The influence of mass culture on society. Mass culture and its influence on society

How independent phenomenon mass culture is assessed controversially. Generally existing points vision can be divided into two groups. Representatives of the first group (Adorno, Marcuse, etc.) give a negative assessment of this phenomenon. In their opinion, mass culture forms a passive perception of reality among its consumers. This position is argued by the fact that works of mass culture offer ready-made answers to what is happening in the sociocultural space around the individual. In addition, some theorists of mass culture believe that under its influence the system of values ​​changes: the desire for entertainment and entertainment becomes dominant. On the negative aspects associated with the influence of mass culture on public consciousness, also include the fact that mass culture is based not on an image oriented to reality, but on a system of images that influence the unconscious sphere of the human psyche.

Many researchers note that modern mass culture in Russia is characterized by a completely irrepressible desire to fill everything with oneself. cultural space each person, displacing any individual preferences. Moreover, sometimes one gets the impression that in Russia the entire mass culture has been “taken over” by one clan, which is making its own profit on it. This is indirectly confirmed by the fact that on television every day everyone can see the same faces having fun, making faces, celebrating something, singing songs and telling “funny” jokes. And this is all against the backdrop of a deep systemic crisis that is occurring in Russia in all aspects of the lives of its citizens. There is evidence of the use of popular culture as a mechanism of manipulation public opinion when fooling occurs through this phenomenon masses, instilling complete indifference to what is happening in the country, distracting from pressing problems, planting false values and ideals. Moreover, starting from a certain point, figures of mass culture suddenly imagined themselves as experts in other fields human activity, therefore, their expert opinion is becoming very popular for influencing the fragile consciousness of young people, whose representatives often choose their idols from among such dishonest figures.

Another aspect of popular culture is the hidden genocide of certain groups of citizens. So, for example, in Lately It has become fashionable to ridicule everything that is originally Russian - Russian traditions, Russian foundations, the Russian way of life, everything in general. Comedians, under the guise of jokes, introduce into the consciousness of their audience thoughts about the inferiority of this very audience due to its origin. It should be noted that most of these humorists who undertake to talk about the Russian people in a ridiculous manner have nothing to do with this people. However, such “sabbaths” are broadcast at the federal level almost every day in a state where most of population consider themselves Russian.

Meanwhile, researchers who adhere to an optimistic point of view on the role of mass culture in the life of society point out that:

• - it attracts the masses who do not know how to use their free time productively;
• - creates a kind of semiotic space that promotes closer interaction between members of a high-tech society;
• - provides an opportunity for a wide audience to become acquainted with works of traditional (high) culture.

And yet, it is likely that the contrast between definitely positive and definitely negative assessments of mass culture will not be entirely correct. It is obvious that the influence of mass culture on society is far from clear and does not fit into the binary scheme “white - black”. This is one of the main problems of analyzing popular culture.

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..…................. 3

Historical conditions and stages of the formation of mass culture…………4

Social functions of mass culture………………………………………………………5

Negative influence of mass culture on society……...………………….6

Positive functions of mass culture………………………………………….7

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………8

References………………………………………………………………………………………………..9

Introduction

Culture is the totality of industrial, social and spiritual achievements of people. Culture is a system of means of human activity, which is constantly being improved, and thanks to which human activity is stimulated and realized. The concept of “culture” is very ambiguous, has different contents and different meaning not only in everyday language, but also in various sciences and philosophical disciplines. It must be revealed in differential-dynamic aspects, which requires the use of the categories “social practice” and “activity”, connecting the categories “social being” and “social consciousness”, “objective” and “subjective” in the historical process.

If we recognize that one of the main signs of true culture is the heterogeneity and richness of its manifestations, based on national-ethnic and class-class differentiation, then in the 20th century it was not only Bolshevism that turned out to be the enemy of cultural “polyphony”. In the conditions of “industrial society” and scientific and technological revolution, humanity as a whole has discovered a clearly expressed tendency towards pattern and monotony to the detriment of any kind of originality and originality, whether we are talking about an individual or about certain social strata and groups.

