Society is stratified, divided into those who only derives news from state-controlled media, primarily radio and TV, and those who choose from a broader range, including all on yet another flaw less controlled Newspapers and network sites. As a result, people find it difficult to find a common language – they live in a completely different field of information.
For some, everything that happens – the solid chain of brilliant moves and absolute victories of our government. And all the bad is somewhere in Europe, especially in Ukraine. If something bad we do, it is only because of the intrigues of external enemies.
For others, the picture is quite different and, at least, is not so clear.
The point is not to influence people astrocities data about our situation and about the actions of the authorities. No, it’s in the effects not retouched any information that enables people to compare, to compare, to draw valid conclusions.
So, I read on the web about the horrors of the outcomes of health care reforms in one area are imbued with gratitude to the author because for sure everyone noticed that we have going on, analyzed and showed the reasons. And only at the end of the article suddenly realize that the area in question – Kirovohrad, that is, not us, and the Ukraine. But everything is described-as a blueprint – exactly what is being done to us. This is an example of how people, sorry, washed – in a positive sense – brains (that is, clears the brain from deliberately trying to drive them in the garbage) not someone’s insidious propaganda, but the information is generally a stranger, but allowing her to compare with what is happening and make conclusions. The conclusions, unfortunately, are not positive for a relationship to its power.
Loyal-Patriotic reader (with a focus on the first component – the unconditional loyalty to any government), actively preferring state-controlled media or even if and network, it is only jingoistic, but in General believes the Internet is a “cesspool”, ask: but what’s the harm if the government gives citizens confidence in our strength and achievements? It’s certainly better than mass pessimism and, especially, the unjustified criticism?
Unwarranted criticism, I agree, is bad. And unjustified self-praise – right?
And empty condemnation, misleading people astray and disoriented?
By the way, who is it and how do so carefully makes the Internet garbage, scored it cheap and faux? But only see the titles of publications, imposed as “news” in our Russian segment of the Internet, and wonder. It turns out that it is only in Ukraine (to be understood, in contrast to Russia too corrupt, EU – are about to collapse, and USA – all will be demolished by the eruption of the volcano with the unpronounceable name. Yes, and not expecting that all Americans – already shocked by our “Armat” and flee in terror…
Of course, before battle to instill courage in soldiers need is indisputable. But-if we put in the position of soldiers, two questions.
The first question: the best method of instilling courage – deliberate misinformation? For example, handing the soldier a wooden sword – “sample” of the tank, not even passed the state tests, but pompously presented on parade. Or, though technically relatively modern submarine, but … without the proper weapons. And ringing all the media that it is this wooden sword – enemy aircraft carrier razrushaetsya as cabbage…
I foresee a storm of indignation: do you think in Syria we do not have proved to the world the superiority of our weapons?
Unfortunately, not proved.
I say this not just as a publicist, deriving information from the media. But as someone who worked in the Soviet defense industry and continue to maintain contact. And because of its past and the state-political work, contacts with the defense industry and military – on a higher level of awareness about the real situation.
With respect to Syria it’s that easy. So we don’t oppose any modern air defenses or fighter aircraft of the enemy. That is, the Syrian operation is the ratio of the arms with the enemy and the nature of management closer to operations, even on a large scale, but, after all, not military, and police interaction with incomparably worse armed enemy.
We must soberly understand that the operation in Syria is absolutely not comparable with combat operations with appropriate armed enemy, for example, the United States and all the NATO bloc. Here, despite all the bravura of the headlines in our media, we must admit that the power is so disparate that the only real protection for us – the remnants of the former nuclear missile potential. Stress: it’s not new, and the former Soviet.
To avoid confusion and misunderstandings: unlike the vulgar-liberal podsadnoj “opposition” (a prominent representative of which Kudrin is not with us, you, and most in our country the Supreme will again close not just to power, but with the mission of defining the strategy of development!), I did not put the question about the uselessness and harmfulness of the currently planned large-scale defense spending. On the contrary.
But see, first, the impropriety precocious bravura correlations.
And, secondly, the apparent failure and inconsistency ongoing limited mobilization measures. First of all, not purely military, but in defining the scientific, technological and industrial field.
And the second question: what battle and when we are prepared? More precisely, what a fight, with whom and when we must now prepare themselves (if men)?
Watch the calendar of upcoming events and see: near a large-scale action – not direct clashes with superior forces NATO (for which, we need to understand and dwell in us a fighting spirit), but… the basic election in his native State Duma. And if the calendar is not wrong, in the sense that the probability of a direct attack on us, NATO troops before we have the September elections to the Duma relatively small, what a fight, in particular, from the viewpoint of securing the future of defense, we all need to prepare now?
Probably for the elections?
Not in Ukraine, not in Turkey, not NATO, not USA, and we have in the country.
And if with an eye on a potential enemy, the more so, with even greater attention – not to his vile machinations, but to the true state of Affairs in their country, to their present and future readiness of these machinations to resist.
So then, probably, in the information field it is the situation in the country – social and economic, status and prospects of scientific, technological and industrial development, the real condition of education and health, with the consistency and scale of corruption that impede the achievement of the stated objectives in almost any current national project – all that ought, finally, to take a leading position in the information field? At least at the site independent of the government and more or less fair media.
