Practices for Self-Representation Governors of the Russian Federation in Virtual Social Networks

The article substantiates the idea of transformation of public policy in modern Russia, which is associated with the processes of digitalization of both power structures and the population as a whole. Practices of self-representation of governors in the virtual network space are considered. Based on an original approach based on the methodological principles of P. Lazarsfeld, J. Habermas, P. Bourdieu, and E. Goffman examines the popularity of the accounts, the frequency of their updates, the level of social approval records, feedback, etc., and also visual settings — formal or informal nature of the shooting the main photo in the profile, the social distance on it, head position and gaze, emotional background. We use our own data collected in December 2019. Based on the information received, it is concluded that representatives of the Governor’s corps and users of virtual social networks understand the importance of digital transformations of public policy, although this is not directly expressed in expert assessments of their activities. In some cases, governors are effective leaders of public opinion, whose number of subscribers exceeds the audience of many regional traditional media. Also, many of them create conditions for an equal dialogue with the population, independently or with the help of assistants responding to incoming requests.

virtual social networks, public policy, digitalization, multi-stage communication, communicative action, visualization, Instagram, VKontakte, Odnoklassniki, Facebook, Twitter

1. Bareev M.Yu., Kachurina I. O. YouTube as a Factor in Shaping the Protest Potential of Young People // Russian Journal of Regional Studies [Regionologiya]. 2019. Vol. 27. N 3. P. 572–587. (In rus)

2. Belova Yu.Yu., Fadeeva I. M. Representation of alcohol consumption practices in virtual social networks // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2019. N 4. P. 86–105. (In rus)

3. Brodovskaya E. V., Huang T. Digital generation: civil mobilization and political protest among Russian youth // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2019. N 5. P. 3–18. (In rus)

4. Bradley A., McDonald M. P. The Social Organization: How to Use Social Media to Tap the Collective Genius of Your Customers and Employees. Moscow: Alpina Publisher, 2015. (In rus)

5. Volodenkov S. V. Influence of Internet Communication Technologies on Contemporary Social and Political Processes: Scenarios, Challenges, and Actors // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2019. N 5. P. 341–364. (In rus)

6. Jessop B. The State: Past, Present, Future. Moscow: Publishing House «Delo», 2019. (In rus)

7. Dmitrieva N. E., Styrin E. M. Open Governance: Problems and Prospects for Russia // Issues of state and municipal administration [Voprosy gosudarstvennogo i municipalnogo upravleniya]. 2014. N 1. P. 127–148. (In rus)

8. Dneprovskaya N.V. Digital Transformation of Interaction between Public Authorities and Citizens // Electronic Bulletin «Public administration» [Gosudarstvennoe upravlenie. Elektronnyj vestnik]. 2018. N 67. P. 96–104 [Electronic resource]. URL: https: //elibrary.ru /download /elibrary_34964480_80239388. pdf (accessed: 19.08.2020). (In rus)

9. Dukin R. A., Fadeeva I. M. Information Activities of a Region in the Media Space // Russian Journal of Regional Studies [Regionologiya]. 2015. Vol. 25. N 3. P. 94–101. (In rus)

10. Keane J. Democracy and Media Decadence. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 2015. (In rus)

11. Kuhta M.S. Models of Information Perception in Verbal and Visual Texts // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Bulletin of Tomsk state University]. 2004. N 3. P. 116–119. (In rus)

12. Lapkin V. V., Semenenko I.S. «Homo Politicus» vs Challenges of «Infomodernity» // Polis. Polis. Political Studies [Politicheskie issledovanija]. 2013. N 6. P. 64–81. (In rus)

13. Miroshnichenko I. V., Morozova E. V. Network Public Policy: Outlines of Subject Field // Polis. Political Studies Polis [Politicheskie issledovanija]. 2017. N 2. P. 82–102. (In rus)

14. Misnikov Y. G., Filatova O. G. Online Discussion as a Form of e-Participation: Russian Specifics // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2019. N 5. P. 320–340. (In rus)

15. Radaev V. V. Millennials: How the Russian Society Changes. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 2019. (In rus)

16. Srnicek N. Platform Capitalism. Moscow: HSE Publishing House, 2019. (In rus)

17. Ushkin S. G. Visual Images of Users of the VKontakte Social Network // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2012. N 5. P. 159–169. (In rus)

18. Ushkin S. G. Coffee Shop, Gentlemen’s Club and Social Network, or Where the Public Opinion is Shaped Today // Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes [Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i socialnye peremeny]. 2017. N 6. P. 52–62. (In rus) DOI: 10.14515 /monitoring.2017.6.03.

19. Ushkin S. G. Moral Transgression and the Meanings Making in Online Discussions // Sociological Studies [Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya]. 2020. N 1. P. 65–73. (In rus) DOI: 10.31857/S013216250006339-5.

20. Habermas Yu. Relations to the World and Rational Aspects of Action in Four Sociological Concepts of Action // Sociological review [Sociologicheskoe obozrenie]. 2008. Vol. 25. N 1. P. 1–24. (In rus)

21. Bjola С., Holmes M. Digital Diplomacy: Theory and Practice. London : Routledge, 2015.

22. Bourdieu P. Photography: A Middle-Brow Art. Oxford : Polity Press, 1998.

23. Clark J., Gewirtz S., McLaughlin E. (ed.) New Managerialism, New Welfare? London : Sage, 2010.

24. Giannetti L.K. Understanding Movies. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey : Prentice Hall, 1990.

25. Goffman E. Gender Advertisements. Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1979.

26. Habermas J. On the pragmatics of communication. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press, 1998.

27. Katz E., Lazarsfeld P. Personal Influence: The Part Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communication. Glencoe, IL : The Free Press, 1995.

28. Kavanaugh A. L., Fox E. A., Sheetz S. D., Yang S., Li L. T., Shoemaker D. J., Natsev A., Xie L. Social Media Use by Government: From the Routine to the Critical // Government Information Quarterly. 2012. Vol. 29. N 4. P. 480–491.

29. Kress G., Leeuwen T. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London : Routledge, 1996.

30. Kuźniar E., Filimoniuk N. E-Diplomacy on Twitter. International Comparison of Strategies and Effectivity // Social Communication. 2018. Vol. 3. N 2. P. 34–41.

31. Lazarsfeld P., Berelson B., Gaudet H. The People’s Choice: How the Voter Makes up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign. N. Y. : Columbia University Press, 1948.

32. Lee D.K.L., Borah P. Self-presentation on Instagram and Friendship Development among Young Adults: A Moderated Mediation Model of Media Richness, Perceived Functionality, and Openness // Computers in Human Behavior. 2019. Vol. 103. P. 57–66.

33. Lill M.M., Wilkinson T. J. Judging a Book by Its Cover: Descriptive Survey of Patients’ Preferences for Doctors’ Appearance and Mode of Address // British Medical Journal. 2005. Vol. 331. N 7531. P. 1524–1527.

34. Mergel I. Social Media in the Public Sector. A Guide to Participation, Collaboration and Transparency in the Networked World. New Jersey : Jossey-Bass, 2012.

35. Tomazic T., Misic K.U. Parliament-citizen Communication in Terms of Local Self-government and Their use of Social Media in the European Union // Lex Localis — Journal of Local SelfGovernment. 2019. Vol. 17. N 4. P. 1057–1079.

36. Zhong X., Lu J. Public Diplomacy Meets Social Media: A Study of the U. S. Embassy’s Bogs and Micro-blogs // Public Relations Review. 2013. Vol. 39. N 5. P. 542–548.