Culture modern society a collection of the most diverse layers of culture, that is, it consists of the dominant culture, subcultures and even countercultures. In any society one can distinguish high culture (elite) and folk culture(folklore). The development of the media led to the formation of the so-called mass culture, simplified in semantics and artistically, technologically accessible to everyone. Mass culture, especially with its strong commercialization, is capable of displacing both high and folk cultures. But in general, the attitude towards popular culture is not so clear.

The phenomenon of “mass culture” from the point of view of its role in the development of modern civilization is assessed by scientists far from unambiguously. A critical approach to “mass culture” boils down to its accusations of neglecting the classical heritage, of allegedly being an instrument of conscious manipulation of people; enslaves and unifies the main creator of any culture, the sovereign personality; contributes to her alienation from real life; distracts people from their main task - “the spiritual and practical development of the world” (K. Marx). The apologetic approach, on the contrary, is expressed in the fact that “mass culture” is proclaimed as a natural consequence of the irreversible scientific technical progress that it promotes the unity of people, especially young people, regardless of any ideologies and national-ethnic differences into a stable social system and not only does not reject the cultural heritage of the past, but also makes its best examples the property of the widest strata of the people by replicating them through print, radio, television and industrial reproduction.

The debate about the harm or benefit of “mass culture” has a purely political aspect: both democrats and supporters of authoritarian power, not without reason, strive to use this objective and very important phenomenon of our time in their interests. During the Second World War and in the post-war period, the problems of "mass culture", especially its essential element - mass media, have been studied with equal attention in both democratic and totalitarian states.

Historical conditions and stages of the formation of mass culture

The peculiarities of the production and consumption of cultural values ​​have allowed culturologists to identify two social forms of cultural existence: mass culture and elite culture. Mass culture is a type of cultural product that is produced in large volumes every day. It is assumed that mass culture is consumed by all people, regardless of place and country of residence. It is the culture of everyday life, presented to the widest audience through various channels, including the media and communications.

When and how did mass culture appear? There are a number of points of view regarding the origins of mass culture in cultural studies.

Let us give as an example the most frequently found in the scientific literature:

1. The prerequisites for mass culture have been formed since the birth of humanity, and, in any case, at the dawn of Christian civilization.

2. The origins of mass culture are associated with the appearance in European literature of the 1988th centuries of the adventure, detective, and adventurous novel, which significantly expanded the readership due to huge circulations. Here, as a rule, they cite as an example the work of two writers: the Englishman Daniel Defoe, author of the well-known novel “Robinson Crusoe” and 481 other biographies of people in so-called risky professions: investigators, military men, thieves, etc., and our compatriot Matvey Komarov .

3. The law on compulsory universal literacy adopted in Great Britain in 1870 had a great influence on the development of mass culture, which allowed many to master the main form of artistic creativity of the 19th century - the novel.

And yet, all of the above is the prehistory of mass culture. And in the proper sense, mass culture manifested itself for the first time in the United States. The famous American political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski liked to repeat a phrase that became commonplace over time: “If Rome gave the world the right, England - parliamentary activity, France - culture and republican nationalism, then the modern USA gave the world a scientific and technological revolution and mass culture.”

The phenomenon of the emergence of mass culture is presented as follows. The turn of the 19th century was characterized by a comprehensive massification of life. It affected all its spheres: economics and politics, management and communication between people. The active role of the human masses in various social spheres was analyzed in a number of philosophical works of the 20th century.

X. Ortega y Gasset in his work “The Revolt of the Masses” derives the very concept of “mass” from the definition of “crowd”. A crowd, in quantitative and visual terms, is a multitude, and a multitude, from a sociological point of view, is a mass,” explains Ortega. And further he writes: “Society has always been a mobile unity of the minority and the masses. A minority is a set of persons who are specially singled out; the mass is a group of people who are not singled out in any way. The mass is the average person. Thus, a purely quantitative definition turns into a qualitative one.”

