Search

This article examines how the modern Russian press covers the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict, both historically and currently. Since print media are some of the most popular sources of information in Russia, such analysis helps us understand the media's priorities in presenting the conflict to Russian society. The article focuses on the inherently manipulative, albeit hidden, essence and layout of this material, which increases the likelihood of information bias. While the quality of the reporting on this conflict demonstrates the proximity of contemporary Russian media to the interests of the country's ruling powers, it also provides opportunities for the government to influence its audience's comprehension of Middle East politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article informs that the Israel–Russia relations refers to the bilateral foreign relations between the two countries, Israel and Russia. Topics include the two countries have signed twenty intergovernmental agreements; Russian–Israeli relations are based on a mutual interest: to bring peace to the Middle East; and Russia's policy toward Iran has always been in conflict with that of Israel.

The Middle East is one of the 'unreliable links' in the international security system. This became apparent once Iran began developing its nuclear program decades ago, and in recent years, the program has reinforced the challenges to international security. The steps taken by the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as well as US sanctions have not yet achieved positive results. Although Russia formally supported these sanctions, its political interests and attitude to Iran differ significantly from that of the United States and its allies. Russia seeks to consolidate its position in the region, challenging American policies. This article investigates political contradictions regarding the implementation of Iran's nuclear strategy and observes the position of the Russian print media as a source of information. Despite the active development of online news in Russia, print media continue serving as a popular information source in the country. This holds especially true for local officials, who are responsible for making government decisions, thus determining our increased interest in these forms of media. The Russian press, when covering the 'Iranian nuclear issue,' do not serve as unbiased sources of information, but suggest propaganda influence, albeit flavored with thorough knowledge of the political situation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The content of mass information in any society is closely linked to the patterns of its political development. A typical example of this concerns the modern Russian media, which have been influenced particularly by their embeddedness with the authorities. Indeed, the Russian media have served as the mouthpiece of the country's political leaders, and this fact has left a significant imprint on media coverage. To understand the symbiotic relationship between Russian political leaders and media, this article focuses on the Syrian Civil War, which is currently one of the most important issues on the international political agenda. The Russian government's role in the conflict over the last several years has affected the Russian media's tremendous interest in this topic. Nonetheless, Moscow's participation in the war was determined uniquely by how the communication sphere related the conflict to its audience so that its involvement in the Syrian imbroglio was not an objective reflection of reality. Guided by the political interests of the authorities, the Russian media created an emotionally oriented story, which intended to advance an extremely positive interpretation of Russia's role in this conflict in the minds of the audience. Therefore, in terms of propaganda, these media acted not as "pure" promoters of the state's will, but rather as its "interpreters." This study highlights how leading Russian publications approach this agenda and the consequences this fact has for the Kremlin's political priorities. The authors come to a definite conclusion regarding Russian media's unconditional dependence on the political priorities of modern Russian society. It was crucial for the Kremlin that the media present a positive view of Moscow's involvement in the conflict given that Russia's military presence in Syria caused a very controversial reaction throughout the world and led to increased tensions and contentious disputation between Russia and many Western countries. Therefore, the Kremlin needed to justify its policies and did so through manipulating the Russian public by means of a large-scale propaganda campaign conducted through the Russian media. This phenomenon is pivotal to understand not only the case of Russia's involvement in Syria but also contemporary international media development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Russian mass media system has experienced tremendous change since the Soviet era. It has been argued that some similarities still exist between the old Soviet system and the new post-Soviet media, such as the practice of self-censorship. Pressure has been mounting on the mass media's level of editorial freedom since the late Yeltsin era, beginning with a raft of new laws introduced under the guise of keeping the media ‘honest’. One contemporary influence constraining and shaping media development is Russia's `war on terrorism'. Ever since the infamous apartment bombings of August 1999, over 1000 people have been killed and scores more physically and emotionally scarred by acts of terrorism on Russian soil. The political, social and economic costs have been considerable. Russia's `war on terrorism' has provided the authorities with ample excuses to curtail media reporting, such as protecting the work of the security forces in combating terrorist activity, stopping the spread of terrorist ‘propaganda’ and protecting victims of terrorist acts. Numerous bills have been debated in the Duma on prohibiting activity by the mass media during an incident. Senior representatives from the mass media have been involved in talks with the authorities on the issue and in drawing up industry guidelines for reporting on a terrorist act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]