The attitude of the authorities towards the common man. Lefty is a folk hero

Use the site search form to find an essay, coursework or dissertation on your topic.

Search for materials

Manipulation methods public opinion

PR

Faculty of Law

Essay

"Methods of manipulating public opinion"

completed by: 4th year student, 2nd group Lashkevich Maxim Vladimirovich

scientific supervisor: Kokhnyuk Vasilina Vasilievna

Some aspects of the mechanisms of mass influence.

Modern post-Soviet, in particular Belarusian society, and a specific representative of this society have difficulty mastering the phenomena of mass influence, which are similar to Western “advertising-market” or “advertising-political” models. The factors and limits of such belief require careful analysis. In particular, this refers to the idea of ​​the omnipotence of mass communicative influence on a mass audience, on a “mass” person, which frightens some and encourages others (depending on the position). A number of fundamental questions arise from the similarity, or, let’s say, apparent technological proximity, between everyday commercial advertising and the intrusive political campaigning so memorable from recent election campaigns. Ultimately this leads to one facet of the age-old problem public person: how and to what extent a person can and desires to succumb to pressure communication means"mass destruction". In order to influence the mood of members of society, there are many methods, the development and use of which is carried out by such sciences as psychology, and its derivatives - PR, and others. I would like to touch on this topic in relation to the election campaign, which is soon planned in our republic. However, you will still have to use Russian examples, since their example can demonstrate the effect of one or another technique more clearly, and besides, there is absolutely no information on such topics on the domestic Internet.

RECEPTION 1. "Organization of protest voting in a spread-out manner"

The party in power is always interested in fragmenting the voices of the protest electorate and almost always strives to create additional alternatives for expressing opposition sentiments. The most recent example is the blocking of the impeachment procedure against Yeltsin in the State Duma. Impeachment was failed not so much by those deputies who avoided voting, but by those who insisted on the largest possible number of charges. As a result, the work of the relevant deputy commission turned into a months-long and almost never-ending process. But the main thing is that every deputy had the opportunity to vote for the resignation of Boris Nikolayevich precisely on that charge that could not collect 300 votes. As I see it, if representatives of the Communist faction in the Russian parliament really sought the resignation of the President, they would settle on one accusation, the least “party” and the most consolidating votes - the accusation of unleashing the Chechen war. And so something incomprehensible happened: either political emotionality let them down, or habitual short-sightedness, or a reluctance to part with the parliamentary level of well-being ahead of schedule.

TECHNIQUE 2. "Strengthen enemy 2 to weaken enemy 1."

The use of this technique as a special case of the previous method gave rise to many myths in political history. Despite the high effectiveness of the “mutual horror stories” scheme, by mid-May in the year of the last presidential election, the sociological forecast of the results of the first round did not give Boris Nikolaevich an advantage over Gennady Andreevich. And even a minimal lead by Zyuganov in the voting on June 16 was fraught with the loss of control of the party in power over the situation in the second round. Therefore, on May 20, the presidential “family” was forced to make a decision to intensively promote the stubborn General Lebed as a candidate capable of stealing the largest number of votes (compared to other leaders of the Third Force) from the communists.

RECEPTION 3. “Bringing the positive (or negative) to the point of absurdity.”

Recently, the effectiveness of election campaigns has become increasingly dependent on a sense of proportion in campaigning, on the accuracy of choosing the volume of information conveyed to the electorate (especially in the form of direct advertising). And accordingly, more and more often, pre-election counter-games are built on the search for outwardly positive information about the candidate.

An elegant example of this was provided by the recent elections of deputies to the Moscow City Duma. In one of the outlying constituencies, the talk of the town was the broken and sagging asphalt in many places in a crowded square. An entrepreneur who ran in this constituency, instead of calling for a better life, did a good deed - he paved the square at his own expense. Next to the fresh asphalt, a single and rather modest-looking sign was placed, announcing the participation of the repair sponsor in the upcoming elections. It was a strong move that made a very positive impression in the area.

But the businessman’s opponents took an action in the style of “bringing the positive to the point of absurdity.” They printed tens of thousands of leaflets reminding area residents exactly who was sponsoring the renovation of the square. And then every day for two weeks they stuffed one such leaflet a day into each mailbox of the constituency. And voters, enraged by this annoying “immodesty” of a candidate who initially looked promising, failed miserably on election day.

As they say, done modestly and tastefully. Without any violation of election laws and even without the usual compromising evidence for election campaigns. It is clear that such games, based on exceeding the limit in “positive” campaigning, have a very effective impact on the electoral situation in poor regions.

Accordingly, this technique can also be used in the opposite direction - to neutralize the release of incriminating evidence, political technologists usually arrange a counter-flow of “negative” information of dubious reliability and easily refuted, in which a dangerous place for discussion is “drowned.”

RECEPTION 4. “Demonization of gray cardinals.”

Administrators with a clearly negative reputation in the eyes of the majority of the population are themselves unelected, but attributing to them behind-the-scenes, sero-cardinal influence has become a common method of discrediting a politician participating in elections. To defeat candidates in federal election campaigns, the most popular is the use of two “demons” from the presidential “family” - Berezovsky and Chubais (the latest in fashion this season is Abramovich).

Of course, it makes no sense for the “demons” themselves to publicly renounce the omnipotent influence attributed to them. And Boris Abramovich in every possible way advertises his real or imaginary patronage over any figure whom manipulators of public opinion declare to be his protégé on the grounds that they know each other. And the ex-secretary of the CIS is an easy and sticky person to communicate with. If Berezovsky does not “show up” in thirty meetings to collect political information in a day (and most of the meetings arise spontaneously, somewhere in the corridor), then he simply begins to feel sick and useless as a “political Panikovsky.” And if he has a good run and “shines” his fleeting conversations in court circles, then he feels like a great schemer.

The influence of shadow figures on public policy should neither be underestimated nor exaggerated. Citizens who are unsuccessful in their business are psychologically predisposed to exaggerate this influence within the framework of the concept of some kind of general conspiracy against ordinary people, whom the “demons” do not allow to the long-deserved “celebration of life”. Russian society is now unsuccessful, painful, humiliated and prone to searching for the guilty according to the principle of “a beam in its own eye.” If there were no “gray cardinals,” voters would still have invented them in order to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own political immaturity.

RECEPTION 5. "Mutual horror stories."

This technique is the implementation of the ancient principle of political struggle: “The darker the night, the brighter the stars.” Its essence is that two politicians, publicly opposing each other, agree among themselves on the mutual promotion of their ratings through the intimidation of each of their potential voters by “black forces” personified in the enemy partner.

A striking example of the effective implementation of the “mutual horror stories” technique was the unprecedented promotion of the support rating of the seriously ill and extremely unpopular Yeltsin in the 1996 presidential elections. The strengthening of Boris Nikolayevich’s pre-election positions could only happen as a reaction of fear to the strengthening of the leader of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. Of course, the increase in Zyuganov’s rating had to be controlled by the party in power, i.e. accurately dosed in time and not much higher than the level sufficient to take an honorable second place.

