| As two representatives of post-communist authoritarian political transition countries, China and Russia run different road, which is from totalitarian to authoritarian country road, with European and American through three years of social transformation. Unlike Europe and the United States media in the form of government and ideology, under the established "development" path, post-communist authoritarian state is characterized by the evolution of the media "transformation." This article uses the new institutionalism, political economy of communication, social movement theory tools, and case studying and comparative research methods to study Chinese and Russian media transition path from 1978 to 2008, and we highlights various factors that demonstrated the important impact in the process of media transition between the two countries, such as state control, market environment and the civil society and social movements. Through this study, the author not only pay careful attention to the special laws in the path of Sino-Russian Media Transformation, but also more truly restore the various power factor in the role of this process.The first chapter reviewed the transition paths of the Chinese and Russian media transition since 1978. The media patterns and models before the Sino-Russian media transformation were compared. Soviet media in 1985, "openness," the stock of resources before the reform is rich, the media is a central vertical pattern of management-level pyramid structure, information model is the implementation of "party control the media", the state-owned public sector, media resource allocation according to the planned economy, speech high uniformity and a high degree of uniform distribution channels, "Stalin news mode"; China was under Mao Zedong Thought news from the "Stalin news model". The biggest difference with the Soviet "Stalin news mode" is the mobilizing role in the political campaign. According to the key nodes in the media transformation and evolution of the path, we will divide the China and Russia media transformation into three periods:(1) The ideology of changing situation during the 1980s:since 1978, Chinese media’s role from propaganda tool of party’s ideology, transited gradually to the Enlightenment. While the Soviet media were "openness" to the non-party; (2)Since the early 1990s, the two media began almost simultaneously marketing transition, the difference is that the Russian media started the privatization of property rights after independence of Russian Federation, full commercial operation of capital, and the Chinese media is the accumulation of capital market-oriented self-transformation; (3) Since the mid-1990s, the two media started the group, but essentially different, the Russian oligarchs control the media in the financial industry below, China is under the control of the executive power of the regional grouping; (4) Since 2000, the Russian media after Putin in power toward the nationalization, while Chinese media, has begun a "mainstreaming" transformation efforts.The second chapter compared the differences between the initial conditions of the media transition. That include five aspects:first, the main transition, the Chinese media and the "incremental development" of the main characteristics of the decision of the transformation is more marginalized non-core, new media, Russia has experienced three times the mainstream media’s "stock of Shuffle"; second, the institutionalization of media in transition, to varying degrees, reflect the Chinese media in transition and more flexible, irregular outside the system characteristics, the Russian media are mostly made through the formal legal and presidential implemented; Third, media are facing De economic environment is different, the Chinese media is state monopoly and regional decentralized competitive management of the "birdcage economy", Russian media Zai "shock therapy" is now facing the financial Industry Group’s "economic oligarchy"; Fourth, more political control, the Chinese media has been in a "party control the media" under the unit under the control of Russia in the early days of independence, because "government incompetence", the result of the oligarchs on the media control; Fifth, the two sides of the ideological resources to different mid-1980s, the "openness" for the Soviet/ Russian media foster a high degree of political participation, the role of the spirit and the opposition, the Chinese media are facing a situation of lack of ideological hegemony.The third chapter from the contrast of the relationship between the state and the media, proposed the main difference in the media transformation between the two countries by external control; China’s central government and more power in accordance with their own idea of media regulation, and the Soviet Union/Russia, tend to institutional development of the media, but the power of differentiation within countries and Game also had an impact on the media transformation and opportunity. Specifically, in the 1980s after the reform and opening up the media between the two countries are facing the ideological game situation, China’s politics "in-left-wing alliance" and the Soviet Union, "radical democratic" ideology of power to grasp the reality determines the direction of the two media different; since the 1990s, China’s central government propaganda on the media, from the legalization of ideology into the government’s performance, while the central and local interests separated into the media’s "remote supervision" and other innovations provide the opportunity. Russian oligarchs control the media in the next, as interest group politics of elections and the struggle tools; in 2000, the Chinese government concept of governance tend to protect social stability and safeguard stability of local government reform, the pressure caused by the stagnation of the media, but at the same time, the central functional departments and local government "power crack" as