2 December 14, 2020
Articles
1. Artyom Yu. Peretyatko
The Birth of the Military Government Propaganda in the Don Host Oblast (1880−1890): Several Observations
Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 3-13.
Number of views: 267 Download in PDF
2. Volodymyr PylypenkoPropaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 3-13.
Abstract:
In 1880-1890, a series of books came out in the Don region, which contained elements of military patriotic propaganda. A noteworthy fact is that their publication was initiated by the staff of Ataman N.I. Svyatopolk-Mirsky. The ataman also took other steps that can be interpreted as an attempt to arrange targeted military propaganda – his office coordinated preparations to establish the Don Museum, it tested and refined measures of “moral influence” on Cossacks to maintain their morale, etc. The paper generally endeavors to explain the reasons behind the development of such military government propaganda among Don Cossacks. To achieve the goal, the author reviews the essential military patriotic texts of the time, written by N.A. Maslakovets (assistant to the ataman), A.N. Pivovarov (army headquarters aide-de-camp), A.A. Karasev, S.F. Nomikosov and Kh.I. Popov (members of the Don Statistical Committee). The most important finding of the research suggests that the Don military propaganda naturally evolved from the bureaucratic infighting of army officials against zemstvo leaders who demanded to make the army service easier for Cossacks.
In 1880-1890, a series of books came out in the Don region, which contained elements of military patriotic propaganda. A noteworthy fact is that their publication was initiated by the staff of Ataman N.I. Svyatopolk-Mirsky. The ataman also took other steps that can be interpreted as an attempt to arrange targeted military propaganda – his office coordinated preparations to establish the Don Museum, it tested and refined measures of “moral influence” on Cossacks to maintain their morale, etc. The paper generally endeavors to explain the reasons behind the development of such military government propaganda among Don Cossacks. To achieve the goal, the author reviews the essential military patriotic texts of the time, written by N.A. Maslakovets (assistant to the ataman), A.N. Pivovarov (army headquarters aide-de-camp), A.A. Karasev, S.F. Nomikosov and Kh.I. Popov (members of the Don Statistical Committee). The most important finding of the research suggests that the Don military propaganda naturally evolved from the bureaucratic infighting of army officials against zemstvo leaders who demanded to make the army service easier for Cossacks.
Number of views: 267 Download in PDF
Seize or Regain: Chernigov and Severian Lands in the Political Thought of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth before the Middle 17th сentury
Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 14-19.
Number of views: 275 Download in PDF
3. Dmitry Surzhik, Tatiana LokhovaPropaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 14-19.
Abstract:
In 1503, Muscovy acquired the Smolensk and the Chernigov and Severian lands from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) following the war. The substantial loss became for Vilna one of the factors that induced it to ally with Poland and form a union state – the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Even before the unification took place, there were vigorous debates among diplomats and intellectuals on what grounds their state should require to return the land. It was in this period when Muscovy’s seizure of the territories was conceptualized as a dishonest act in breach of international agreements. As a result, when Warsaw managed to reconquer the Smolensk and Chernigov-Severian lands, it began to define them as “rekuperowane” which meant “regained from the enemy”. The terminology became embedded both in political journalism and official documents of the state. For example, the term “ziemie rekuperowane” was already used in the sejm constitutions (official documents of the Sejm of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), although the lands were not yet officially integrated. To ensure a more effective incorporation of the new lands, Warsaw granted the Magdeburg rights to many cities in the region, and the document itself also emphasized that these cities and lands were successfully recovered from the hands of the adversary. Hence, at first political journalism and historical and geographical treatises of the Kingdom of Poland, and later those of the Commonwealth justified Krakow’s/Warsaw’s right to the Smolensk and Chernigov-Severian lands. When the lands – first de facto and then de jure – became part of the Polish-Lithuanian state, they were described using the term “ziemie rekuperowane”.