By the decision of the “seven bankers”, the communists were allocated a solid sponsor in the person of the now defunct Inkombank. This move of the deeply echeloned game of the super-elite was perceived, as usual, very superficially by the general politicized public. Some interpreted communist sponsorship as worldly wisdom like: “You can’t put all your eggs in one basket.” Others - as clear evidence of the recognition of the strength of the “popular opposition to the rotten regime.” But the leaders of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, having accepted a modest contribution from class enemies to carry out the “horror stories” necessary according to the scenario of the party in power in the media with the proper intensity and according to the proper schedule, were hardly as naive and uninformed as ordinary voters.

By April 1996, the launched scheme of “mutual horror stories” of Yeltsin by Zyuganov and Zyuganov by Yeltsin began to bring results. The “Siamese twins” of the 1996 election campaign worked in concert to increase the ratings of each other’s forced popularity. The wise Chubais, with an unwavering hand, brought the level of mobilization of the pro-communist and anti-communist electorate of Russia to the theoretical limit, i.e. to the point of white heat and choking with hatred.

Frightened by the pre-election activity of left and right radicals, the main, usually apolitical mass of voters felt themselves in danger. And the picture of the mental tossing of Russian citizens in search of the “lesser evil” was calculated long ago by sociologists: they should have ended in the choice of the healthy Zyuganov as the greater evil - despite all the glaring shortcomings of the sick Yeltsin as the lesser evil.

After all, the peculiarity of the second round of elections compared to the first is the dominance of the “contrary” voting motive. Although the number of convinced Yeltsin supporters was negligible compared to the number of convinced Zyuganov supporters, the number of voters who considered Gennady Andreevich a more dangerous figure in the presidential post than Boris Nikolaevich turned out to be larger.

By the way, elements of the “mutual horror stories” scheme will certainly be used in the upcoming elections. It seems that the authorities have already begun promoting the rating of Barkashov’s “Russian National Unity” in order to mobilize the electorate of the “forces of good.” After all, the effectiveness of intimidation of ordinary people by communists is now clearly lower than in 1996. And the extremely important vacancy for the authorities, “the murderer of Russian democracy,” should not be empty or filled with spontaneous, untested figures. It is not for nothing that there is a popular saying in political circles: “The choice of an enemy is too important a matter to be left to chance.”

TECHNIQUE 6. “Provoking a premature peak in the opponent’s popularity.”

Political technologists use certain techniques aimed at ensuring that the enemy’s resources are spent not on achieving a result, but on the process of achieving a result. In general, there is nothing particularly new here for Russia - the opponent’s team is only being “helped” to carry out more events in the wrong way, at the wrong time, in the wrong place and in the wrong volume. Outwardly, everything looks normal - the locomotive is humming, the wheels are spinning, the team is running, capital investments are being spent - but the fact that the train is going nowhere is visible only to attentive observers until the very moment of the elections.

One of the common methods of organizing pre-election “trips to nowhere” is to play on mobilizing the unstable part of the candidate’s electorate too early - so that by the decisive moment of voting they have time to get tired and disappointed. In order to provoke a peak of forced voter support for Yeltsin in June 1996, communist political investors built a peak of voluntary voter support for Zyuganov in April.

But charismatic politicians with a high proportion of unstable fans are much more sensitive to the accuracy of the popularity growth graph than Gennady Andreevich. If they create inflated expectations among their potential voters too early, then at the time of elections they are sure to face inflated disappointments of the electorate. Provoking a charismatic to make a false start in the active part of the campaign means that he is already halfway defeated. Examples illustrating this simple idea include Luzhkov’s election campaign in 1999, which followed a completely irrational schedule.

RECEPTION 7. “Strange and false supporters of the candidate.”

Election campaigns always bring lumpen dregs to the surface, mobilizing people with less than adequate behavior in search of easy money and social significance. Politicized “city madmen” who willingly give interviews to journalists easily become objects of manipulation by technologists on the opposing side.

A candidate's positive image can often be successfully compensated for by creating a negative image of his team - after all, as we know, kings are played by their retinue. A wide range of techniques are used here - right up to television reports about demonstrations of colorful homeless people carrying posters: “We are the face of the NN politician!” However, such crude anti-advertising stories have virtually no effect on the voting results - voters perceive them as everyday abuse of teams that does not decorate both opposing sides.

But provocateurs portraying authorized representatives of the election headquarters of a popular politician or his close relatives are a serious problem. The election “children of Lieutenant Schmidt” (both working individually and organized in false headquarters) can cause very noticeable damage to the reputation of candidates precisely because their vigorous activity instantly becomes food for gossip among misinformed voters.

RECEPTION 8. "Extra" candidates.

At any election of any social significance, along with two (less often three) candidates who have a real chance of winning, a motley crowd of “extra, unrealistic” applicants always gets off to a noisy start:

1. "promising debutants", who are more likely to apply for success in the next elections than in the current ones; 2. "sent Cossacks" - to take away part of the votes from one real candidate; 3. “permanent” participants who participate in the election campaign regardless of their chances of winning, because this is their political status (for example, for Zhirinovsky or Yavlinsky, non-participation in any federal elections means recognizing themselves as a political dead); 4. "firms" conducting an advertising campaign for their brand at the expense of the state budget (in the last presidential elections, this niche was filled by the deliberately vulgar figure of the alcohol manufacturer Bryntsalov, and in the next elections one can quite expect the participation of some bushy-haired manufacturer of anti-dandruff products).

Since the “extra” candidates form the background against which the intrigue of the elections develops and the disinformation maneuvers of teams of leading politicians are carried out, it would be useful for voters to learn to recognize which of the participants in the election marathon belongs to which of the four categories.

In the century mass media Politics largely comes down to the art of creating an image. And the most important art during the pre-election period is ratings of politicians. Through them, public interest in certain persons is aroused or extinguished. Ratings are a tool for attracting or withdrawing investments. Ratings are an attempt to discern in today's chaos the contours of what will persist in the future. It is a pedestal for the winners and a consolation for the losers...

Most election campaign headquarters are publishing rigged results of dishonestly conducted sociological measurements. But this lie is boring and ineffective, since it is quite obvious to the audience (perhaps, among the methods of “scientifically based lies” used, the only thing worthy of mention is the mixing of different concepts of trust rating and support rating).

Much more “interesting” are more subtle manipulations with the results of conscientiously conducted rating studies. The fact is that a professionally conducted study of voter support for certain politicians always has at least two layers of results.

The first layer is intended for the general public. The logic for interpreting the published figures in it is extremely simple and direct, without taking into account the strategic context known to the professional environment: “Dear readers, all the main figures of the preferences of survey participants are in front of you, and you cannot but agree with the completely obvious conclusions we propose. We do not intend to to impose some point of view on you - you are smart people. We are confident that you yourself will be able to draw the conclusions that the customer of the publication of the rating needs..."

Any numbers in sociology are somewhat disingenuous - if only because all stages of the mechanism of their appearance and processing inevitably bear the imprint of subjective interests. Therefore, scientifically valid conclusions based on primary sociological data can only be drawn on the basis of a complex, multidimensional and largely based on intuition (and therefore not indisputable!) interpretation of the data.

In the second layer of rating measurement results (intended not for the general public, but for a serious customer), the context in which the interviewees indicated their preferences is taken into account as much as possible. And then there is a kind of “translation” of the same measurement figures from the context of the situation at the time of the survey into the predicted context of the situation in which voting will take place. Without this “translation of context” (and very few specialists in Russia master this art), the results of rating measurements are meaningless - especially if there is still an indefinite amount of time before the elections. As the real situation of the presidential election approaches, the contexts become closer and the “direct” poll results become more objective.