The book by the American sociologist, Columbia University professor D. Bell, “The End of Ideology,” in which the features of modern society are determined by the emergence of mass production and mass consumption, is very informative for analyzing our problem. Here the author formulates five meanings of the concept “mass”:

1. Mass - as an undifferentiated set (i.e., the opposite of the concept of class).

2. Mass - as a synonym for ignorance (as X. Ortega y Gasset also wrote about this).

3. The masses - as a mechanized society (i.e., a person is perceived as an appendage of technology).

4. The masses - as a bureaucratized society (i.e., in a mass society, the individual loses his individuality in favor of the herd). 5. The masses are like a crowd. There is a psychological meaning here. The crowd does not reason, but obeys passions. A person may be cultured by himself, but in a crowd he is a barbarian.

And D. Bell concludes: the masses are the embodiment of herdism, uniformity, and stereotypes.

An even more in-depth analysis of “mass culture” was made by the Canadian sociologist M. McLuhan. He, like D. Bell, comes to the conclusion that mass communications give rise to a new type of culture. McLuhan emphasizes that the starting point of the era of “industrial and typographical man” was the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. McLuhan, defining art as the leading element of spiritual culture, emphasized the escapist (i.e., leading away from reality) function of artistic culture.

Of course, these days the mass has changed significantly. The masses have become educated and informed. In addition, the subjects of mass culture today are not just the masses, but also individuals united by various connections. In turn, the concept of “mass culture” characterizes the features of the production of cultural values ​​in modern industrial society, designed for mass consumption of this culture.

Social functions of mass culture

Socially, mass culture forms a new social stratum, called the “middle class”. The processes of its formation and functioning in the field of culture are most concretely described in the book of the French philosopher and sociologist E. Morin “The Zeitgeist”. The concept of “middle class” has become fundamental in Western culture and philosophy. This “middle class” also became the core of life in industrial society. He also made mass culture so popular.

Mass culture mythologizes human consciousness, mystifies real processes occurring in nature and in human society. There is a rejection of the rational principle in consciousness. The purpose of mass culture is not so much to fill leisure time and relieve tension and stress in a person of industrial and post-industrial society, but to stimulate consumer consciousness in the recipient (i.e., viewer, listener, reader), which in turn forms a special type - passive, uncritical person's perception of this culture. All this creates a personality that is quite easy to manipulate. In other words, the human psyche is manipulated and the emotions and instincts of the subconscious sphere of human feelings are exploited, and above all the feelings of loneliness, guilt, hostility, fear, and self-preservation.

The mass consciousness formed by mass culture is diverse in its manifestation. However, it is characterized by conservatism, inertia, and limitations. It cannot cover all processes in development, in all the complexity of their interaction. In the practice of mass culture, mass consciousness has specific means of expression. Mass culture is more focused not on realistic images, but on artificially created images (image) and stereotypes. In popular culture, the formula is the main thing.

Mass culture in artistic creativity performs specific social functions. Among them, the main one is illusory-compensatory: introducing a person to the world of illusory experience and unrealistic dreams. And all this is combined with open or hidden propaganda of the dominant way of life, which has its ultimate goal of distracting the masses from social activity, adapting people to existing conditions, and conformism.

Hence the use in popular culture of such genres of art as detective, melodrama, musicals, and comics.

The negative impact of mass culture on society

The culture of modern society is a combination of the most diverse layers of culture, that is, it consists of the dominant culture, subcultures and even countercultures.

34% of Russians believe that mass culture has a negative impact on society and undermines its moral and ethical health. The All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) came to this result as a result of a study conducted in 2003. survey.

ABOUT positive impact mass culture on society was stated by 29% of Russians surveyed, who believe that mass culture helps people relax and have fun. 24% of respondents believe the role of show business and mass culture is greatly exaggerated and are convinced that they do not have a serious impact on society.

80% of respondents are extremely negative towards the use of profanity in public speaking show business stars, considering the use of obscene expressions an unacceptable manifestation of promiscuity and lack of talent.

13% of respondents allow the use of profanity in cases where it is used as a necessary artistic means, and 3% believe that if it is often used in communication between people, then attempts to ban it on the stage, in cinema, on television are simply hypocrisy .

