How aggression is born on television and penetrates the audience consciousness. Review of the methods, comments of experts - and leading Artem Sheinin!

The authorities believe that in attacks on activists and journalists there is no fault of modern Russian television. Experts are confident that aggression is cultivated precisely on the body, and tell what methods this is done.

One of the topics that again arose in connection with the attack on the journalist "Echo of Moscow" Tatyana Felgenhauer was the influence of modern television in Russian on the viewer. Can viewing of television programs in which the “echo of Moscow” is also stamped as “enemies” and “traitors”, to become a trigger for mentally unstable people to irreparable actions? The authorities have a completely obvious and expected answer to this - cannot. So said, in particular, the press secretary of the president Dmitry Peskov. “Similar tragic cases - they cause the deepest regrets. And, let's say, the actions of the madman - they are the actions of the madman. Trying to link with something, coloring in some color is absolutely illogical and incorrect, ”Peskov told reporters to the question of the influence of television on the psyche of people like Boris Gritsa.

I must say that this week, Patriarch Kirill himself did not agree in absentia in absentia, who stated that he was “scary” when watching Russian television channels (but the patriarch has his own song: he believes that, despite such a trash on television, there were more believers). At a long distance with the judgment of Peskov and the entire Russian government, specialists - psychiatrists, telecritics and linguists argue. With their help, the New Gazeta tried to compose a certain methodology for the birth of aggression on television broadcast and its penetration into the audience consciousness.

• Method "your or foe"

One of the main techniques that almost all modern television programs are used by “discussions” is the division of heroes into “their own” (in the image of thoughts, by community of interests, in the nation even) and “strangers”. As a rule, this is disguised as objectivity: it is supposedly given the opportunity to speak out to all parties. But there are nuances.

“In the socio-political talk show, the leaders are emphasized“ with the right point of view ”, they are emphasized, let them finish the phrase, show with all their appearance that they are in the same position,” explains Tekritic Irina Petrovskaya . - When they provide the word to the opposite side (to a person who adheres to a “anti -state” point of view), they begin to interrupt it. The applause in the studio is clearly conducted by some special person [at the right time]. But the presenters also give their "right" guests to interrupt, yell, insult the interlocutors. " This allows you to achieve the effect that a person with a “alien” point of view is small, in a clear minority and often not quite adequate.

As a bonus “weapon”, a condescending smile of a host or heroes with a “right” point of view in the frame can be used when the “dissenting” says: we, they say, understand that the opponent carries nonsense. So, by the way, Vladimir Soloviev often uses, but he certainly is not a pioneer in this genre. Professor of the Higher School of Economics, Philologist Hasan Huseynov recalls the broadcast of 2011 on Channel One, when the satirist Mikhail Zadornov came to the studio to Alexander Gordon in order to defend his “theory” about the origin of languages ​​before the scientists. Then he was opposed by the philologist Viktor Zhivov, and it was with the help of the presenter, he believes Huseynov, Zhivov was put in an uncomfortable position.

“Matador Zadornov had Banderylro and Picadors, assistants who carried, so to speak, even more nonsense than this clown himself,” Huseynov recalls. - It was like the voice of the people, who did not insist on anything, and so, thinking aloud, they say, maybe all these scientists eat their bread in vain? And this meaningless talker with laughter and jokes was accompanied by the so -called TV presenter. It was not to cope with this as an expert on scientific discipline as an expert on scientific discipline as an expert in scientific discipline. The scientist flared up, exploded, began to scold - and immediately received a rebuke from Zadornov, who began to play the role of an arbitrator now in a dispute between Zhiv. and one of his Banderylro. "

With the help of sound engineering, the effect is created that everyone listens to the representative of the right point of view with reverence, and the main noise begins just where in normal discussion everyone would listen to convincing arguments. “Since there is no positive, rational content in the ideology of such a Corrida, the audience masses and are expelled only by the atmosphere itself, this funny gas hatred of a smart person, the whole misfortune of which was only that he gave himself to catch and take him to the arena,” Huseynov continues. - He was invited for entertainment and in order to show: “It doesn’t matter what lies and what nonsense we will carry, and no matter what smart things you say! It doesn't matter. It is important that we will defeat you - an insignificant loner and wise guy if you are ahead of us! ”