When “the cancer has not yet whistled,” the discrepancy between contexts is significant and anyone who trusts the “direct” conclusions of surveys will almost certainly make a grave mistake. Because publishing ratings of potential candidates is an information game designed for an incompetent audience. I don’t want to belittle the merits of popular leading analytical television programs, but I must note that they often work on the principle: “Let the public know everything without understanding anything!”

Although serious information is collected in a number of sociological surveys, the results of its processing are almost never communicated to a wide audience. Because then it would become clear who exactly the majority of Russian voters would not want to see as President of the country. And this list would include a number of politicians whose promotion today feeds sociological agencies and the media. Who would want to strangle their own financial base with their publications? It is better to leave for the public audience and memos to the customer a certain veneer of semi-certainty over issues that have long been extremely clear to professionals.

Since Russian politicized ordinary people do not belong to the category of qualified users of forecasting information, they are fed “chewing gum for the mind” through the media, distracting them from truly serious information - they are given “a lot instead of the important.” To paraphrase a well-known expression, we can say that every nation deserves the sociological service that it receives. In general, they are fooling our brother - and rightly so.

RECEPTION 10. "Exploitation of the candidate's appearance."

The vast majority of voters judge a politician's personality primarily by his appearance, often confusing the politician's appearance with his real personality. Election campaign technologists always try to use this circumstance - some to reduce the support rating of the owner of his appearance, others to promote the politician. In this area of ​​manipulating public opinion, things sometimes arise that are completely unobvious to the general public and have an impact on the voting results.

A striking example of this is Yegor Gaidar. Sociologists noted that a significant part of his electorate in 1992-1995 were poorly educated, elderly women with low incomes. Precisely that category of voters who by that time had already become the worst victims of Gaidar’s reforms. And yet, she continued to support Yegor Timurovich in the elections - contrary to her own economic interests.

Psychologists have found an explanation for this amazing phenomenon. What was important to the grannies was not the content of Gaidar’s speeches, but his appearance and smooth speech of an “excellent student.” They saw in him their unrealized parental ideal, the living embodiment of what they failed to achieve in their own adult sons: he is smart, and knows how to explain everything clearly, and does not drink, and does not fight - “not like my good-for-nothing.” The grannies voted for Yegor Timurovich as a film actor who created for them the ideal image of the son of a poorly educated woman with a difficult fate.

RECEPTION 11. "Suitcase without a handle."

In the ratings of election campaign participants there is always some quantitatively defined line that separates candidates who have a non-zero chance of success from obvious losers. In elections to the State Duma according to party lists, this is 5% of the votes. For the first round of elections for the President of Russia, governors, mayors and parliamentarians in single-mandate districts, this critical barrier is in the range from 22 to 25% of the vote (only those two candidates who overcome this level advance to the second round and retain a chance of winning).

Food for thought about the name of Yeltsin's successor. In order to become the next President of Russia, it is enough to take second place in the first round with only a little over twenty percent of the votes. It is possible to give the championship in the first round to Zyuganov without any threat to the final result. Because in the second round, the majority of voters, guided by the principle of the “lesser evil,” will vote for any non-communist remaining on the ballot. If a politician from the top five ratings does not have a chance of winning the 22-25% barrier in the first round, then he can and should be excluded from the list of real contenders. So as not to fool voters.

The effect of a “suitcase without a handle” (which is both difficult to carry and a shame to throw away) arises regarding candidates who do not reach the critical line that leaves a chance for success. Supporters of such politicians find themselves in a psychologically difficult position - on the one hand, you want to be principled, but on the other, you don’t want your vote to go to waste without any influence on the election results.

Many active voters (no less than 15% of the electorate) during the election campaign are worried about the question: “Should I support a nice outsider or give a vote to one of the politicians with a high rating?” It is clear that technologists are trying to play on the doubts of these people and force them to make a choice in favor of more “passable” politicians.

Imposing a list of two (less often three) favorites through the media at the beginning of the election campaign is one of the key stages of manipulating public opinion in elections. These lists almost never change during the campaign, because those politicians who have been declared “suitcases without a handle” find it very difficult to regain their reputation as “electable”. The louder they will repeat about their cross-country ability, citing the “latest” data from the “most objective” sociological research, the more distrust they will cause in their words.

RECEPTION 12. "Frog vision".

It is known that a frog can die of hunger if motionless food lies under its nose - the frog sees only objects moving in its field of vision, and what does not change does not seem to exist for it.

Voters form their opinions about candidates as a result of some events related to them, “sufficiently noticeable” violations of monotony for the audience. If a politician is present a lot, for a long time and monotonously on television screens, then this is not an event (remember the notorious “election bulls” of Ivan Rybkin in the State Duma campaign of 1995). The constantly overwhelming extravagance of behavior also creates perception fatigue in the audience - for example, now there is a clear crisis in the event genre in Zhirinovsky.

At the same time, any slight deviation of a politician from his previous image does not become an event (an analogy can be made with the trading system - it is known that price changes of less than 0.3% per month are psychologically indistinguishable for buyers). For the “frog vision” of voters, what is noticeable is not so much the total volume of changes in a politician’s image over a long period, but rather the high rate of change at a relatively short, decisive stage of the campaign.

If changes in image in a given direction occur at a uniformly low pace (relatively speaking, less than 0.3% per month), then they are noticeable only to a narrow circle of specialists. And the precise unevenness of a politician’s public behavior over time, with pronounced peaks and troughs in popularity, allows him to effectively attract the attention of a wide audience. Voter visibility commensurate with the strategic context is the high political art of timely adjustment of existing image stereotypes.

RECEPTION 13. "Hunting a bear with a log."

In the old days, our ancestors had a now almost forgotten method of hunting bears... with a log (nowadays, in a slightly modified form, it is used by Siberian beekeepers to protect honeycombs in trees). To kill or scare away a bear, it was not at all necessary to run after the animal throughout the forest with a log at the ready. A dead heifer was taken as bait and half-buried under a tree. Two or three logs were suspended vertically from a tree branch so that they almost touched the carcass. When the bear came and started digging out the heifer, he quickly discovered that the logs were in his way. He pushed them away - they came back and lightly hit him. The angry animal pushed the logs away harder - and they returned to him the force of his own blow. The bear quickly had no time for food - he fought furiously with the swinging logs until he broke his own backbone.

Opposition politicians often use this method of promoting their image to the masses of voters - at the expense of the energy and material and financial resources of their opponents from the party in power. To do this, you need to look provocatively enough for an angry enemy to look like a “hanging log.”

This technique only looks simple on the surface. In fact, the ability to far-sightedly place oneself at the forefront of an opponent’s attack in right time and in in the right place- this is the most important of the political arts. Just exposing yourself to attack is a simple task and is accessible to everyone. To be able to stand out from the endless row of people unfairly oppressed by their ardently unloved bosses requires a certain image-making intuition. But maintaining the popularity gained for any length of time is possible only for a very few people with the natural talent of a politician (or a politician).

Using the method of “hunting a bear with a log”, both Boris Yeltsin, who managed to stay at the heights he had conquered for a long time using various events, and Telman Gdlyan, who did not distinguish himself in diversity and therefore mediocrely squandered his fantastic image of the social response of the 1989-90 model, entered big politics .