In 1503, Muscovy acquired the Smolensk and the Chernigov and Severian lands from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (GDL) following the war. The substantial loss became for Vilna one of the factors that induced it to ally with Poland and form a union state – the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Even before the unification took place, there were vigorous debates among diplomats and intellectuals on what grounds their state should require to return the land. It was in this period when Muscovy’s seizure of the territories was conceptualized as a dishonest act in breach of international agreements. As a result, when Warsaw managed to reconquer the Smolensk and Chernigov-Severian lands, it began to define them as “rekuperowane” which meant “regained from the enemy”. The terminology became embedded both in political journalism and official documents of the state. For example, the term “ziemie rekuperowane” was already used in the sejm constitutions (official documents of the Sejm of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), although the lands were not yet officially integrated. To ensure a more effective incorporation of the new lands, Warsaw granted the Magdeburg rights to many cities in the region, and the document itself also emphasized that these cities and lands were successfully recovered from the hands of the adversary. Hence, at first political journalism and historical and geographical treatises of the Kingdom of Poland, and later those of the Commonwealth justified Krakow’s/Warsaw’s right to the Smolensk and Chernigov-Severian lands. When the lands – first de facto and then de jure – became part of the Polish-Lithuanian state, they were described using the term “ziemie rekuperowane”.
Number of views: 275 Download in PDF
Stalingrad Victory – 1943: US Propaganda and Public Opinion
Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 20-23.
Number of views: 291 Download in PDF
4. Vadim A. NesterenkoPropaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 20-23.
Abstract:
The article dwells to the US media-coverage of the Soviet troops victory at Stalingrad battle. The battle itself was shown at the US media as a crucial disaster of Nazis at the Soviet Union at the beginning of 1943. It also confirmed power of the Red Army and it ability to fight the enemies – the believe, shook after the failed Kharkiv battle of the spring 1942. As the authors show, the USSR victories at the frontline and at the home front spread over the American mass-media by the US Office of War to shift the public opinion from the US and UK failures at the Atlantic, Southeast Asia and Northern Africa. The US Government itself made such a “image making” efforts, and former US secretary of war Patrick J. Hurley visit to Stalingrad shortly after the battle. His telegrams along with another personal recollections, brochures and movies, positive to the image of USSR and Joseph Stalin, were printed and mass disseminated. To our mind, it was made to reduce Americans’ awareness of the Axis success and show, the US is not alone, but has mighty Allies. It also should be noted, that there was a discussion over the USSR image at the Office of War Information. It employees tried not to lie to Americans, but to concentrate their attention on Russian people achievements on the eve and at times of World War II.
The article dwells to the US media-coverage of the Soviet troops victory at Stalingrad battle. The battle itself was shown at the US media as a crucial disaster of Nazis at the Soviet Union at the beginning of 1943. It also confirmed power of the Red Army and it ability to fight the enemies – the believe, shook after the failed Kharkiv battle of the spring 1942. As the authors show, the USSR victories at the frontline and at the home front spread over the American mass-media by the US Office of War to shift the public opinion from the US and UK failures at the Atlantic, Southeast Asia and Northern Africa. The US Government itself made such a “image making” efforts, and former US secretary of war Patrick J. Hurley visit to Stalingrad shortly after the battle. His telegrams along with another personal recollections, brochures and movies, positive to the image of USSR and Joseph Stalin, were printed and mass disseminated. To our mind, it was made to reduce Americans’ awareness of the Axis success and show, the US is not alone, but has mighty Allies. It also should be noted, that there was a discussion over the USSR image at the Office of War Information. It employees tried not to lie to Americans, but to concentrate their attention on Russian people achievements on the eve and at times of World War II.
Number of views: 291 Download in PDF
German Propaganda in Occupied Territories during World War II: The Case of the Town of Yeysk in Krasnodar Kra
Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 24-28.