• Translated method

Fleaning an alien point of view is the first and, if you think about it, the lower level of birth of aggression. The next stage is an increase in the degree of intolerance to a person. It is not enough just to take it into a background noise, you need to increase the level of aggression through rudeness, verbal and non -verbal. “The so -called presenter plays his board, an honest, patriotic man who cannot endure falsehood and hypocrisy from the West and any representative of the West, - Hasan Huseynov explains the system on the example of Artem Sheinin and Channel One, but this - with reservations - also works in other cases. - Sheinin, like Solovyov or Kiselev, can only act in a studio controlled by him, surrounded by assistants and brigades of bribed citizens, where he is d'Artagnan, and all the rest are at best dumb servants of the Cardinal guards. Hence the fake emotion, excited by an attempt to hide the first -order lies. ”

When a degree needs to be increased again, direct violence in the frame is permissible. Psychological-this is when the same Sheinin takes a bucket with “feces” for the enemy (the question is why the presenter considers someone an enemy, in principle rhetorical). And physical - when a person is simply taken by the breasts or beat.

What is the emotion? First of all, anger. “These current-shows often use such revolutions as“ shut up ”,“ shut your mouth ”,“ to yell good, ”Irina Petrovskaya lists. - Such things are generally unacceptable in the usual dialogue of civilized people, and here - a public discussion on the TV channel. For example, Andrei Norkin (who for some reason is considered an intelligent person-apparently, because he is with glasses) can afford to personally push the guest with the words “go to hell” and “ram”. It can be also played-“the format requires”, and quite sincerely (see the commentary of Artem Sheinin). “Sheinin really applied the physical impact to the American guest Michael Bomu,” the telecritic recalls. - He grabbed the guest by the neck and with an insulting gesture began to tilt his head to the side. He gave him a slap on his neck with the words: "Why are you provoking me?"

Such actions create a role model for the future behavior of the viewer in similar situations. “When the leading talk show, which for the layman of the star, almost God, allows himself to take someone's breasts, drive out of the hall, rudeness in relation to the audience, the viewer thinks:“ He can. Why can't I? And I can do this in relation to a person with a foreign accent, because they tell me that all enemies are in America, ”explains the psychiatrist Andrei Biljo . And taking into account the fact that the heroes - as a rule, earning in their shame - do not give any rebuff, ordinary people are approved in addition to the “correctness” of this behavior strategy.

• The method of injection

After that (although most often in parallel), an intonation weapon of aggression comes into business. “There are quite a lot of people who are hypnosis, about 86 % (very funny figure - ed. ),” Says Biljo. “I don’t know where the TV presenters learned an amazing sometimes sunbathing anxiety and horror even at those moments when they talk about some nonsense.” Even sports news today is announced so that there is a feeling of anxiety, as if someone had died on a football field. The housewife who cooks may not even look at the screen, but she hears her voice, and she is already scared, the pulse becomes more frequent. This affects people with an unstable psyche - not mentally ill, but impressionable, unable to analyze what they are told. ”

Due to such intonation, emphasis on certain words (this is clearly visible in films from the series “Anatomy of Protest”, as well as in the plot of “Echo Gosdepa”, which also mentioned Tatyana Felgenhauer) people with personal problems combine one with the other, receiving the result amazing in force of influence.

“People with social problems first lead a personal search for the reasons why they are not good. And then they tell them on TV that we have red-brown, here are liberals-and so on, ”explains the mechanism of making a fatal decision, the head of the department of medical psychology of the scientific health center of the RAMS, psychologist Sergei Enikolopov. “And then a person understands who is to blame for his troubles, and if there is a source of evil, the idea may come to mind.”

Enicolopov adds that a certain picture of the world is being created, and a person who received scenarios of behavior in various situations will think exactly as television programmed him - “I know, I saw this.” “Another problem is that television greatly reduces the threshold of sympathy for the victim. On the screens we are shown the result: the victim is already dead, she was not very tormented. After this, you react less to someone else's pain, namely physical, ”the psychologist says. And when this connects with the fact that the victim is an “enemy”, at the exit we get a story about “Felgenhauer is to blame”.