A negative attitude towards the use of profanity is also reflected in Russians’ assessments of the situation surrounding the conflict between journalist Irina Aroyan and Philip Kirkorov. 47% of respondents sided with Irina Aroyan, while only 6% supported the pop star. 39% of respondents showed no interest in this process at all.

47% of Russians surveyed believe that bright characters television screens, being models and idols for a significant part of young people, must meet higher moral requirements than those imposed on ordinary people. 41% consider show business stars to be the same people as everyone else, and 6% of respondents believe that some elements of defiant behavior on the part of pop characters are acceptable as creative and extraordinary people.

The development of the media has led to the formation of the so-called mass culture, simplified in semantic and artistic terms, technologically accessible to everyone. Mass culture, especially with its strong commercialization, can displace both high and folk cultures.

Modern Russian culture is also characterized by a phenomenon that sociologists have called the Westernization of cultural needs and interests, primarily of youth groups.

Many Russians, and again, primarily young people, are characterized by a lack of ethnocultural or national self-identification; they cease to perceive themselves as Russians and lose their Russianness. The socialization of youth occurs either on the traditional Soviet or on the Western model of education, in any case, non-national. Russian folk culture (traditions, customs, rituals) is perceived by most young people as an anachronism. The lack of national self-identification among Russian youth precisely leads to the easier penetration of Westernized values ​​into the youth environment.

In many ways, the youth subculture simply repeats and duplicates the television subculture. It should be noted here that since the early 1990s. mass culture in its screen and television forms is becoming increasingly negative. For example, of the 100 films most popular in Leningrad video salons, 52% had all the features of action films, 14 horror films, 18 karate films. At the same time, according to film experts, there was not a single film that was distinguished by artistic and aesthetic value, and only 5% had certain artistic merits. The repertoire of cinemas consists of 80-90% foreign films.

No less Negative consequences can also be noted in the development of musical culture. Such a type of mass culture as rock music was first banned at the official level in our country, and then just as immoderately exalted and idealized. Why oppose the rock music that is associated with folk traditions, traditions of political and art songs? There are also trends such as punk rock, heavy metal, etc., which undoubtedly have a countercultural, vandalistic character. Many musical styles are characterized by syndromes of pessimism, motives of death, suicide, fear and alienation. The loss of humanistic content occurs in rock music due to the distortion of the natural human voice with all sorts of wheezes and squeals, deliberately broken by mocking intonations, the replacement of male voices with effeminate ones, and vice versa.

Positive functions of mass culture

The most important, if not defining, feature “ mass society” is “mass culture”.

Responding to the general spirit of the times, it, unlike the social practice of all previous eras, from about the middle of our century has become one of the most profitable sectors of the economy and even receives appropriate names: “entertainment industry”, “commercial culture”, “pop culture”, “ leisure industry”, etc. By the way, the last of the given designations reveals another reason for the emergence of “mass culture” - the emergence of an excess of free time and “leisure” among a significant layer of working citizens. People increasingly have a need to “kill time.” “Mass culture” is designed to satisfy it, naturally for money, which manifests itself primarily in the sensory sphere, i.e. in all types of literature and art. Particularly important channels for the general democratization of culture are last decades cinema, television and, of course, sports (in its purely spectator part) have become, gathering huge and not too discriminating audiences, driven only by the desire for psychological relaxation.

To fulfill its function - to relieve severe work stress - “mass culture” must be at least entertaining; addressed to people often with insufficiently developed intellectual principles, it largely exploits such areas of the human psyche as the subconscious and instincts. All this corresponds to the prevailing theme of “mass culture”, which receives large profits from the exploitation of such “interesting” topics that are understandable to all people as love, family, career, crime and violence, adventure, horror, etc. It is curious and psychotherapeutically positive that, in general, “mass culture” is life-loving, shuns truly unpleasant or depressing plots for the audience, and the corresponding works usually end with a happy ending. It is not surprising that, along with the “average” person, one of the consumers of such products is the pragmatically minded part of young people, not burdened by life experience, who have not lost optimism and still think little about the fundamental problems of human existence.