A striking example of the use of the “hunting with a log” technique was the election campaign of Alexander Lebed in the Krasnoyarsk Territory. His opponents, who played on the side of the incumbent governor Valery Zubov, had a 100% chance of preventing the victory of the “outsider” general - to do this, it was enough to play to slow down as much as possible the pace of Krasnoyarsk voters’ awareness of Lebed’s strengths and weaknesses. But the party in power lost its nerve and it mediocrely squandered the strategic advantage it initially had - as a result of a fierce attack on the “suspended log”, in just one month from March 26 to April 26, 1998, Lebed’s support rating soared from 13-15% to 46%.

About "black" and "gray" technologists.

All electoral technologies manipulate the will of citizens to one degree or another, but there is still a certain line dividing the professional community into “black” and “gray” technologists.

“Black” technologists proceed from the fact that the overwhelming mass of voters are “cattle”, incapable of independently assessing events in a fast-moving campaign - which means that public opinion can and should be raped by any shocking, painful, morally prohibitive methods. This is a very arrogant and self-sufficient public, loving to boast of their extremely high fees for organizing a number of noisy “rapes” of Russian public opinion in 1992-1996. They work a lot on their personal image in the eyes of potential customers (sincerely considering their employers to be the same object of manipulation as voters), polishing their skills in portraying international-class specialists on the basis that they work according to Western methods.

“Black” technologists almost always focus on disclosing incriminating evidence. Let me give you a lengthy and very eloquent quote from one theoretical article: “Kompromat, if it is based on facts, is a kind of “forest sanator.” It rejects dirty politicians and gives others a real incentive not to get involved with anything that can discredit. Thanks to kompromat politics is becoming not dirtier, but cleaner. It is no coincidence that in “civilized” countries the art of compromising and criticism has reached the highest development. And here we are far from them. Today’s detractors of “dirty” campaigns probably do not know that in the last presidential election in civilized America , 70% advertising campaign Clinton was built on anti-advertising.

The fact that in our country compromising material is also beginning to play an increasingly important role suggests that we are gradually getting rid of the Soviet faith in the “perfect” person, in the leader. Gradually, people begin to realize that all candidates for any post are people and nothing human is alien to them. Typical elections three to five years ago took place according to the following pattern: a frantic wave of popular love carries out a candidate, and then the same wave sweeps him away, but under the sign of hatred. The main remedy for disappointment is to try not to be enchanted. You need to look at things and people realistically."

“Black” technologists, as a rule, tell potential customers that they have no lost election campaigns or have lost only one or two campaigns. Formally, such statements are not lies. The fact is that in serious election campaigns, the same team of “black” technologists is usually divided into two working groups that enter into agreements with the headquarters of two leading and competing candidates. (This is reminiscent of the distribution of roles in the “security racketeering” business, when one part of the group creates a problem - it “attacks” the entrepreneur, and the second part of the group successfully solves the problem - for a lot of money it provides a “protection” from its “attacking” colleagues).

So they are still involved in the victory in the elections - either directly, or through the “fifth column” at the headquarters of the loser. Such cases are not uncommon, so “black” technologists really have reasons to treat customers as successfully manipulated “cattle”. As they say, “everything goes according to Senka”: like the customer, so are the technologists for fulfilling his wishes.

"Gray" technologists are usually more provincial and less arrogant. They believe that the proportion of the electorate that is able to navigate candidates on their own is not so small - which means that the bulk of voters must be treated more or less with respect. There are not and cannot be “white” political technologists (so to speak, professionals in manipulating public opinion in impeccably white “moral clothes”) - although sometimes in election headquarters you come across idealistic amateurs who accidentally approach the candidate, but they do not make a difference.

If we talk about trends, it is worth noting that over the past year and a half, the previously strong position of “black” technologists in the eyes of potential customers has been somewhat shaken. The Russian voter, although slowly, is gradually learning from his own mistakes to recognize the most crude and morally incorrect methods of information and psychological coercion. The effectiveness of direct positive or negative political advertising has sharply decreased compared to the pre-Gaidar period.

Ordinary Russians have become much more distrustful of external sources of information about candidates - before voting, they are more focused on the point of view of the authorities of local public opinion, on the verdict of the “street court”. Therefore, indirect methods for managing how voters share controversial impressions about candidates' strengths and weaknesses are becoming increasingly popular among election technology specialists. Psychologically unobtrusive assistance in choosing the “lesser evil” is typical of the approach of “gray” technologists.

The time of dirty political technologies in Russia is unlikely to ever end, but last elections in St. Petersburg, the “blacks” suffered their first loud and obvious defeat, publicly showing a decrease in their effectiveness. And six months before that, the same St. Petersburg team of “blacks” suffered an implicit defeat in the gubernatorial elections Krasnoyarsk Territory(as a “fifth column” in the ranks of Alexander Lebed’s election headquarters). It can be assumed that based on the results of the upcoming State Duma and presidential campaigns, “gray” technologists will more often accept congratulations on their victory than “black” ones.

About the oddities of election campaigns

The question of the interest of politicians themselves and their political investors in the effectiveness of election campaigns is far from simple. For example, investors often pay politicians not for their personal “public” victory, but for their “honorable” second or third place in the election results.

One gets the impression that most candidates are trying to seriously control the effectiveness of their own headquarters. Partly because they will then be forced to ask too many unpleasant and "inopportune" questions to their political investors, on whom the campaign depends.

A politician who does not need any money at all to “defend the interests of the people” is an illusion, a naive dream of the elderly part of voters. Politics is a rather expensive business, and any professional politician is periodically objectively forced to “sell” on a very specific market for political investments. There is no point in making complaints against a politician just for this, because this is an indispensable “underside of the profession.” But it is imperative to demand from a politician the quality of his work (for investors’ money) in the interests of voters.

No politician can reduce his dependence on “money bags” to zero, but this dependence can actually be reduced for the sake of the interests of ordinary voters. For example, one can and should use the so-called “law of harmony of communal apartments”, which is valid in the political kitchen. It states that relative peace in a common kitchen can only exist if the number of housewives is at least three. With three or more housewives, permanent shift object of condemnation by all other women. Every housewife understands that someday she will definitely find herself persecuted by her cohabitants, and therefore tries not to bring scandals to the point of frenzy. With two mistresses, it is almost inevitable that one will “bite” the other, who does not have the opportunity to find at least temporary allies and form a coalition with them against the aggressor.

As paradoxical as it may sound, in order not to become a hostage to his investors and to work primarily in the interests of his voters, a politician must take money from at least three financial groups of comparable strength. Without this condition being met, the situation around him will constantly be explosive. Attempts at constructive activity by a politician with only two large investors will be paralyzed by their uncompromising internecine bickering. And when a monopoly or dominance of any one group is established, the politician becomes a “pocket figure”, nominally reigning, but not managing the individual - real power passes to the main investor.

The main way a politician can ensure relative independence from his economic benefactors is through the precise use internal contradictions in their disorderly ranks. But in order to be seriously interesting to three large investors at once and not give up a controlling stake of influence over himself to anyone, a politician needs to have extraordinary data. An ordinary figure, even if he has all sorts of populist talents, is doomed either to be out of pocket or to lack access to financial resources.

