CYNICISM AND RUDENESS OF REGIONAL POLITICAL ELITE IN THE CONTEXT OF STRUCTURAL AND BIOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS

The purpose of the article is to analyze the biographies of a number of representatives of the regional political elite, who in the period of 2018-2020 (mainly) due to incorrect, sometimes boorish statements and actions against citizens, became participants in public scandals. The authors focused on more than 80 biographies of leaders and employees of regional and municipal authorities. The structural and biographical analysis made it possible to determine to which generation this cohort of politicians belongs, the peculiarities of the spiritual and professional atmosphere of their socialization in the context of both their previous work and the time they came to power structures, geographical and regional aspects, as well as the educational level. The factors that determine the tendency of the modern regional elite to harsh neoliberal rhetoric provoking public outrage and scandals are highlighted. Within the framework of the regional cut of the scandalous mass-elite communication, the Volga-Ural region turned out to be predominant. The statements and activities of politicians / officials from the central and (especially) southern regions were the least likely to find themselves in the center of public scandals.

Migration between Politics, Journalism and PR

In this article we present a preliminary theoretical background and some empirical findings concerning a migrating trend between the fields of politics, PR and journalism: one day a political reporter, the next a communication officer; one day a PR consultant, the next a state secretary. To understand contemporary politics one must, we argue, comprehend the convergence between three fields of power holders that together form the realm of politics and communication: elite politicians, elite political reporters and elite communication/PR officers. Together, they form a communication elite that sets the parameters for the public discourse on politics. When politics is produced and constructed in, and through, social networks formed by elite agents from politics, journalism and PR, what does this mean for how democracy is worked out and what does it mean for citizenship in general?

Elite Communication and the Popular Legitimacy of International Organizations

This article offers the first systematic and comparative analysis of the effects of elite communication on citizen perceptions of the legitimacy of international organizations (IOs). Departing from cueing theory, it develops novel hypotheses about the effects of elite communication under the specific conditions of global governance. It tests these hypotheses by conducting a population-based survey experiment among almost 10,000 residents of three countries in relation to five IOs. The evidence suggests four principal findings. First, communication by national governments and civil society organizations has stronger effects on legitimacy perceptions than communication by IOs themselves. Secondly, elite communication affects legitimacy perceptions irrespective of whether it invokes IOs’ procedures or performance as grounds for criticism or endorsement. Thirdly, negative messages are more effective than positive messages in shaping citizens' legitimacy perceptions. Fourthly, comparing across IOs indicates that elite communication is more often effective in relation to the IMF, NAFTA and WTO, than the EU and UN.

The Trump Effect: An Experimental Investigation of the Emboldening Effect of Racially Inflammatory Elite Communication

This article explores the effect of explicitly racial and inflammatory speech by political elites on mass citizens in a societal context where equality norms are widespread and generally heeded yet a subset of citizens nonetheless possesses deeply ingrained racial prejudices. The authors argue that such speech should have an ‘emboldening effect’ among the prejudiced, particularly where it is not clearly and strongly condemned by other elite political actors. To test this argument, the study focuses on the case of the Trump campaign for president in the United States, and utilizes a survey experiment embedded within an online panel study. The results demonstrate that in the absence of prejudiced elite speech, prejudiced citizens constrain the expression of their prejudice. However, in the presence of prejudiced elite speech – particularly when it is tacitly condoned by other elites – the study finds that the prejudiced are emboldened to both express and act upon their prejudices.