Mass culture today is able to play a positive role, introducing the masses to the most complex spiritual and moral problems in an adapted form. But whether an individual will abandon further searches for cultural musical values, or will be content with the acquired surrogates of mass culture - this directly depends on the individual himself. An exceptional role here belongs to education, artistic and aesthetic education.

Conclusion

Attitudes towards mass culture are most often ambiguous: they arrogantly despise it, express concern about its onslaught, and in the milder version treat it condescendingly, but no one has yet avoided contact with it.

Of course, mass culture has its positive aspects. By entertaining and delivering sensual pleasure, it gives a person the opportunity to forget about his problems and relax. However, works of mass culture are momentary and only imitate techniques true art, designed for external effect.

The spread of mass culture does not mean the disappearance of elite culture. It would be a simplification, however, to represent mass culture only negatively, as a monster that devours everything human in a person. When analyzing mass culture, one should not consider it exclusively in an ideological manner, as was the case quite recently.

In the works of modern researchers one can find different indications of the time of the emergence of mass culture: some believe that it existed even in the most ancient civilizations. We believe, however, that mass culture is a product of modern civilization with its characteristic features of urbanization and universal education. Almost until the beginning of the 20th century, there was a fairly clearly separated elite and folk culture. The first was common in cities, among those who had the opportunity to receive appropriate education and upbringing. The second was often created by people who were illiterate, but who were bearers of traditions.

The process of urbanization, which relocated significant masses of peasants and petty bourgeoisie to cities, led to the fact that people, having been cut off from nature, which nourished folk culture, were unable to join urban culture, which required not only basic reading and writing skills, but much more education, time and material opportunities. The new urban masses needed forms of culture accessible to them.

Thus, mass culture is a multifunctional, objective phenomenon of the modern stage of culture, in which all segments of the population are inevitably involved, and the problem lies in managing the dynamics of mass culture, that is, developing effective mechanisms for selecting its necessary and promising directions and culling those that lead to irreversible degradation of cultural values ​​and samples.

Bibliography

1. Parkhomenko I.T., Radugin A.A. “Cultural Studies in Questions and Answers”, Moscow “Center” 2001

At the end of the forties of the last century, the term “Mass culture” appeared, that is, culture designed for large masses of people. Mass culture includes tabloid newspapers, pop music, and soap operas. Something that usually exists for the purpose of “relaxing”, for example after a long day of work. Mass culture is intended for many, but not for everyone. And that's why.

Let's imagine a welder, Vasily, who received a secondary specialized education. How would he prefer to spend his leisure time? What will he choose, watching some talk show on TV or reading a volume of Dostoevsky? Obviously the first one. Now let’s imagine Nikolai Petrovich teaching philosophy at one of the universities. Would you think that in the evenings he watches Malakhov’s show? Thus, we can come to the conclusion that the need for mass culture exists, first of all, among poorly educated people. These include the working class and people employed in the service sector. Popular culture is most common in industrial countries such as Russia, as the working class predominates there. I’m not saying that it doesn’t exist in post-industrial countries - it does exist, but of a higher quality.

It would seem that this mass culture exists, and okay. But, unfortunately, its spread leads to the most negative consequences for society. Since its task is to satisfy needs huge amount people - it should be simple and understandable to everyone. Therefore, its main characteristic is primitiveness. This primitiveness is destructive for society. Maybe the welder Vasily will no longer be convinced that the Beatles better group“Lesopoval”, but he has a daughter who is being raised in thieves.

Mass culture shapes the younger generation. And the problem is that it basically doesn’t make you think. This leads to degradation. As a result, we have a weak-willed, unthinking society, suitable only for the service sector. If the frantic dynamics of increasing the popularity of mass culture that exists now continues, then in just a few decades we may find ourselves in the world described by the famous science fiction writer Ray Bradbury. In a world without books, in a world where a huge TV is enough to satisfy all spiritual needs.