It would seem that political investors should be interested in the effectiveness of election campaigns - after all, their money is being spent. But here, too, “the devil is in the details.” Of course, investors strive for as much control as possible over the results of using their money. More precisely, for the final results - after all, the victory of one or another candidate is for them only an intermediate stage of the game. Investors are interested either in eliminating some dangers for their business (for example, the success of many Russian “entrepreneurs” can be seriously hampered by the too close interest of law enforcement agencies in them), or in making a profit through access to state budget resources and state property. They strive to achieve these goals by funding specific politicians.

If successful, election campaigns will be very profitable business. Typically, investments pay off within three to four months, and then profit comes. This process has its own shadow economy and its own “evil figures.” Paradoxical as it may seem, investors are not always interested in stopping cases of theft of their money by election headquarters (and usually at least 30% of the actual election fund is stolen). And they are often quite loyal to the use of high-cost election campaign technologies. Political investors in Russia are also no strangers - they strive to take control of the process of stealing their own money in front of the financed politician. Presenting him with a “phony” bill for his “good deed” after the elections.

Relatively speaking, they invest 5 million dollars in the election campaign, but quickly return 4 million, stealing it themselves through their people embedded in the election headquarters. In reality, they invested only $1 million in the politician, but they presented him with an invoice for return with a profit of $5 million. Due to quick access to state budget funds. And the several hundred thousand dollars that are stolen by “unorganized” activists of the electoral process already become necessary costs in this scheme, for which claims can be made against the same politician who failed to ensure order in his own headquarters.

So every participant in the process benefits. And the “bedside table” for this cyclical financial process is ultimately taxpayers’ money. In Russia, as in any other marginal country, election campaigns are part of the mechanism of corruption. But this, of course, does not mean that elections should be abolished - democracy, as we know, is a bad way to solve the problems of society where all other methods are even worse..

Electoral technologies are a myth of “political thimblemakers”

By and large, the very name “election technologies” is inaccurate, opportunistic and mythological. It is simply convenient for the image of “thimbles” who are extracting money from political investors. We can talk about technologies in auxiliary areas of the election campaign (for example, about technologies for blocking falsification of election results). But the industrial approach will not help the main direction - creating and promoting a positive image of the candidate, because the consumer prefers not a “mass product”, not a “stamped product”, but personality, individuality.

If we compare a politician’s election campaign with a one-man show, then the analogue of a political technologist will be a stage director. Can you imagine what an outstanding director would say about the industry of staging a play - especially one involving an outstanding actor? And thousands of so-called political strategists are selling themselves on the vanity fair of tens of thousands of people who have no ability for public politics, saying: “You are a fool - it’s more expensive for you!”

In Russia, the number of public politicians interesting from a technological point of view can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Moreover, at least half of them are “their own directors.” So there are hardly more than a dozen truly professionally working consultants for promoting a political image in our country.

Of course, in the absence of fish in Russia, even cancer is a fish. Since there will always be someone who works even more unprofessionally, figures appear who promote their personal image. But in the overwhelming majority of cases, election consulting in our country is a type of fraud. So far, the demand for so-called political strategists from those who “are happy to be deceived” is stable. And this will continue until Russia develops a kind of voter safety culture.

Manipulation by “political thimbles” during election campaigns is one of the most serious internal threats to our national security. Because the sleep of the pre-election mind gives rise to post-election monsters.

It is with the help of all of the above methods that the political fooling of the electorate is carried out.

Item Description: "PR"

In market conditions, when each of the business partners pursues self-interest, it is very important to create an environment of mutual trust. This is a condition for efficiency in any area, and especially in the market, where constant reliable connections with consumers, clients, suppliers, and employees form the basis of activity. Consequently, marketers should be familiar with public relations (“public relations” (PR)). This term translated from English means public relations. It appeared in scientific literature relatively recently, although establishing contacts with the public, taking into account their opinions, and influencing public consciousness go back to ancient times. Also in ancient Greece targeted influence on the public was considered a necessary condition for success in politics and trade. Aristotle, in particular, believed that you can convince an audience only if you achieve its location and sympathy.

There are quite a lot of definitions of PP. Here are some of them: PR is the art and science of achieving harmony between the company and the public through mutual understanding based on truth and full information; PR is the art of forming a favorable public attitude towards companies by creating the idea that the company produces and sells goods in the interests of the buyer, and not for its own benefit; PR is a multifaceted activity to organize public opinion in relation to a company (or individual) on the part of not only potential clients, but also the general public, including a form of work with extensive involvement of the media.

The components of PR are propaganda and corporate identity of the enterprise. Propaganda (publicity) - non-personal and unpaid by the sponsor stimulation of demand for a product, service or business organizational unit by disseminating them commercially important information in the printed media or favorable presentation on radio, television or stage. Corporate style is a set of consistently reproducible distinctive characteristics of communication, behavior, and traditions characteristic of a company and revealing the uniqueness of their market interaction.

The role and functions of PR can be formulated in ten fundamental principles: PR is thoughtfully designed programs that give priority to the interests of society.

PR is a service area of ​​activity where public interests rather than personal benefits predominate.

The main criterion by which PR programs are selected is public interests.

Do not harm the media, as they represent channels of universal communication with the broad masses.

Mastery of contact skills by PR specialists, i.e. the ability to pass information from one party to another until understanding is reached.

Wide use scientific research in the field of public opinion.

Involvement of social sciences such as psychology, sociology, communication theory and semantics for a more complete understanding and effective impact on the target audience. Collaboration of PR with other related disciplines, such as pedagogical theory, political science, economics and history.

Attention!

The bank of abstracts, term papers and dissertations contains texts intended for informational purposes only. If you want to use these materials in any way, you should contact the author of the work. The site administration does not provide comments on works posted in the abstract bank or permission to use texts in whole or any parts thereof.

We are not the authors of these texts, do not use them in our activities and do not sell these materials for money. We accept claims from authors whose works were added to our bank of abstracts by site visitors without indicating the authorship of the texts, and we delete these materials upon request.

MANIPULATION OF PUBLIC OPINION syn. "manipulation mass consciousness") is one of the ways of domination and suppression of the will of citizens through spiritual influence on people through programming their behavior.

This influence is aimed at the mental structures of a person, is carried out secretly and aims to change the opinions, motives and goals of people in the direction desired by the authorities.

Symptoms and signs of hidden manipulation can be: language, emotions, sensationalism and urgency, repetition, fragmentation, removal from context, totalitarianism of the source of messages, totalitarianism of the decision, mixing of information and opinions, covering with authority, activation of stereotypes, incoherence of statements, etc. .

The Oxford English Dictionary defines manipulation as “the act of influencing or controlling people with dexterity, especially with disparaging connotations, as covert management and manipulation.”

Published in 1969 in New York " Modern dictionary sociology" defines manipulation as "a type of use of power in which the possessor influences the behavior of others without revealing the nature of the behavior that he expects from them."

There are many interesting things woven into the intricate fabric of the media, which is the main tool of manipulation. There are quite a few methods of manipulating consciousness, but below we consider the main nine methods that are used most often.

1. Use of suggestion. The media and, in particular, the journalist must convince the audience of their own competence, gain their trust, becoming, as it were, their alter ego, their second self. It is necessary to introduce the public to the so-called. suggestive state - in this case, the listener/reader/viewer takes everything on faith, without requiring proof. This is the reactive behavior of the public - a puzzled herd. All religions are built on this method:

“You don’t have to think, you have to believe.”