the media in environmental protection, the mobilization of new social movements in providing legitimacy. After Putin came to power, proposed a "controlled democracy" and "national security" to the principle, while the collapse of the media oligarchies, the Russian media, consequently, towards nationalization.The fourth chapter compared the market environment in transition between the two nations. In general, the two media, the difference between the market environment in transition can be summarized as "market" and "commercial." Chinese media "birdcage economy" and the Russian media "oligopoly economy" their own media in transition between the two countries had a major impact. The beginning of the Chinese government in the reform of financial pressure on countries which allow the media the main reason for enterprise management, the same period of the Soviet media as Zhongyang extractive capacity of the powerful, the basic can protect the media economy, and newspaper circulation volume Zishen also been rising; 1990 After the fast-growing Chinese media, advertising revenue, most media to achieve self-financing in the late 1990s, the market power once created a "political and economic tug of war game" situation, although the Russian media have also experienced the Russian Federation after independence, "the three In Golden Age ", but" shock therapy "was soon created a serious shortage of media sources. After the mid-1990s, the Chinese government tried to tame the help of the media group of market forces, the Russian media were full control over the financial industry oligopoly. After 2000, the Chinese media "birdcage economy" of the media, especially newspapers highlighted the potential negative impact of the market environment to "zero-sum game", the media is facing financial pressure and the capital of the bottleneck. The same period, the Russian economy in the long-term recovery after the downturn, the Putin government to use state-controlled or state-owned energy group holding a large way in the Russian media to the national market under the framework of capitalism.The fifth Chapter studied and compared the relationship between the media and social movements. Soviet Union/Russia social movement is often large-scale social protest, while China is reflected in local, that is, against the activities of daily death. Different characteristics and patterns of movement also determines the participation and involvement of the media in different social activities. Specifically, the Soviet Union in the late 1980s outbreaks of social protest activities of a short-term "revolutionary civil society", this period produced a large number known as the "reform illegitimate child" of independent media, Chinese media launched in the 1980s and mobilization of cultural reflection and the Enlightenment, but it is rather far away from the people. After the 1990s, Russia in the late 1980s, early 1990s, the revolutionary civil society quickly dissipated to the mobilization of civil society, civic organizations, some immature to make the media act the role of civic organizations and interest groups become political tools. The Chinese media attention on the social movements from the mid-1990s, "consumer rights protection movement" began gradually to "news expose the black movement," the characteristics of social movement media intervention is to initiate "discourse" campaign makes society to the intermediary through the media national public expression. The 21st century, particularly in 2004, "color revolution", the Russian citizens have been organizational activities is not active, the Russian people tend to political alienation, Russian society "hourglass structure" and the crime is serious, media workers are often in high-risk situation. The Chinese media have a wide range of involvement, participation and mobilization of environmental protection, civil rights activities, such as the "new social movements" in the movement played an irreplaceable role.The sixth chapter is the conclusion and summary. Through comparative studies, this paper has the following four findings:(1) comparing the practice of Chinese and Russian media, the process of transformation can be found in the post-communist authoritarian political structure of the media, for news professionalism, understanding of the role the media, has a different election-the Liberal regime in the nature of journalistic professionalism. In contrast to Western mainstream news media emphasized that the media "objectivity, neutral and balanced reporting" side, China and Russia the media is more emphasis in the media in social transformation "actor" role and spirit of the Enlightenment; (2) and ideological superstructure of the polity as a fracture or extension does not necessarily guarantee to ensure the media were "free from state control" (be free from state). The former is a necessary condition for freedom of the press, but not sufficient conditions; (3) market transformation in the media has a dual character of the feature, the market is a neutral resource allocation mechanism, the market under the authoritarian political culture media, both the fighting spirit and ability can also lure the media and state complicity, as state power (state-power) of the attendants; on the other hand, the market itself as a power (market-power), can drive media attention to civil society, public sphere, can also erode Professionalism and public interests; (4) strong state-authoritarian social structure of the weak countries, civil society and immature, the absence of civic organizations, the media assumed the civic organizations in social movements in most of the features, but the community Interaction between the movement and the media depends on many factors contest, the media attention and intervention of social movements are often selective, and the death of the features. In this sense, the media has not and is unlikely to create a truly civil society. |
PDF Full Text Request