Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Paradigms of economic thinking in journalism: The post-Soviet transformations’ experience
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-1-105-122
Abstract
The paper, using the example of publications in federal periodicals in the period from 1991 to 2022, examines the process of formation and transformation of economic thinking paradigms that have gone from a liberal economic agenda that promotes the values of private property and market reforms to an administrative concept that brings paternalistic sentiments to the fore and pro-government stance. The content analysis and sentiment analysis of the texts, carried out by the author, show that over the three decades of post-Soviet transformations, not only the economic ideas broadcast through periodicals have noticeably transformed, but also the emotive field of these ideas has changed sign from negative to positive context. The conclusion is drawn about the prospects for such a transformation, which inevitably leads to the consolidation in the public mind of the principles of learned helplessness and a return to the argumentative constructions of the Soviet period with the dominant role of distribution motives and state support for the economy. The results showed that the increase in the subjectivity of the media in the representation of economic topics during periods of dominance of paradigms and the intention of periodicals for objectivity during the period of paradigm transition.
Keywords
liberal paradigm,
administrative paradigm,
paradigm shift,
economic thinking,
content analysis,
sentiment analysis
JEL: A12, D82, G01
About the Author
D. E. Konoplev
Chelyabinsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry Е. Konoplev, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications
Chelyabinsk
References
1. Aleksashenko S. (2019). Counterrevolution. How the vertical of power was built in modern Russia and how it affects the economy. Moscow: Alpina Publisher. (In Russian).
2. Antipov G. (2015). Economic thinking and reality. Ideas and Ideals, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 125—140. (In Russian).
3. Denilkhanov A. (2013). The fate of modern liberalism (to the problem of the formation of the principles of ethical liberalism). Values and Meanings, No. 1, pp. 9—18. (In Russian).
4. Dyagilev V. (2019). Economics, democracy and liberalism. Bulletin of the National Institute of Business, No. 37, pp. 72—75. (In Russian).
5. Izryadnova O. (2013). From innovation to conservatism. Russian Economic Development, No. 12, pp. 14—16. (In Russian).
6. Kagarlitskij B. (2014). Paternalism and liberalism. Logos, No. 2, pp. 167—180. (In Russian).
7. Klistorin V. (2011). On conservatism, protectionism and historical memory. EKO, No. 7, pp. 172—179. (In Russian).
8. Lakatos I. (1995). Falsification and methodology of research programs. Moscow: Medium. (In Russian).
9. Okara A. (2010). On three aspects of liberalism. Outlines of Global Transformations: Рolitics, Economics, Law, No. 5, pp. 86—87. (In Russian).
10. Oleinik A. N. (2021). Uses of content analysis in economic sciences: An overview of the current situation and prospects. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 4, pp. 79—95. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2021-4-79-95
11. Ostrovsky A. (2019). Russia speaks and shows. Journey from the future to the past by the media. Moscow: Corpus. (In Russian).
12. Pavlov A. (2011). Liberalism and open society. Society and Рower, No. 4, pp. 13—19. (In Russian).
13. Rastorguev S. (2011). Application of the content analysis method to economic, sociological and political research. Finance: Тheory and Рractice, No. 6, pp. 76—80. (In Russian).
14. Romanova K. (2005). Russian mentality and liberalism. Antinomies, No. 6, pp. 149—164. (In Russian).
15. Spirova Е. (2016). Conservatism vs liberalism. Vek Globalizatsii , No. 4, pp. 12—22. (In Russian).
16. Blyth M. (2002). Great transformations: Economic ideas and institutional change in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Blyth M. (2014). Paradigms and paradox: The politics of economic ideas in two moments of crisis. Governance, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 197—215. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12010
18. Camargo J., Gonzalez M., Guzman A., Horst E., Trujillo M. (2018). Topics and methods in economics, finance, and business journals: A content analysis enquiry. Heliyon, Vol. 4, No. 12, article E01062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01062
19. Culpepper D., Lee T. (2021). Media frames, partisan identification and the Australian banking scandal. Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 73—98. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2021.1879009
20. Feng Z., Zhou H., Zhu Z., Mao K. (2022). Tailored text augmentation for sentiment analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 205, article 117605. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117605
21. Hellman J. (1998). Winners take all: The politics of partial reform in postcommunist transitions. World Politics, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 203—234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100008091
22. Hodgson G. (1996). Economics and evolution: Bringing life back into economics. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
23. Hodgson G. (2001). How economics forgot history: The problem of historical specificity in social science. Routledge.
24. Hopkin J. (2020). Anti-system politics: The crisis of market liberalism in rich democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25. Kunh T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26. Lindgren B., Lundman B., Graneheim U. (2020). Abstraction and interpretation during the qualitative content analysis process. International Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol. 108, article. 103632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103632
27. Merten R. K. (1946). Paradigms: The codification of sociological theory. In: R. K. Merten. On social structure and science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 57—62.
28. Osgood C., Suci J., Tannenbaum P. (1967). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
29. Parsons C. (2016). Ideas and power: Four intersections and how to show them. Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 446—463. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1115538
30. Seabrooke L. (2007). Why political economy needs historical sociology. International Politics, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 390—413. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ip.8800197
31. Xu Q., Chang V., Jayne C. (2022). A systematic review of social media-based sentiment analysis: Emerging trends and challenges. Decision Analytics Journal, Vol. 3, article 100073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dajour.2022.100073
32. Zitnik S., Blagus N., Bajec M. (2022). Target level sentiment analysis for news articles. Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 249, article 108939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108939
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Konoplev D.E. Paradigms of economic thinking in journalism: The post-Soviet transformations’ experience. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2023;(1):105-122. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2023-1-105-122
Views:
524
Email this article 
