. The outdated concept of classic culture was replaced in the post modernistic media environment by a “mosaic culture” (A.Mol). People have gradually adjusted to the “information blitz” (A.Toffler) – news, videos, news-clips – a constant stream of fragmentary knowledge, facts, evaluations, both true and fiction. The purpose of such a fragmentary stream is to produce emotions, whereas the “live TV wars” maintain a state of gen- eral anxiety in the public. The metaphor of War on Terror activated the Fear Frame (and, consequent- ly, anger and anxiety). The “patriotism” triggered “enthusiasm” and mobilized the society around the leader and the government. Media confrontation became permanent (war as a TV show). Active “war in media” lasting for many months has a significant influence on the public opinion. Traditional meth- ods of media wars – ignoring the facts of casualties and number of losses among the combatants, emo- tional emphasis on the civilian deaths and sufferings are amended with massive fakes sold as true facts, reinforced with a rapid distribution of unverified information in social networks (often staged with specialized media tools by “bots and “trolls”). The three major TV channels – 1TV, Russia 1 and NTV are the main source of news for more than 85% of Russians. They not only over- simplify the world- view, but also produce and distribute the emotions, including reconstructions, stagings and media fakes.
Different approaches to defining the term «downshifting» are considered. Conception of downshifting as an actual social tendency is presented. Necessity of modern downshifters images presented in mass media is substantiated. Interviews with downshifters published in electronic mass media during 2008-2010 are analyzed in the empirical research. Three types of «successful downshifters» are identified: 1) experience seekers, who are not fixed on a single activity and are seeking new areas for self-realization; 2) those who successfully made their childhood hobby a profession; 3) seekers of calm, harmonic and natural life outside of big cities (developing countries – Thailand, Egypt, India and rural territories in Russia).
The article presents the results of a television consumption survey of rural residents. We prove that people choose the TV content that corresponds to their mindset. This is true to people of all ages and socio-cultural status. These views suggest that the villagers are in a state of social depression - they tend to become less sensitive and more alienated towards symbols, values and conventions of the present-day media. Thus we introduce the term "depressive media consumption" that refers to this rural viewing pattern.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.