“GYPSY SUBJECT” IN RUSSIAN MEDIA AGENDA: THE STRATEGY OF FORMING UNFRIENDLY IMAGE AND THE PERSPECTIVE FOR CONSTRUCTING INTERACTION

“GYPSY SUBJECT” IN RUSSIAN MEDIA AGENDA: THE STRATEGY OF FORMING UNFRIENDLY IMAGE AND THE PERSPECTIVE FOR CONSTRUCTING INTERACTION

Author:  V.M. Amirov, T.A. Glebovich

Affiliation:  Ural Federal University

Abstract:  The empirical base of the work is 30 media materials selected by the keywords “gypsies”, “gypsy crime”, “incidents related to gypsies”. These materials were published from 2016 to 2019.
The study of strategies used for constructing a negative image of the Gypsy people is an urgent problem, since media discourse has a definite impact on socio-political processes, public opinion and inter-ethnic interaction. Negative strategies for creating an unfriendly image of a national minority play a significant role in media moderation of interethnic conflicts.
National and foreign discursive studies of social and political processes in the media agenda, as well as works on the formation of the image of enemies in a media text constituted the theoretical and methodological basis of the work. Media materials were analyzed from the standpoint of a cognitive approach to the discursive representation of social events, critical discourse analysis methods being also used.
The construction of an unfriendly image of Gypsies in media may provoke interethnic conflicts in society. The choice of strategies is determined by the political position of the media and the journalists who represent it, the local goals of the material in the context of the current agenda in the period of publication.
Mass media use negative strategies: criminalization, stigmatization. These strategies problematize the image of gypsy society, personify the event, which became the basis of publication, turn social conflict into a personal drama.
Opposition media use strategies of objectification and individualization. State and pro-government mass media turn to rehabilitation strategies, equalize the rights of gypsies and representatives of other ethnic groups. This approach is a constructive solution in the field of media representation of one of the most complex national societies.

Keywords:  gypsies, image, construction, strategy, nationality, discourse.