• Domination method

Finally, in order to create a sense of the only true strategy of behavior - the one imposed by television - it is necessary to ensure the total of such a summons. “The programs that go out on Friday Prime Time are designed for a mass audience,” says Irina Petrovskaya. - In the afternoon, for example, “60 minutes” and “Norkin” is for housewives and pensioners who also need to give a picture of the world, because they are the main electoral resource today. This is the most suggestible and attractive audience. ”

In the evening, a news block begins, in which the “evening talk shows” dominate, which are already a “weapon of mass destruction”. TV shows are added to them: in the same “sleeping” about the adventures of the “opposition”, the journalist cuts the throat - together with the rest of the television aggression details, the detonator is quite.

And all this is fastened with “informational” plots like a “echo of the State Department”. “This is an example of the absolute impunity of lies. Those who participate in this, completely in vain think that their names will simply be forgotten, and they will either come out completely dry from the water, or then wash themselves. All their moves are recorded, ”says Gasan Huseynov.

The only means of resistance to the tsunami of television aggression, without saying a word, call the departure from it. “Unfortunately, not everyone understands that the only means of resistance in this case is the total boycott of state television by civil society,” Huseynov formulates. The only trouble is that he has been declared a boycott for a very long time - but only from a small number of people. The rest is quite satisfied with what is happening. Two buckets of the current show to these gentlemen!

Vyacheslav Polovinko, Tatyana Vasilchuk, Vera Yurchenko, "New"

On the other side of the screen

"I assure you, if there was no request for such a language, I would simply not be there"

The host of the program “Time will tell” on Channel One Artem Sheinin - about the modern language of Russian television

- I really, to a certain extent, is one of those who brought this new language, but here is a very important reservation: I did not bring it to television, but to the format in which I work and in which they watch me. There are programs conducted by Mikhail Shvydka. Their tongue has not changed: it remained beautiful, soft, non -aggressive. And there is Posner whose language has not changed either and whose programs are also today's television. Each of them works in their own format for their audience and spectators can choose this.

And there is a different audience, for which there is a possibility of ... another language. Moreover, even if we say that this is the language of daytime socio-political talk shows-this will also be too much generalization. In the same format and at about the same time as I am, my colleagues Olga Skabeev and Evgeny Popov work, whose language is completely different. In parallel with me in the same format, Andrei Norkin and Olga Belova practically work in the same format, who has a completely different language - not like Skabeeva and Popov. Their (Norkina and Belova - Ed.) The language is more spoken, there are more jargonisms and more freedom in the formulations.

For example, YouTube is full of cuts of Norkin's jokes inside the program. And the words he used in these jokes are unusual for the television language that Petrovskaya writes about for example. Maybe it is not entirely appropriate for such a language that a Norkin’s joke will sound that Putin climbs into the refrigerator, and jelly is shaking there, and Putin says: “Not a sink! I'm cheese! "

I - by virtue of who I am and what I can afford, add even more jargonisms, perhaps a little more aggression than the same Norkin. But this corresponds to the needs of people who want and are ready at this time to watch the material on such an energy and emotional wave.

“I do not portray or play anything of this. I'm really like that. "

I assure you that if there was no request for such a language, I would simply not be there. As for the conversations around the Felgenhauer (the fact that the trigger of the attacks became stories on TV - ed. ), In my opinion, this is part of the provocative discourse.

When a completely insane person with the motives of a completely insane person attacks her and when people calling journalists begin to drag ideological or political contexts under this, I personally can’t call it anything but provocation. To the same extent, I can provoke aggression in another person, how much this person was provoked by aggression by Tatyana Felgenhauer. He constantly listened to her broadcasts, he did not watch my programs on TV, and, apparently, her programs, due to the features of the psyche, provoked such aggression from him.

Probably, in some unhealthy people can provoke an unmotivated aggressive reaction of anything. But there is no linear dependence in this, because we talk about unhealthy people. And if we talk about healthy people, then adults, responsible people are able to decide that they are charged with positive energy, and what is negative.

If from morning till night, there were programs in the style and manner of Artem Sheinin on all channels, I would agree with the thesis about aggression on television with the thesis.

“But a healthy person has a remote control, and he, by clicking them, can choose calm and classic Skabeev and Popov, or a little more relaxed Norkin with Belova, or more energetic and, if you like, aggressive at some points of Shein.”

And for all the conversations that my energy is pushing someone to something, I can only tell you that only the energy of Tatyana Felgenhauer is pushing for now. But this logic seems wrong to me.

Vyacheslav Polovinko recorded