2. Transfer of a particular fact into the sphere of the general, into the system. For example, one student who professed the so-called was killed. anti-fascist views (see anti-fascism). It is unknown who killed him, but journalists are working hard, blaming, of course, Russian fascists for everything. But even if so - so what? And the fact that the media, supporting the most shocking version of the event, are trying to drive it into a certain system, which is the hopeless Russian fascism in Russia, invented by the same media. Although it is clear to anyone that a single special case is in no way an indicator of the overall system...

3. The use of rumors, speculation, interpretations in an unclear political or social situation. A method that is closely related to the previous one. Again, the same example with the murdered student. No one knows for sure who killed, why he killed, etc. But the tabloid media unanimously picked up that evil fascists did it. A chain reaction has begun that journalists and editors themselves can no longer control. The same thing happened, by the way, with the “Tajik girl” Kh. Sultanova, and with the “Peruvian boy” E. Arturo, and with many, many others. The media in all these cases, having imagined the unthinkable, got into a puddle, but did not want to loudly advertise it.

4. A method called “we need corpses,” i.e., emotional impact on the audience with the help of blood, sex, violence, shooting, murder, etc. Simply, emotional zombies. This, firstly, attracts the reader/listener/viewer, and secondly, a thought like “How is this possible! This is terrible!”, or, if it’s a child, like “I want to be as cool!” Thus, under the guise of harmless films or informational notes, the ideology hidden in them creeps into the subconscious of the public.

5. The “horror story” method, when the audience is forced to choose the lesser of two evils. As a result of the picturesque story of all the horror of the greater evil, the lesser evil is no longer presented as evil, but as very good. For example, the following formulation of the problem is now in use: “But when nationalists come to power, grandiose repressions will begin, accompanied by the measurement of skulls.” And a colorful description of this process with an appeal to the history of the Third Reich (although, naturally, the Third Reich has nothing to do with the current situation in Russia and in the world, as well as with modern Russian nationalists).

6. Silencing some facts and exaggerating others. Here you don’t have to look far for an example. Everyone has already heard about how poor immigrants are and how they want to be friends with the Russians, how they can boost the Russian economy, etc. However, about the fact that over 50% of the crimes of their total number are committed by immigrants, that 70,000 people annually they die from the drugs that these people bring from the Caucasus and Central Asia - all the media are silent about this, because this is natural extremism.

7. The fragmentation method, which consists of the following: the information flow is divided into separate fragments that are not connected with each other, as a result of which the audience’s consciousness fails to form a correct and complete picture of the world. In addition, consumers of information experience an inability to concentrate on one thing, an inability to highlight the main idea of ​​​​everything that is happening.

8. Multiple repetitions or the “Goebbels method”. Using this method, you need to repeat the lie as often as possible in order for the public to believe it. This is suggestion. This is what all advertising is based on, as well as many of the catchy news items in tabloid newspapers. For example, almost all the media, when the “Tajik girl” was killed, screamed that she was killed by skinheads. And they shouted about it so often and a lot that the public really believed this lie. Then, however, it turned out that the father of this girl was a drug dealer, and that he used his daughter as a weapon for selling drugs, and skinheads had nothing to do with it. But the majority of people remain of the opinion that the “Tajik girl” is a poor and unfortunate victim of cruel skinheads.

9. Creation of false events, hoaxes. In this case, an event is created that did not happen and presented as a fact. The entire yellow press is constantly doing this. Stories about Satanists making bloody sacrifices in cruel rituals to their father Satan have long set the teeth on edge and cause nothing but healthy laughter or even disgust. In the same row are tales about skinheads killing thousands of “Tajik girls” every day, and everything else in the same spirit.

How to protect your consciousness from manipulation The solution is simple - you need to think (determine cause-and-effect relationships), analyze, compare, measure with reason. The thinking audience is the so-called. a reflective audience that demands evidence instead of faith, sees the logical errors of the media, does not succumb to colorful descriptions of terrible and merciless entities with labels attached to them, independently searches for facts, compares them with the facts given by the media, and draws the proper conclusions.

The thinking audience is no longer a puzzled herd, it is a collection of individuals. Therefore, only a thinking audience is not subject to manipulation of their consciousness.

Literature:

1. Danilova A. A. Manipulation of words in the media. - M.: “Dobrosvet”, “KDU Publishing House”, 2009

2. Kara-Murza S. G. “Manipulation of consciousness. Tutorial. M.: Algorithm, 2004.

Let's consider methods of manipulating “public opinion” by the media using the example of the Three Little Pigs.

Techniques for manipulating the human psyche and the consciousness of the masses:

1. False questioning, or deceptive clarifications.

In this case, the manipulative effect is achieved due to the fact that the manipulator pretends that he wants to better understand something for himself, asks you again, but repeats your words only at the beginning and then only partially, introducing a different meaning into the meaning of what you previously said, thereby changing general meaning said to please oneself.

In this case, you should be extremely attentive, always listen carefully to what they are telling you, and if you notice a catch, clarify what you said earlier; Moreover, clarify even if the manipulator, pretending not to notice your desire for clarification, tries to move on to another topic.

2. Deliberate haste, or skipping topics.

The manipulator in this case strives, after voicing any information, to hastily move on to another topic, realizing that your attention will immediately be refocused on new information, which means there is an increased likelihood that previous information that has not been “protested” will reach the listener’s subconscious; if information reaches the subconscious, then it is known that after any information ends up in the unconscious (subconscious), after a while it is realized by a person, i.e. passes into consciousness. Moreover, if the manipulator has additionally strengthened his information with an emotional load, or even introduced it into the subconscious using the coding method, then such information will appear at the moment the manipulator needs, which he himself will provoke (for example, using the principle of “anchoring” from NLP, or, in other words, by activating the code).

In addition, as a result of haste and skipping topics, it becomes possible to “voice” a large number of topics in a relatively short period of time; which means that the censorship of the psyche will not have time to let everything through, and the likelihood increases that a certain part of the information will penetrate into the subconscious, and from there it will influence the consciousness of the object of manipulation in a manner beneficial to the manipulator.

3. The desire to show one’s indifference, or pseudo-inattention.

In this case, the manipulator tries to perceive both the interlocutor and the information received as indifferently as possible, thereby unconsciously forcing the person to try at all costs to convince the manipulator of his importance to him. Thus, the manipulator can only manage the information emanating from the object of his manipulation, obtaining those facts that the object had not previously intended to publish. A similar circumstance on the part of the person at whom the manipulation is directed is embedded in the laws of the psyche, forcing any person to strive at all costs to prove that he is right by convincing the manipulator (without suspecting that he is a manipulator), and using for this the available arsenal of logical controllability of thoughts - that is, the presentation of new circumstances of the case, facts that, in his opinion, can help him with this. Which turns out to be in the hands of the manipulator, who finds out the information he needs.

As a counteraction in this case, it is recommended to strengthen your own volitional control and not succumb to provocations.

4. False inferiority, or imaginary weakness.

This principle of manipulation is aimed at the desire on the part of the manipulator to show the object of manipulation his weakness, and thereby achieve the desired, because if someone is weaker, the effect of condescension is activated, which means the censorship of the human psyche begins to function in a relaxed mode, as if not perceiving what is coming from manipulator information seriously. Thus, the information emanating from the manipulator passes directly into the subconscious, is deposited there in the form of attitudes and patterns of behavior, which means the manipulator achieves his goal, because the object of manipulation, without knowing it, over time will begin to carry out the attitudes laid down in the subconscious, or, in other words, fulfill the secret will of the manipulator.