Of course, the direction in which society develops largely depends on the state. But it, in particular ours, does not seem to be deliberately trying to restrain the spread of mass culture. There is only one answer to this - it is not profitable. After all, it is much easier to manage people whose thoughts are occupied with who slept with whom in show business than those people who think about freedom and social justice.

Arises philosophical question: "What to do?". Firstly, no matter how trivial it may sound, you need to start with yourself. It is necessary to restrain your primitive needs in mass culture, not to follow their lead, not to succumb to the temptation to watch an evening reality show, not to buy yellow newspapers with the next sensation from the world of show business, not to fill your player with albums of one-day stars.

Instead, read as much as possible, engage in self-development, reflect on real issues, not pressing ones. Secondly, try, if not directly indicate, then at least hint to the people around you that everything popular is bad, because the understanding of this should come to them on their own. I think this is the duty of every person who, to use a metaphor, does not float on the surface, but looks deeper. We must ensure that all people show interest in traditional and elite culture, regardless of their level of education or social status. What our society will be like in the future depends on us. It depends on us whether we can move to a new, truly civil society, or whether we will continue to mark time, inventing new idols for ourselves and living someone else’s life, the life of the heroes of TV series for housewives, a festive life, but deceptive and false.

- , adapted to the tastes of the broad masses of people, is technically replicated in the form of many copies and distributed using modern communication technologies.

The emergence and development of mass culture is associated with the rapid development of mass media, capable of exerting a powerful influence on the audience. IN media There are usually three components:

• mass media(newspapers, magazines, radio, television, Internet blogs, etc.) - replicate information, have a regular impact on the audience and are aimed at certain groups of people;
• means of mass influence(advertising, fashion, cinema, popular literature) - do not always regularly influence the audience, are aimed at the average consumer;
• technical means of communication(Internet, telephone) - determine the possibility of direct communication between a person and a person and can be used to transmit personal information.

Let us note that not only the media have an impact on society, but society also seriously influences the nature of the information transmitted in the media. Unfortunately, public demands are often low in culturally, which reduces the level television programs, newspaper articles, variety shows, etc.

In recent decades, in the context of the development of means of communication, they talk about a special computer culture. If previously the main source of information was the book page, now it is the computer screen. A modern computer allows you to instantly obtain information over the network and supplement text graphic images, video films, sound, which provides a holistic and multi-level perception of information. In this case, text on the Internet (for example, a web page) can be represented as hypertext. those. contain a system of references to other texts, fragments, non-textual information. The flexibility and versatility of computer information display tools greatly enhance the degree of its impact on humans.

At the end of XX - beginning of XXI V. popular culture began to play important role in ideology and economics. However, this role is ambiguous. On the one hand, mass culture made it possible to reach wide sections of the population and introduce them to cultural achievements, presenting them in simple, democratic and understandable images and concepts, but on the other hand, it created powerful mechanisms for manipulating public opinion and forming an average taste.

The main components of mass culture include:

• information industry- the press, television news, talk shows, etc., explaining current events in clear language. Mass culture was initially formed in the sphere of the information industry - the “yellow press” of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Time has shown the high efficiency of mass communication in the process of manipulating public opinion;
• leisure industry- films, entertaining literature, pop humor with the most simplified content, pop music, etc.;
• formation system mass consumption, which centers on advertising and fashion. Consumption here is presented as a non-stop process and the most important goal of human existence;
• replicated mythology - from the myth of " American dream", where beggars turn into millionaires, to the myths of " national exclusivity"and the special virtues of a particular people in comparison with others.

Master's student

Averkina Tatyana Nikolaevna, honorary worker general education Russian Federation, teacher of history and social studies at VUVK named after. A.P. Kiseleva, Voronezh

Annotation:

Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics and an orientation toward the “average person.” One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propaganda. Another part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on the collective consciousness and mind. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its connection with various spheres of society.

Mass culture is a form of culture dominant among the majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation towards the "average person". One part of society criticizes mass culture, considering it faceless and propagandistic. The other part recognizes its effectiveness in supporting the spiritual and moral unification of individuals. At the same time, no one denies the global influence that mass culture has on collective consciousness and reason. This article is devoted to a more detailed study and analysis of the presented influence, as well as its relationships with different spheres of society.

