Instead of the word "crisis", it broadcasts dancing, pageantry, and general happiness
A well-known TV anchor admitted in a recent interview that the word "crisis" in reference to the Russian situation is banned from television. The behaviour of the TV bosses and the possible consequences of that behaviour and the way the Russian TV channels present the crisis were discussed with Novaya Gazeta by Olga Makhovskaya, a social psychologist, PhD (Psychology), senior researcher with the RAS Institute of Psychology who has been a consultant to many TV projects.
Q.: Of late, our television has conspicuously avoided words like "panic", "market crash", etc. If there is a crisis, it affects the West, and not us. How much harm can such policy do?
A.: You see, en masse, the audience is pretty infantile and easily prone to panic and fears. Television is not out to do harm or distort reality, but rather forms an image of the situation in which the spectators, most of whom are stress-averse, feel safe. In fact, it glosses over events or hushes them up. It's exactly the way we deal with children - we prefer to distract and entertain them in order to conceal the truth from them.
Television (we are talking about the national channels) relies heavily on suggestion. Its task is to reassure people and discourage them from thinking. The way to reassure people is to immerse them in an atmosphere of euphoria and festival. Over the past two years television has broadcast dancing, pageantry and songs almost non-stop... This is supposed to remind people that life in this country is wonderful. The authorities and the media try to instill in people a sense that they are lucky to have been born in this country, that while the whole world is grappling with the crisis, we live in innocent bliss, with the sweet dreams of a child.
Q.: But surely television is not the only reason why people fall into a trance and don't care about things?
A.: Emotional torpor comes from having too much of everything. This has been particularly noticeable in the last two or three years. The transition to the market was perceived not as a call to work hard because your well-being depends on hard work, but as a call "to live well". The word "comfort" was used by Mr Putin in all his speeches, including his last New Year address. He promised comfort, and we have it. He spoke about the importance of family, home, and comfort, and that strikes a chord with people who long for a normal life. The President and the people around him spoke about themselves as a working team, displaying their strength and, literally, their well-trained muscles. The underlying message seems to be: don't be afraid, relax, we will do everything and solve all the problems for you.
Mr Putin, like Batman, will appear at the right moment and sort out all the problems.
In general, television has long been trying to hypnotise us into a state of indifference. It has invariably portrayed Mr Putin as everyone's psychotherapist, who has a powerful impact on the perceptive audience. People trust Mr Putin more than anyone else. If Mr Putin says that there is no crisis, then there is no crisis. Whether this is a secret technique used by the security services or true hypnosis, no psychologists in this country can rival him. One can't name any since Kashpirovsky.
Q.: Does he really possess such powers?
A.: The person plus the media. Previously, psychologists maintained that charisma is an inborn quality. Now we know it is formed by the media. A person's messages are spread through television, radio, and the Internet, and his figure grows stronger and becomes a symbol. Mr Putin has unprecedented resources to rely on.
Q.: President Medvedev does not count?
A.: Mr Medvedev is progressive in the sense that he has gone on the Internet, making him popular among the younger audiences. But so far, Mr Medvedev looks like a "magician's disciple". He is learning, following his teacher's recipes.
Q.: Is it logical to have blind faith in a single person?
A.: It is very much in tune with the Russian mentality. Some studies have shown that we are an epileptoid nation in psychological terms. This is the type characterised by exaltation, and tempestuous and impulsive behaviour that may erupt into aggression.
The main instrument that such a person and such a nation use in relation to the world is psychological pressure. He relies not on rational criteria but on inner urges and intuition. We think not with our brains, but with our spinal cord. If, for example, you show an expert on TV who explains the mechanisms of the crisis in logical detail and tells you what to do, and then a two-minute conversation showing the Prime Minister saying that everything is fine and under control, the conflict between information and the sense of calm emanating from Putin will be resolved in favour of emotions.
Q.: 80% of people succumb to this influence but that still leaves 20% of people who think. What are they supposed to do?
A.: They are already doing something. They are not so inert. A crisis usually reveals every person's real worth. Immediately, there is a shortage of professionals who nobody needs in a situation of stagnation. In addition, a self-reliant and professionally competent person is prepared for ups and downs. This is not our first recession. It's unpleasant, but we can cope with it.
Q.: By the way, if you compare the crisis of 1998 and 2008, do you find many differences? Why was there a panic then and why is there no panic today?
A.: For starters, at that time we were pioneers. We could not predict what would happen.
Second, panic begins when there is a discrepancy between what people hear on television and what they hear on the street. In a situation when no one trusts the government, what your colleagues at work say is far more important than what television says. In a situation when the authorities are trusted, discrepancies are slight and you can convince the population of anything. It's a matter of technique.
Third, relations between people have changed. We are less cemented. Economic stratification has put us on different social levels. We have different ways of life. For panic to spread quickly, there have to be intensive and trusting contacts among many people, and this is not the case today.
Fourth, the "man on the street" has turned into a couch potato. We have become a consumer society and we like to be consumers. In 1998, all we wanted was a normal life. Now, we have had a period of what we thought was normal life. The crisis is not as morally taxing as it was in 1998.
Q.: But not everyone wants to be a couch potato. How can you wake up the nation as a whole?
A.: I don't see a Herzen around. And television is not a toxin, but the Rat Catcher's pipe. If you tell a Babbitt that he is a Babbitt he will be angry and deny it, but statistics show that only 5% of the population avail themselves of the possibility to travel abroad. We are not talking about emigration, but about simple curiosity - going abroad in order to see how people live in other places. It is not a question of whether they can afford it. People don't want to be on the move.
Besides, the hypnotic impact of the authorities and television helps people let off steam. They are not silent, as during Soviet times. They tell us that the crisis is underway, but it does not affect us. It is not connected with capitalism or the credit system as a whole, but with the misguided policies of Mr Bush, a bogeyman. Compared with him, Mr Putin is the good guy. We like this analysis; we like to look at ourselves on television and see that the world depends on us and that we will eventually win, although it won't be easy. Competent propaganda is about forming public opinion about things before they happen.
Only an emergency can jolt people out of their torpor. If it hits the people materially, that is, if it hits their spinal cord, if people get sacked, and prices go up, then unrest may set in. Only a shock can pull people out of a state of hypnosis.
"If Mr Putin said there is no crisis, it means there is no crisis."