The main way of confrontation is complete control of information emanating from any person, i.e. Every person is an opponent and must be taken seriously.

5. False love, or letting down vigilance.

Due to the fact that one individual (the manipulator) acts out love, excessive respect, veneration, etc. in front of another (the object of manipulation). (i.e. expresses his feelings in a similar way), he achieves incomparably more than if he openly asked for something.

In order not to succumb to such provocations, you must have, as F.E. Dzerzhinsky once said, a “cold mind.”

6. Violent pressure, or excessive anger.

Manipulation in this case becomes possible as a result of unmotivated rage on the part of the manipulator. The person at whom this kind of manipulation is directed will have a desire to calm down the one who is angry with him. Why is he subconsciously ready to make concessions to the manipulator?

Methods of counteraction may be different, depending on the skills of the object of manipulation. For example, as a result of “adjustment” (the so-called calibration in NLP), you can first stage in yourself a state of mind similar to that of the manipulator, and after calming down, calm the manipulator. Or, for example, you can show your calmness and absolute indifference to the manipulator’s anger, thereby confusing him and therefore depriving him of his manipulative advantage. You can sharply increase the pace of your own aggressiveness using speech techniques simultaneously with a light touch of the manipulator (his hand, shoulder, arm...), and additional visual influence, i.e. in this case, we seize the initiative, and by simultaneously influencing the manipulator with the help of a visual, auditory and kinesthetic stimulus, we introduce him into a state of trance, and therefore dependence on you, because in this state the manipulator himself becomes the object of our influence, and we We can introduce certain attitudes into his subconscious, because It is known that in a state of anger, any person is susceptible to coding (psychoprogramming). You can use other countermeasures. It should be remembered that in a state of anger it is easier to make a person laugh. You should know about this feature of the psyche and use it in time.

7. Fast pace, or unjustified haste.

In this case, we must talk about the desire of the manipulator due to the excessively imposed fast pace speeches to push through some of your ideas, achieving their approval by the object of manipulation. This also becomes possible when the manipulator, hiding behind an alleged lack of time, achieves incomparably more from the object of manipulation than if this happened over a long period of time, during which the object of manipulation would have time to think about his answer, and therefore not become a victim of deception ( manipulations).

In this case, you should take a time out (for example, refer to an urgent phone call, etc.) in order to knock the manipulator off the pace he set. To do this, you can pretend to misunderstand some question and “stupidly” ask again, etc.

8. Excessive suspicion, or causing forced excuses.

This type of manipulation occurs when the manipulator feigns suspicion in some matter. As a response to suspicion, the object of manipulation has a desire to justify himself. Thus, the protective barrier of his psyche weakens, which means that the manipulator achieves his goal by “pushing” the necessary psychological attitudes into his subconscious.

An option for defense is to become aware of yourself as an individual and willfully resist the attempt of any manipulative influence on your psyche (i.e. you must demonstrate your own self-confidence and show that if the manipulator suddenly gets offended, then let him be offended, and if he wants to leave, you don’t run after him; this should be adopted by “lovers”: do not let yourself be manipulated.)

9. Imaginary fatigue, or a game of consolation.

The manipulator with his entire appearance shows fatigue and the inability to prove anything and listen to any objections. Thus, the object of manipulation tries to quickly agree with the words given by the manipulator, so as not to tire him with his objections. Well, by agreeing, he thereby follows the lead of the manipulator, who only needs this.

There is only one way to counter it:

do not give in to provocations.

10. The authority of the manipulator, or deception of the authorities.

This type of manipulation comes from such specific features of the individual’s psyche as worship of authorities in any field. Most often, it turns out that the very area in which such an “authority” achieved results lies in a completely different area than his imaginary “request” now, but nevertheless, the object of manipulation cannot help himself, since in his soul the majority people believe that there is always someone who has achieved more than them.

A variant of opposition is belief in one’s own exclusivity, super-personality; developing in yourself the conviction of your own chosenness, that you are a super-man.

11. Courtesy provided, or payment for assistance.

The manipulator conspiratorially informs the object of manipulation about something, as if advising in a friendly manner to make this or that decision. At the same time, clearly hiding behind imaginary friendship(in fact, they may be meeting each other for the first time), as advice, inclines the object of manipulation towards the solution option that is primarily necessary for the manipulator.

You need to believe in yourself, and remember that you have to pay for everything. And it’s better to pay immediately, i.e. before you are asked to pay as a thank you for the service provided.

12. Resistance, or acted out protest.

The manipulator, using some words, awakens feelings in the soul of the object of manipulation aimed at overcoming the barrier that has arisen (censorship of the psyche), in an effort to achieve his goal. It is known that the psyche is structured in such a way that a person mostly wants what is either forbidden to him or what requires effort to achieve.

Whereas what may be better and more important, but lies on the surface, in fact is often not noticed.

The way to counteract is self-confidence and will, i.e. You should always rely only on yourself and not give in to weaknesses.

13. Factor of particularity, or from details to error.

The manipulator forces the object of manipulation to pay attention to only one specific detail, without allowing him to notice the main thing, and on the basis of this to draw appropriate conclusions, which are accepted by the consciousness of that person as the non-alternative basis for the meaning of what was said. It should be noted that this is very common in life, when most people allow themselves to make their own opinion about any subject, without actually having any facts or more detailed information, and often without having their own opinion about what they are judging, using the opinions of others. Therefore, it is possible to impose such an opinion on them, which means the manipulator can achieve his goal.

To counteract, you should constantly work on yourself, on increasing your own knowledge and level of education.

14. Irony, or manipulation with a grin.

Manipulation is achieved due to the fact that the manipulator chooses an initially ironic tone, as if unconsciously questioning any words of the object of manipulation. In this case, the object of manipulation “loses his temper” much faster; and since critical thinking is difficult when angry, a person enters ASC (altered states of consciousness), in which consciousness easily passes through previously forbidden information.

For effective protection, you should show your complete indifference to the manipulator. Feeling like a super-human, “chosen one” will help you to tolerate attempts to manipulate you as child’s play. The manipulator will intuitively immediately feel such a state, because manipulators usually have well-developed senses, which, we note, allows them to sense the moment to carry out their manipulative techniques.

15. Interruption, or escape of thought.

The manipulator achieves his goal by constantly interrupting the thoughts of the object of manipulation, directing the topic of conversation in the direction desired by the manipulator.

As a counteraction, you can ignore the interruptions of the manipulator, or use special speech psychotechnics to make him ridiculed among the listeners, because if they laugh at a person, all his subsequent words are no longer taken seriously.

16. Provoking imaginary or false accusations.

This kind of manipulation becomes possible as a result of communicating to the object of manipulation information that can cause him anger, and therefore a decrease in criticality in assessing the supposed information. After which such a person turns out to be broken for a certain period of time, during which the manipulator achieves the imposition of his will on him.

Protection is to believe in yourself and not pay attention to others.