Keywords:

culture; Mass culture; moral values; society

culture; mass culture; moral values; society

UDC 316.7

Mass culture is one of the fundamental attributes of the spiritual sphere of modern society. A striking example of mass culture is the creation of the “Hollywood industry” and the emergence of such film genres as horror, action films and TV series. Such products are aimed at the mass consumer, who craves “bread and circuses” and does not set themselves the goal of careful thoughtfulness and understanding of what is happening on the screen. So-called “Hollywood” films are one of the most widespread and “effective” tools for influencing people’s consciousness over the past decades.

Mass culture has become one of the integral components of the modern era. Moreover, this phenomenon has left its mark on absolutely all spheres of social life, which can be easily traced on the basis of all the changes that have affected the way of human existence.

For example, mass culture has big influence on political sphere. First of all, it introduces the individual to the existing system of social relations, suppressing attempts and motivations to rebel against it. With the help of the media, citizens are introduced to politics, their level of political participation. However, it is worth noting reverse side this medal. Extreme politicization of many printed publications often serves as the basis for forming the opinion of a reader who is unable to recreate his own picture of the world. Due to the spread of the influence of mass culture, politics is perceived through images (image and stereotypes). Lacks full understanding political processes, the idea of ​​politics is formed under the influence of PR, advertising and agitation. In such conditions, the likelihood of spreading false information and misleading citizens with the help of the media and other tools is high. One of the most bright examples A similar situation can be seen in the scandal caused by the appearance in the nineties of the 20th century of photographs of the “Serbian death camp”, which turned out to be fake, but played an important role in accusing Serbia of exterminating civilians.

Among economic consequences The influence of mass culture cannot fail to note the stimulation of technical progress, accessibility, low cost of products (due to their standardization), and, consequently, the ability to meet the needs of the poorest segments of the population and, as a result, an increase in living standards in all corners globe. For example, over the past ten years, the economic growth of some African countries located south of the Sahara Desert has amounted to more than seven percent. In addition, popular culture preaches the need and importance of developing production technologies and technical innovations. Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the United States (a country where pragmatism and technology are elevated to the rank of basic values), technological innovations also spread with the spread of mass culture. On the other hand, mass culture limits the stimulation of the production of unique and high-quality products. Thus, any economic agent, be it a company, positions profit maximization as its main economic goal, which can be achieved, among other things, by increasing the scale of production. One of the accompanying factors and ways to achieve this goal is to reduce costs by offering the consumer homogeneous and unified products, which, of course, cannot be characterized positively.

Mass culture has had a huge influence on social sphere. The same homogeneous products of mass culture act as a certain integrating force, bringing people together and promoting globalization.

Due to its universality and focus on each individual, regardless of his social status, popular culture blurs the boundaries between classes. All this ultimately helps reduce the level of social tension in society.

However, the spread of mass culture caused a sharp increase in the level of patriotism of nations. Certain cultural communities began to defend the right to national identity, fighting against universal unification. Suffice it to recall the policy of the Ukrainian authorities to restore the importance Ukrainian language as one of the measures to revive national identity.

Among the negative social consequences of mass culture, one should mention the passive perception of reality by the individual, conservatism, orientation not to reality, but to advertising, television and radio images, conformism as the main type of individual behavior, reluctance and inability to change the existing social order and eliminate shortcomings in him.

Although the mid-20th century is considered to be the birth of mass culture, it is worth considering that some of its features can be seen before this time. So you can quote the Russian philosopher A.I. Herzen, who says that the masses (people) are an inhibitory force that does not allow society to develop progressively: “He clings to his depressing life, to cramped frames... He even accepts new things in old clothes...”. The masses resist innovation and are afraid of the new. This hinders the development of society along the path of progress.

