IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intare/v22y2019i4p312-326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To cover or not to cover: Alexei Navalny in Russian media

Author

Listed:
  • Anastasia Kazun

Abstract

This article analyses the discourse about the opposition politician Alexei Navalny in Russian media. Navalny has been actively engaging with his audience through social media and online platforms; however, some media continue to ignore the politician, practically not covering his activities. The article analyses the intensity and sentiment of the media coverage of Navalny based on data from Medialogia. It is concluded that the media in general do cover the politician’s activities and attempts to deliberately ignore news about him are only made by TV stations. However, news about Navalny is often negative. While blogs offer a more positive outlook on the politician’s activities than do the other types of media that the article considers, the majority of the coverage of Navalny in Russian media is of a critical nature. In addition, an analysis of positive and negative news in various types of media suggests that the way the politician’s activities are covered primarily involves not information about what he did or did not do but rather the various media interpretations of these actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Anastasia Kazun, 2019. "To cover or not to cover: Alexei Navalny in Russian media," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 312-326, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:22:y:2019:i:4:p:312-326
    DOI: 10.1177/2233865919846727
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2233865919846727
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2233865919846727?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Wallsten, 2007. "Agenda Setting and the Blogosphere: An Analysis of the Relationship between Mainstream Media and Political Blogs," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 24(6), pages 567-587, November.
    2. Rolf Fredheim, 2017. "The loyal editor effect: Russian online journalism after independence," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 34-48, January.
    3. Carolina Vendil Pallin, 2017. "Internet control through ownership: the case of Russia," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 16-33, January.
    4. Roberto Casarin & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2013. "Being on the Field When the Game Is Still Under Way. The Financial Press and Stock Markets in Times of Crisis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-14, July.
    5. Anastasia Kazun & Anton Kazun, 2017. "Coverage of Three Tragedies in the Russian Media: Application of the Network Agenda Model," HSE Working papers WP BRP 48/PS/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anastasia Kazun & Anton Kazun, 2017. "A Friend Who Was Supposed to Lose: How Donald Trump Was Portrayed in the Russian Media?," HSE Working papers WP BRP 51/PS/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    2. Anastasia Kazun & Anton Kazun, 2017. "Coverage of Three Tragedies in the Russian Media: Application of the Network Agenda Model," HSE Working papers WP BRP 48/PS/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Freyburg, Tina & Garbe, Lisa & Wavre, Véronique, 2022. "The political power of internet business: A comprehensive dataset of Telecommunications Ownership and Control (TOSCO)," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Online fi, pages 1-1.
    4. Niccolò Casnici & Pierpaolo Dondio & Roberto Casarin & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2015. "Decrypting Financial Markets through E-Joint Attention Efforts: On-Line Adaptive Networks of Investors in Periods of Market Uncertainty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    5. Matija Piv{s}korec & Nino Antulov-Fantulin & Petra Kralj Novak & Igor Mozetiv{c} & Miha Grv{c}ar & Irena Vodenska & Tomislav v{S}muc, 2014. "News Cohesiveness: an Indicator of Systemic Risk in Financial Markets," Papers 1402.3483, arXiv.org.
    6. Marco Castellani & Linda Alengoz & Niccolò Casnici & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2022. "A role-game laboratory experiment on the influence of country prospects reports on investment decisions in two artificial organizational settings," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 21(1), pages 121-149, June.
    7. Lisa Oswald, 2024. "More than news! Mapping the deliberative potential of a political online ecosystem with digital trace data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Costola, Michele & Hinz, Oliver & Nofer, Michael & Pelizzon, Loriana, 2023. "Machine learning sentiment analysis, COVID-19 news and stock market reactions," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    9. Lauren Guggenheim & S. Mo Jang & Soo Young Bae & W. Russell Neuman, 2015. "The Dynamics of Issue Frame Competition in Traditional and Social Media," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 659(1), pages 207-224, May.
    10. Anastasia Kazun, 2017. "Agenda-Setting in Russian Media," HSE Working papers WP BRP 49/PS/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    11. Svetlana S. Bodrunova & Anna Litvinenko & Ivan Blekanov & Dmitry Nepiyushchikh, 2021. "Constructive Aggression? Multiple Roles of Aggressive Content in Political Discourse on Russian YouTube," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 181-194.
    12. Yevgeniy Golovchenko, 2020. "Measuring the scope of pro-Kremlin disinformation on Twitter," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Diamantis Petropoulos Petalas & Hein van Schie & Paul Hendriks Vettehen, 2017. "Forecasted economic change and the self-fulfilling prophecy in economic decision-making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, March.
    14. Raphael H Heiberger, 2015. "Collective Attention and Stock Prices: Evidence from Google Trends Data on Standard and Poor's 100," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-14, August.
    15. Tina Freyburg & Lisa Garbe & Véronique Wavre, 2023. "The political power of internet business: A comprehensive dataset of Telecommunications Ownership and Control (TOSCO)," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 573-600, July.
    16. Olga Dovbysh & Esther Somfalvy, 2021. "Understanding Media Control in the Digital Age," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 1-4.
    17. Yan, Shuang & Gu, Changgui & Yang, Huijie, 2024. "Bridge successive states for a complex system with evolutionary matrix," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 637(C).
    18. Oleg S. Nagornyy & Olessia Y. Koltsova, 2017. "Mining Media Topics Perceived as Social Problems by Online Audiences: Use of a Data Mining Approach in Sociology," HSE Working papers WP BRP 74/SOC/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    19. Kaushal Kumar Bhagat & Sanjaya Mishra & Alakh Dixit & Chun-Yen Chang, 2021. "Public Opinions about Online Learning during COVID-19: A Sentiment Analysis Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, March.
    20. Hitesh Bhatt & Rajesh Bahuguna & Siddharth Swami & Rajesh Singh & Anita Gehlot & Shaik Vaseem Akram & Lovi Raj Gupta & Amit Kumar Thakur & Neeraj Priyadarshi & Bhekisipho Twala, 2024. "Integrating industry 4.0 technologies for the administration of courts and justice dispensation—a systematic review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:intare:v:22:y:2019:i:4:p:312-326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hufs.ac.kr/user/hufsenglish/re_1.jsp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.