From the editor

Dear readers!

The issue of “Domestic Notes” that you are holding in your hands, apparently, least of all corresponds to the principle of encyclopedicism that we have adopted in covering the chosen topics.

Firstly, because the subject we are exploring in this case does not seem to even have a precise definition. That is, there seems to be a definition of the media, but it is such that virtually anything falls under it - from OZ to the billboard “I love you, Solodov!” In between fit books, the Internet, television and radio, election leaflets and car dealer bumper stickers - depending on how broadly a student of the phenomenon tends to interpret the phrase “mass media.” The media is limitless.

Secondly, as it turned out during the work on the issue, “Domestic Notes” has its own position regarding the media and their role in the world and our lives (for the absence of which we are usually reproached, asking “where is the point of view in “OZ” editors?"). Our position may not be entirely accurate, but it is quite clearly reflected in the catchy title “The End of the Media.” It was formed from the spontaneously coinciding opinions of our authors and the magazine’s staff, although it was not without controversy. It turned out that the media is a topic on which everyone has something to say (unlike, for example, work), and most often loudly. Obviously, the roots of this mysterious phenomenon - the poorly hidden indifference of citizens to the media - lie in the very nature of the object under study. We are tired of the limitlessness of the media.

Thirdly, in this issue we deliberately deviated from the principle of not giving the floor to journalists (as opposed to specialists). For the simple reason that only in the case of writing articles about the principles of functioning of the media - and only in this case - do journalists have the right to be proudly called “specialist”. Because in all other cases they are professional laymen.

We are not sure that we have managed to cover all the significant aspects of the functioning of the media in the world, but we hope that we have been able to highlight many of the significant aspects of our existence in the media world. We also did not find a forecast regarding the future of the media that would satisfy the requirement of non-partisan reliability: all known forecasts are divided into globalist or anti-globalist, and the simplicity of this division raises suspicions.

What came out of the issue is not for us to judge in this case: after all, we have formed an “editorial position,” that is, we are interested persons. We are waiting for your responses, complaints and suggestions.

But thank God, man does not live by the media alone. Don’t miss extremely interesting publications, the “OZ” discussion and the magnificent memories of Gavrila Solntsev, a man of exceptional and ordinary destiny. And the diary of a Leningrad (St. Petersburg) pensioner remains extremely relevant to this day.

See you later!