Number of views: 262 Download in PDF
5. Anvar M. MamadalievPropaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 24-28.
Abstract:
This paper explores the characteristics of German propaganda in occupied territories in the Soviet Union, more specifically in the town of Yeysk, Krasnodar Krai. The research reported in this work was conducted using a small body of documents from the State Archive of Krasnodar Krai (Krasnodar, Russian Federation). More specifically, these materials were retrieved from the R-498 archive holding for the Yeysk Town Council. The author’s conclusion is that German propaganda materials directed at the civil population in the town of Yeysk may be divided into the following two categories: (1) prevention of infractions of law and (2) organization of civil administration in a new climate. In other words, the German leadership was focused not only on keeping up the repressive pressure on the population but also on creating a large social base among the population that would be loyal to the new order. With this in mind, the Germans were taking account of errors on the part of the Soviet authorities at local level.
This paper explores the characteristics of German propaganda in occupied territories in the Soviet Union, more specifically in the town of Yeysk, Krasnodar Krai. The research reported in this work was conducted using a small body of documents from the State Archive of Krasnodar Krai (Krasnodar, Russian Federation). More specifically, these materials were retrieved from the R-498 archive holding for the Yeysk Town Council. The author’s conclusion is that German propaganda materials directed at the civil population in the town of Yeysk may be divided into the following two categories: (1) prevention of infractions of law and (2) organization of civil administration in a new climate. In other words, the German leadership was focused not only on keeping up the repressive pressure on the population but also on creating a large social base among the population that would be loyal to the new order. With this in mind, the Germans were taking account of errors on the part of the Soviet authorities at local level.
Number of views: 262 Download in PDF
Military Propaganda around the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War: Official Materials of Armenia and Azerbaijan Defense Ministries (as illustrated by the first day of the conflict – September 27, 2020)
Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 29-40.
Number of views: 262 Download in PDF
6. Propaganda in the World and Local Conflicts, 2020, 7(2): 29-40.
Abstract:
The paper spotlights the now relevant issue – propaganda related to another round of the fierce Nagorny Karabakh conflict from September 27 to November 10, 2020, which over the past two and a half decades not only has altered the balance of regional forces, but also predetermined major territorial changes; the outcome of this, without any exaggeration, full-scale war is the victory by Azerbaijan. However, the balance of forces and outcomes of the conflict lie outside our research interest that is here centered on the forms, methods and content of the propaganda war which was as intense as the operations carried out on the front line. Moreover, the war expanded beyond the media of the opposing sides – Armenia and Azerbaijan – and even “permeated” into those of other countries, above all Russia and Turkey. The paper, discussing the propaganda activities in the context of the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, applied both by the sides in the conflict and third countries, analyzes materials from the official military sources of Armenia and Azerbaijan, published on the first day of the war – September 27, 2020. The paper briefly summarizes the theories of propaganda (H. Lasswell, W. Lippmann, J. Dewey), gives a historical overview of how strained inter-ethnic relations develop, delivers a classification of sources on the problem of propaganda. The analysis and classification provided covered messages by the Defense Ministries of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan on the first day of the conflict. The paper also identifies the methods used by the sides in their propaganda activities and suggests an overall assessment of their quality.
The paper spotlights the now relevant issue – propaganda related to another round of the fierce Nagorny Karabakh conflict from September 27 to November 10, 2020, which over the past two and a half decades not only has altered the balance of regional forces, but also predetermined major territorial changes; the outcome of this, without any exaggeration, full-scale war is the victory by Azerbaijan. However, the balance of forces and outcomes of the conflict lie outside our research interest that is here centered on the forms, methods and content of the propaganda war which was as intense as the operations carried out on the front line. Moreover, the war expanded beyond the media of the opposing sides – Armenia and Azerbaijan – and even “permeated” into those of other countries, above all Russia and Turkey. The paper, discussing the propaganda activities in the context of the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, applied both by the sides in the conflict and third countries, analyzes materials from the official military sources of Armenia and Azerbaijan, published on the first day of the war – September 27, 2020. The paper briefly summarizes the theories of propaganda (H. Lasswell, W. Lippmann, J. Dewey), gives a historical overview of how strained inter-ethnic relations develop, delivers a classification of sources on the problem of propaganda. The analysis and classification provided covered messages by the Defense Ministries of the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan on the first day of the conflict. The paper also identifies the methods used by the sides in their propaganda activities and suggests an overall assessment of their quality.
Number of views: 262 Download in PDF