References:  Avtokhutdinova O.F. «Drugoy» kak personazh v SMI: diskursivnye praktiki konstruirovaniya: dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Ekaterinburg, 2015.
Anderson B., Nikolaeva V. (per. s angl.), Ban'kovskaya S.P. (vstup. st.) Voobrazhaemye soobshchestva. Razmyshleniya ob istokakh i rasprostranenii natsionalizma. M.: Kuchkovo pole, 2016.
Belousova Yu.V. Sozdanie obraza vraga na stranitsakh rossiyskikh SMI (na primere rossiysko-gruzinskogo konflikta v avguste 2008 goda) // Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Filologiya. Zhurnalistika. 2011. №  1. S. 112-114.
Boldyrev N.N. Aktual'nye zadachi kognitivnoy lingvistiki na sovremennom etape // Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki. 2013. № 1. S. 5-13.
Boldyrev. N.N. Kontseptual'noe prostranstvo kognitivnoy lingvistiki // Voprosy kognitivnoy lingvistiki. 2004. № 1. S. 18-36.
Boldyrev N.N. Meta-foricheskaya interpretatsiya otnosheniy cheloveka s okruzhayushchim mirom // Kognitivnye issle-dovaniya yazyka. 2014. Vyp. XVIII. S. 42-48.
Bugay N.F. Zabytye stranitsy zhizni soobshchestva tsygan v Soyuze SSR: 1930–
1960-e gody // Privolzhskiy nauchnyy vestnik. 2015. № 7 (47). S. 46-58.
Van Deyk T.A. Diskurs i vlast'. Reprezentatsiya dominirovaniya v yazyke i kommunikatsii (per. s angl.). M.: Librokom, 2013.
Gutsalov A.A. Tsygane: traditsionnaya kul'tura i sovremennyy mir // Nasledie vekov. 2015. № 4. S. 44-55.
Karpukhina E.A. Spetsifika politicheskogo diskursa // Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2011. № 4. S. 91-93.
Kozhemyakin E.A. Diskurs-analiz kak mezhdis-tsiplinarnyy proekt: mezhdu metodom i ideologiey // Nauchnye vedomosti BelGU. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki. 2015. № 6 (203). S. 5-12.
Kozyrev G.I. Kommu-nikatsiya vrazhdy: konfliktologicheskiy analiz // Kommunikologiya. 2014. № 3. S. 164-167.
Kuz'minskaya S.I. «Obraz vraga» v sovremennoy politicheskoy mifo-logii // Vestnik VGU. Seriya: Lingvistika i mezh-kul'turnaya kommunikatsiya. 2016. № 3. S. 49-52.
Lugueva R.G. Yazykovye osobennosti sozdaniya obraza vraga v ros-siyskikh i zapadnykh SMI // Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teorii i praktiki. 2017. № 2-2 (68). S. 171-179.
Matytsina M.S. Issledovanie politicheskogo diskursa v rossiyskoy i evropeyskoy lingvistike: Aktual'nye napravleniya // Vestnik VolGU. Seriya 2: Yazykoznanie. 2017. № 3. S. 181-187.
Naydysh V.M. Ratsionalizm i postmodernizm // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Filosofiya. 2012. № 2. S. 6-14.
Rusakova O.F., Maksimov D.A. Politicheskaya diskursologiya: predmetnoe pole, teoreticheskie podkhody i struktur-naya model' politicheskogo diskursa // Polis. Politicheskie issledovaniya. 2006. № 4. S. 26-43.
Ryabova A.L. Yazyk sovre-mennogo politicheskogo obshcheniya: novaya model' rossiyskoy ideologii // Voprosy metodiki prepo-davaniya v vuze. 2017. № 22. S. 24-29.
Sukhanov Yu.Yu. Politicheskiy diskurs kak ob"ekt lingvisticheskogo analiza // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Teoriya yazyka. Semiotika. Semantika. 2018. № 1. S. 203-212.
Timoshchuk E.A. Diskursivnyy analiz kak fenomenologicheskaya strategiya sotsiokul'turnogo opisaniya  // Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya. 2012. № 4. S. 66-73.
Fishman L.G. Nedovoobrazhennoe soobshchestvo // Nauchnyy ezhegodnik Instituta filosofii i prava UrO RAN. 2018. T. 18. Vyp. 1. S. 43-58.
Cherepovskiy L. Tsygane: skitaniya po dorogam mira i tropam istorii // Rusin. 2006. № 4 (6).
S. 191-196.
Chudinov A.P. Diskursivnye kharakteristiki politicheskoy kommunikatsii // Politicheskaya lingvistika. 2012. Vyp. 2 (40). S. 53-59.
Yauss Kh.R. K probleme dialogicheskogo ponima-
niya // Voprosy filosofii. 1994. № 12. S. 97-106.
Chilton P. 2004. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
George J. 1994. Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re) Introduction to International Relations. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Ghica L.A. 2013. Discourse analysis and the production of meaning in international relations research: a brief methodological outline. Annals of the University of Bucharest, Political science series
15 (2): 3-9.
Kress G. 1985. Ideological Structures in Discourse // Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Discourse Analysis in Society, London: Academic Press. Pp. 27-42.
Le E. 2006. The Spiral of Anti-Other Rhetoric: Discourses of Identity and the International Media Echo. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Strath B., Wodak R. 2009. Europe – Discourse – Politics – Media – History: Constructing 'Crises'? // The European Public Sphere and the Media: Europe in Crisis / Triandafyllidou A., Wodak R., Krzyzanowski M. (eds.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Pp. 15-33.
Van Dijk T.A. 2001. Critical Discourse Analysis // The Handbook of Discourse Analysis / D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, H.E. Hamilton (Eds.). Oxford: Blackwell. Pp. 352-371.
Van Leeuwen T. 2008. Discourse and practice. New tools for critical discourse analysis. N.Y.: Oxford University Press.
Wodak R., Meyer M. 2001. Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Teun A. Van Dijk Multidisciplinary CDA:
a plea for diversity // Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage publications. Pp. 95-121.
Wood N., King R. 2001. Media and migration // Media and Migration: Constructions of mobility and difference / N. Wood, R. King (Eds.). London, N.Y.: Routledge. Pp. 1-23.

For citation:  Amirov, V. M., & Glebovich, T. A. (2020). “Gypsy subject” in Russian Media Agenda: the strategy of forming unfriendly image and the perspective for constructing interaction. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki, 2, 86-100. (In Russ.).

Pages:  86-100