Perhaps the most noticeable imprint was left by mass culture on the spiritual sphere of society. Mass culture using simple tools ( typical images, standardized plots) helps the individual to better navigate modern world, to obtain, albeit a primitive, idea of ​​the relationships between people. Through art culture, mass culture gives society the opportunity to become familiar with a more high level. By copying and adopting achievements and samples elite culture, mass culture disseminates them, popularizes them through the media, cinema, and other means. Moreover, it was thanks to the spread of mass culture that the poorest segments of the population acquired the opportunity to enjoy the fruits of high art. It is also impossible not to take into account the general increase in the level of literacy of the population, in which mass culture played an important role.

At the same time, most experts note that the negative consequences of this phenomenon are still greater than the positive ones. The famous sociologist and researcher of mass culture J. Ortega y Gasset wrote: “The peculiarity of our time is that ordinary souls, without being deceived about their own mediocrity, fearlessly assert their right to it and impose it on everyone and everywhere.” Universalization, standardization kills high art, which society simply does not need.

The products of human spiritual activity in a mass consumption society are focused primarily on satisfying primary needs. There is a reassessment of values: postmodernism is dominant philosophical direction in the era of mass culture - proclaims the principle of pleasure as the main goal of art. “Everything in the world is relative, there is no “good” or “bad” art,” postmodernists assert, guided by the principle of denying the hierarchy of values. Modern Art and mass culture choose the path of commercialization as the main trajectory of their movement. This path is not aimed at moral improvement of the individual, but at satisfying needs and basic instincts. The primary goal of such a culture is to entertain, but not to provide “food for thought.” It is impossible not to note the emerging trend of denial of such values ​​as chastity, patriotism, and family. Chastity is declared a moral inferiority, the patriot is contrasted with the cosmopolitan - “citizen of the world”, the institution of the family is experiencing a deep crisis.

Thus, we can confidently say that mass culture is modern stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and ever-increasing influence on various areas life of society. At the same time, both positive and negative consequences of this influence can be identified in the political, economic, social, and spiritual spheres. That is why the main task of civilization in the coming years is to prevent the negative influence of mass culture, limit the further decomposition of art, and also prevent its transformation into a tool for satisfying basic needs. To achieve this result, a clear and meaningful change in the values ​​of mass culture in all its manifestations and the introduction of cultural ideals of a higher level are necessary. This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.

Bibliography:

Reviews:

12.22.2017, 13:39 Adibekyan Oganes Alexandrovich
Review: Adibekyan Oganes Alexandrovich. Article by Kanishchev K.V. written skillfully, significant for the public, its scientists, politicians, journalists. It is recommended for printing. But it is proposed to take it into account if the author agrees. It is necessary to stipulate the richness of the content of the term “culture”, where knowledge, morality, behavior, law-abiding, peacefulness, etc. We should not linger in the United States of America; we should also turn to other countries of the world. Taking into account the “mass of people”, one should take into account the representation of poor and rich people in it, and in terms of politics, stipulate the predominance of representatives of the rich there, who influence public consciousness for their benefit. One should not forget the use of the term "classes".

12/22/2017, 14:23 Ershtein Leonid Borisovich
Review: I'll tell you what. I would like to see what specific problem the author is solving. How other authors tried to solve it and what are the disadvantages of past solutions and the advantages of the current solution. There are obvious contradictions in the text, for example, in one place the author writes “Since most researchers agree that mass culture originated in the USA...”, in another he gives the following definition of mass culture: “Mass culture is a form of culture that dominates among majority of the population, characterized by low quality characteristics, orientation toward the “average person.” Attention, question, is there such a culture that didn’t exist before the USA? Complete nonsense. By the way, the abstract, where I got this definition from, should generally contain what the article is about. The conclusions are amazing “Thus, we can confidently say that mass culture at the present stage of its existence is an integral element of social relations, exerting a huge and constantly growing influence on various spheres of social life.” Isn't it obvious? Further, “This process can be organized primarily by mixing mass culture with elite culture, which obviously has a higher base of values.” What is a "value base"? Apparently only the author knows (although I suspect that he doesn’t know either). Conclusion: it can be published only after serious revision. It's not science yet...