The Space of Public Communication in Russia: the main causes of gaps

Author: Zotov V.V., Babintsev V.P., Shapoval Z.A., Gubanov A.V.

Communicology. 2017. Vol.5. No.6
Zotov Vitaliy Vladimirovich, Dr. Sc. (Soc.), Professor, vice rector rector for research and innovations, Kursk Academy of State and Municipal Service;
Babintsev Valentin Pavlovich, Dr. Sc. (Philos.), Professor at the department of social technologies, Belgorod State National Research University;
Shapoval Zhanna Aleksandrovna, Cand. Sc. (Soc.) associate professor of the department of social technologies, Belgorod State National Research University,
Gubanov Alexander Vladimirovich, Kursk academy of a state and municipal service. Address: 305044, Kursk, Stantsionnaya st., 9. E-mail:

Abstract. The article describes the concept of public communication as a total of information channels uniting the government bodies and stakeholders of civil society for the purposes of dialogue and partnership on issues of public interest. The authors conclude that the main causes of the disruption of the Russian public communication space are determined by a range of factors. These are the conversion of the public communication space to its network representation; the unstable nature of the social environment; the inadequate regulatory and legal framework for interaction between authorities and population; low level of transparency of government, the underdeveloped and vulnerable sector of independent non-governmental organizations; the imitative character of a significant part of communicative practices; the lack of expressiveness of attitudes to constructive interaction; the predominance of mutual negative stereotypes; and the lack of communication competence of participants in interaction. The authors see the solution of the problem in the development of the methodology of social-network management of the public communication space.

Keywords: public communication, public administration, social-network management

Text: PDF

For citation: Zotov V.V., Babintsev V.V., Shapoval Z.A., Gubanov A.V. The Space of Public Communication in Russia: the main causes of gaps. Communicology (Russia). 2017. Vol. 5. No.6. P. 61-76 DOI 10.21453/2311-3065-2017-5-6-61-76.

Bogdanova M. (2007). Network State: Reality or myth. Public Administration. No. 5. P. 87-91 (In Rus.).
Grib V.V. (2016). Current issues of legitimizing the system of public control subjects in the Russian Federation. Constitutional and Municipal Law. No. 1. P. 13-16. ( In Rus.).
Dementiev A.N. (2016). Problems of realization by the public chamber of the Russian Federation of the federal legislation on the bases of public control in the Russian Federation. Citizen and Law. No. 11. P. 62-71. (In Rus.).
Dryuchina I.N. (2016). Communication network in the management system of the internal affairs authorities. Vestnik VEGU. No. 1 (81). P. 135-141 (In Rus.).
Zhakke Z.P. (2002). Constitutional law and political institutions. M.: Yurist (In Rus.).
Zajcev A.V. (2011). The problems of institutionalization of political dialogue between the state and civil society. Izvestiya vuzov: Povolzhskij region [Universities’ bulletin: Volga region], Social Sciences. No. 2. P. 27-36 (In Rus.).
Zajcev A.V. (2012). Theoretical and methodological grounds for institutionalizing the dialogue between the state and civil society. Belgorod State University Scientific Bulletin: History. Political science. Economy. Computer science. No. 1 (120), Vol. 21. P. 231-236 (In Rus.).
Zajcev A.V. (2017). Institutionalization of the dialogue between the state and civil society: criteria and milestones. Sociodinamika [Sociodynamics]. No. 2. p. 31-45 (In Rus.).
Zotov V.V., Lelyavin D.V. (2016). Transparency of municipal authorities as a condition for the development of civil society. Formation and development of society in Russian regions: scientific papers of the All-Russian conference / ed. L.N. Alisova. V.: Nauchnaya kniga. P.146-149 (In Rus.).
Ivanov A.A. (2016). Expert evaluation of the Federal law “On fundamentals of public control in the Russian Federation”: a brief overview. Gumanitarnye, social’no-ehkonomicheskie i obshchestvennye nauki [Humanities, Socio-economic and Social Studies. No. 3. P. 33-36 (In Rus.).
Kashirina M.V. (2013). False-interactiveness as a special form of social interaction. Socium i vlast [Society and Power]. No. 6 (44). P. 11-16 (In Rus.).
Isaeva E.A. (2015). To the question of the dynamics of the development of regional legislation that consolidates the dialogue mechanisms of power and society and the relationship with protest activity. Bulletin of The Yaroslavl Demidov State University: Humanities. No. 1 (31). P. 41-45 (In Rus.).
Isaeva E.A., Palagicheva A.V. (2016). Modern trends in the development of dialogue mechanisms of power and society on the territory of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Central Russian Journal of Social Sciences. Vol. 11. No. 6. P.179-186 (In Rus.).
Koksharova A.M. (2009). Political communication as a factor of public policy. Vlast' [Power]. No. 7. P. 63-65 (In Rus.).
Lyavdanskij K.E. (2012). ‘Public communication’ as a term in modern political science. Scientific and technical bulletins of the St. Petersburg state Polytechnic University: humanities and social sciences. Vol. 2, No. 148. P. 30-33 (In Rus.).
Malik E.N., Merkulov S.S. (2016). Forms of state-civil interaction in modern Russia: problems of development and practical implementation. Central Russian Journal of Social Sciences. Vol. 11. No. 3. P. 85-94 (In Rus.).
Raskhodchikov A.N. (2017). Information and communication interaction between government and society: in the search for effective technologies. Monitoring of public opinion: Economic and social changes. No. 2. P. 263-273 (In Rus.).
Smorgunov L.V. (2001). Network approach in politics and management. Polis. No. 3. P. 103-112 (In Rus.).
Uilbi P. Concepts of public policy, public relations and public communication. The role of the Press Secretary in the light of these concepts [electronic source]: aspx?gov_id=245&id=21041 (In Rus.).
Usmanova R.M. (2011). On interrelation of the concepts of ‘public regulation’, ‘public administration’ and ‘public authority’. Society: politics, economics, law. No. 3. P. 133-140 (In Rus.).
Shugrina E.S. (2016). Possible directions for increasing the effectiveness of the activities of subjects of public control in the Russian Federation. State power and local self-government. No. 3. P. 19-24 (In Rus.).
Aucoin P. (1990). Administrative Reform in Public Management: Paradigms, Principies, Paradoxes and Pendulums. Governance. No. 3. P. 115-137.
Faccioli F. (2001). Comunicazione pubblica e cultura del servizio. Roma: Carocci (In It.).
Hood C.A. (1991). Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration. No. 69 (1). P. 3-19.
Iosifidis P., Wheeler M. (2015). The Public Sphere and Network Democracy: Social movements and Political Change? Global Media Journal. No. 13 (25). P. 1-17.
Mancini P. (2006). Manuale di comunicazione pubblica. Roma; Bari (In It.).
Osborne D., Gaebler T. (1992). Reinventing Government. How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: A Plume Book.
Rotberg R. (2014). Good Governance Means Performance and Results. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions. No. 27 (3). P. 511–518.