17. Trapping, or imaginary recognition of the opponent’s benefit.

In this case, the manipulator, carrying out the act of manipulation, hints at more favorable conditions in which the opponent (the object of manipulation) supposedly finds himself, thereby forcing the latter to justify himself in every possible way and become open to manipulation, which usually follows this from the manipulator.

Protection is the awareness of oneself as a super-personality, which means a completely reasonable “elevation” over the manipulator, especially if he also considers himself a “nonentity.” Those. in this case, you should not make excuses that say, no, I am not now higher than you in status, but admit, grinning, that yes, I am you, you are in my dependence, and you must accept this or... Thus, faith in yourself, belief in your own exclusivity will help you overcome any traps on the way to your consciousness from manipulators.

18. Deception in the palm of your hand, or imitation of bias.

The manipulator intentionally places the object of manipulation in certain specified conditions, when the person chosen as the object of manipulation, trying to ward off suspicion of excessive bias towards the manipulator, allows manipulation to take place over himself due to the unconscious belief in the good intentions of the manipulator. That is, he seems to give himself an instruction not to react critically to the words of the manipulator, thereby unconsciously giving the opportunity for the words of the manipulator to pass into his consciousness.

19. Intentional misconception, or specific terminology.

In this case, manipulation is carried out through the use by the manipulator of specific terms that are not clear to the object of manipulation, and the latter, due to the danger of appearing illiterate, does not have the courage to clarify what these terms mean.

The way to counteract is to ask again and clarify what is unclear to you.

20. Imposing false stupidity, or through humiliation to victory.

The manipulator strives in every possible way to reduce the role of the object of manipulation, hinting at his stupidity and illiteracy, in order to thus destabilize the positive mood of the psyche of the object of manipulation, plunge his psyche into a state of chaos and temporary confusion, and thus achieve the fulfillment of his will over him through verbal manipulation and ( or) coding of the psyche.

Defense - don't pay attention. It is generally recommended to pay less attention to the meaning of the manipulator’s words, and more to the details around him, gestures and facial expressions, or generally pretend that you are listening, and think “about your own things,” especially if in front of you is an experienced fraudster or criminal hypnotist.

21. Repetition of phrases, or imposition of thoughts.

With this type of manipulation, through repeated phrases, the manipulator accustoms the object of manipulation to any information that he is going to convey to him.

A defensive attitude is not to fixate your attention on the words of the manipulator, listen to him “with half an ear,” or use special speech techniques to transfer the conversation to another topic, or seize the initiative and introduce the attitudes you need into the subconscious of your interlocutor-manipulator, or many other options.

22. Erroneous speculation, or involuntary reticence.

In this case, manipulations achieve their effect due to:

1) deliberate omission by the manipulator;
2) erroneous speculation by the object of manipulation.

Influencing public opinion is one of the leading functions of the media. Manipulation of public opinion in most cases is based on the use of stereotypes. To successfully manipulate public opinion, you must have a reliable “stereotype map” different groups and layers of the population - all cultural context of this society. If it is possible to push large masses of people to see some social phenomenon through the stereotype desired by the manipulator, then it becomes very difficult for those who disagree to appeal to people common sense. The media is most often accused of manipulating public opinion. And there is every reason for that. According to M. Parenti, the media “select most of the information and disinformation that we use to assess socio-political reality. Our attitude towards problems and phenomena, even the very approach to what is considered a problem or phenomenon, is largely predetermined by those who controls the world of communications."

The media have become the main instrument for manipulating public opinion. "A. Mol writes about the media: "They actually control our entire culture, passing it through their filters, highlight individual elements from the general mass of cultural phenomena and give them special weight, increase the value of one idea, devaluing another, thus polarizing the entire field of culture . What is not included in the channels of mass communication has almost no influence on the development of society in our time.”

Therefore, many scientists believe that the media create a symbolic image of reality, in other words, quasi-reality. Day after day, a complex of stereotypical concepts is consumed by millions of television viewers “in formulaic capsules containing mass-produced information and entertainment products.” From such “capsules” - television stories, printed materials, images, communicated ideas - a special symbolic world is formed that structures life values, norms, shared obligations and attitudes and forms the basis for mutual understanding and interaction between large and diverse groups of people. This world determines the way of thinking, feeling and behavior not of individuals, but of the masses as a whole.

The media offer us ready-made models of behavior (through TV series, talk shows), provide ready-made opinions and interpretations, essentially turning society into a mindless mass of information consumers who stop thinking and analyzing information, thereby simplifying the process of manipulation. The media limits the scope of information that should reach the audience. In fact, what does not appear in the media does not seem to exist; we do not attach due importance to such information. In the work "The Politics of Illusion: The Media and the Manipulation of Public Opinion" the following opinion is expressed - the masses strive to imitate the upper classes. Due to this circumstance, the elite has the opportunity to impose on the masses a certain way of life, supposedly inherent to the upper classes. This is how dominant groups influence people’s behavior and even predetermine it to some extent. The media, being subservient to the dominant class, are trying to instill in society a system common values. For example, television mainly shows representatives of the middle and upper classes, people with prestigious professions and high incomes. People from lower strata are much less common. Women appear as the embodiment of love passions and family relations, not professional qualities. The “marry rich” model for girls is actively exploited. The theme of violence occupies a significant place as “the simplest and cheapest dramatic means of demonstrating the rules of the game for power.” But this often has a detrimental effect on people: they become so accustomed to living in a virtual, symbolic world (for example, in the world of computer games) that when they come into contact with the real world, they can begin to kill people, like enemies in a game.

The media also shapes the audience’s internal readiness to perceive any object or episode of reality. in a certain way, changing not only the consciousness of people, but also their social attitudes(the concept is associated with the significance for a person of a certain object or action, which is assessed as “good - bad”, “useful - harmful”, etc.).

Manipulation is used in political communication, in public speaking. Most manipulative techniques are part of the basis of information influence and neurolinguistic programming (NLP).

In a post-industrial society, the power of information becomes decisive in the management of society, pushing into the background the influence of money and state coercion. The direct carriers and disseminators of knowledge and other politically significant information are the media. The information function is the most important function of the media. It consists of obtaining and disseminating information about the most important events for citizens and authorities. The information obtained and transmitted by the media includes not only impartial, photographic coverage of certain facts, but also their commentary and evaluation.

Not all information disseminated by the media (for example, weather forecasts, entertainment, sports and other similar messages) is of a political nature. Political information includes those information that is of public importance and requires the attention of government agencies or has an impact on them. Based on the information received, citizens form an opinion about the activities of the government, parliament, parties and other political institutions, about the economic, cultural and other life of society. The media influence policy, first of all, through influencing the information process, which makes it possible to shape public opinion in a certain way. The main stages of the information process are receiving, selecting, dissecting, commenting and disseminating information. Selecting the most important information and presenting it - important task the entire media system, which naturally opens up wide opportunities for manipulating public opinion. Thus, the awareness of citizens, including politicians, directly depends on how, for what purposes and by what criteria information is selected, how deeply it reflects real facts after its dissection and reduction carried out by the media, as well as on the method and forms of presenting information.

The media, as a rule, use two main methods of disseminating information - consistent and fragmented. The first method is more often used by the print media, consistently and comprehensively covering a particular political issue in articles and other publications. The second method - fragmentary presentation of information - is especially common on television and has a number of features, giving rise to a number of difficulties for listeners or viewers in understanding the essence of a particular event or process.