Studying Communication Studies

A couple of weeks ago I was in a company of my friend's acquaintances when they were having a nice intelligent conversation about journalism. By some chance somebody switched TV to the FOXnews channel and the conversation among those highly liberal people became not only much bitter than it was before but also quite emberrassing for me.

"I'm wondering what did they study?" my friend asked pointing to the talking head on the screen  with disgust. "They must have got a degree in something but they don't quite understand anything!"

"I bet they have a degree in Communication," answered somebody.

"No doubt, indeed," everybody else agreed.

Luckily for me, my friend didn't revealed my embarrasment by telling everybody that they had just qualified me to apply for job at FOX.

Unfortunately for me and for everybody else who studies Communication, this opinion is rather a rule than an exception. 

If you search Google for Communication Degree the most popular results you would get would pose or answer the question "What can I do with a degree in Communication?" 

And as I understand it, this question is just another way to express uncertainty about what actually the field is.

Last week the Communication degree was relatively oftern mentioned in the news. A student of communication appeared on Obama's Forth Myers Town Hall Meeting to ask a question. Here is a video you might find amusing:

"I want to be a broadcaster or a disc jokey," he says honestly. And here it is, public understanding and attitude to what communication is and is meant to be.

Although this video makes me laugh every time I watch it, I find it less then funny to feel embarrassed every time I introduce myself as a graduate student in Communication.

According to Wikipedia, Communication Studies is

academic field that deals with processes of communication, commonly defined as the sharing of symbols over distances in space and time. Hence, communication studies encompasses a wide range of topics; for instance, the transmission of messages from one point to another through some medium of dissemination--such as face-to-face or conversation, television broadcasting, or the reading of records--but also with how institutions like libraries maintain information over time, how audiences interpret information, and the political, cultural, economic, and social dimensions of related topics.

I think the main difficulty for people to understand what the field actually is, lies in the concept that was of such a big concern for one of the discipline's pillar - Marshal McLuhan. He expressed that concept in the widely known phrase "Media is the message". The essens of this concept is mentioned in the Wikipedia article by the word "processes".

Communication studies processes of human communication but not its products or objects. It studies how different types and technologies of communication change with time and influence our culture.

I remember one of my professors at Fordham University Lance Strate said that communication studies the medium of human life, its culture similar to how biologists study medium and culture of life of microorganisms. This metaphor could give you a good illustration of how the field if actually important. Unless you think that studying bacterial life is more important than studying the life of humans.

The liberal bias of new media isn't working on the Russian soil (with the Russian soul)?

Every time I think about the opportunities new media such as blogs and social networks open for political participation of citizens, for the development of democracy, and how big the role was that they played during the last presidential elections in the United States, I ask myself: 

What is the present and future of this media in Russia? 

Are they able to play any significant role in the change of power there? 

Are they playing any important role in the democratization of the country right now?

The answer is much less then clear. 

Despite all the stories about Russian officals trying to control the Internet, we should confirm

 that Internet in Russia is still pretty free. First of all because Russian authorities and special services don't have any software to control information flow online. And second, because most of the people whose voices contemporary Russian establishment is concerned about during the election periods, don't use Internet or don't trust (by the force of Soviet habit) any information that comes from an "unauthorized" source.

However, most of those who use Internet in Russia don't hesitate to register their own blogs and 

profiles on social networks. According to the 2007 report by Russian web

 search server Yandex, there are 3,1 million of blogs in Russian Internet segment. That means that there is one blog for every 10 Russian speaking users (there are 30 million Internet users in Russia according to the information on the CIA web page). Not bad, taking into account that the same statistics for the whole world is approximately one blog for every 60 people.

Despite this optimistic view, there is no strong aspiration of users in Russia to use their freedom of speech online to solve their political problems. If you try to find a discussion about current political events on Russian Internet, I wouldn't recommend you to go to any popular Russian social networks (Odnoklassniki, VKontakte, or MoyKrug). Non of them has any application that would allow you to easily post a link from an article or express your support of a politician. Non of them has a substential group created by users for political discussion. 

But I wouldn't recommend you to look for any political discussion in Russian blogs either. Especially if you believe in a liberal bias of the new media as much as I still do. I wouldn't recommend you to look there not because there is nothing discussed about politics, but because what is discussed is usually even more regressive in the sense of democratic and liberal discourse than what you can see on Russian television controlled by the state.

I'm wondering if that means that the new media by themselves can't give a big hope for Russian modest democratic movement? Is the question again lying not in what are the media that are used, but who is using the media?

(Images used: 1. Official logo of Livejournal; 2. Picture from a protest action in Moscow against the censure in mass media on January 31, 2009 - by Denis Bochkarev)