Subject-subject paradigm in mediology: Methodological and methodical aspects

   Introduction. In the domestic media methodology and, in particular, in the theory of journalism, the subject-subject paradigm is stated and justified. It asserts the interdependence and mutual responsibility of the media content authors and the mass communication audience. However, in the field of journalism education, a different mental attitude is manifested: the student audience better perceives concepts in which the audience is assigned the role of a passive recipient. This situation is facilitated by the ambiguity of understanding subject-object relations in media studies.

   Purpose setting. The objective of the research is to consider the semantics of the subject-subject paradigm and its presence in the educational space, in order to improve the methods of its assimilation.

   Methodology and methods of the study. The following methodological bases are used: the principle of unity of logical and psychological in the study of methodological discourse; socio-psychological concept of cognitive attitude, elements of discourse analysis.

   Results. The article examines the semantics of the subject-object binary opposition. Based on the analysis of the «entertainment content», «manipulative text», «documentality» concepts, the idea of media audience subjectivity is detailed. The opinion is expressed that the subject-object opposition is an actual concept through which the person position (in this case, the student audience) in the communicative
space is expressed. At the same time, binary opposition is characterized by incompleteness of representation and insufficient reflexivity, which is associated with the complexity of methodological discourse and requires special methodical work. The cognitive attitude that makes it difficult to accept the subject-subject paradigm manifests itself in the uncritical acceptance of theories that emphasize the passive role of the media audience. An assumption is made about the reasons for the existence of this predisposition. Among them are: the popularity of the subject-object paradigm in media communication; the peculiarity of media communication, which consists in the fact that at the phenomenological level, the results of the addressee’s activity are mainly revealed; the centrality of the educational process on the formation of the subjective qualities of media specialists.

   Conclusion. Based on the results of the analysis carried out in the article, the following summarizing is made: the subjectivity of the addressee is expressed in semantic generation and semantic extraction (understanding the nature of the message). The methodical aspect is defined as working with cognitive attitudes, including explication of contradictions in the predispositions system, identification of the causes of their origin and stability.

1. Pronina E. E. Categories of media psychology: facts, phenomena, phantoms. Man as a subject and object of media psychology. Moscow, 2011, pp. 106–150. URL: https://psyrus.ru/library/pdf/person.pdf (accessed 02. 21. 2024). (In Russ.)

2. Dunas D. V. On the issue of classification of media theories. Bulletin of Moscow State University. Series: Journalism, 2011, no. 4, pp. 27–41. (In Russ.)

3. Dmitrovsky A. L. Journalism theories: why don’t they work? (The problem of a synergetic approach to journalistic phenomena). Questions of Theory and Practice of Journalism, 2019, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 36–56. (In Russ.)

4. Demina I. N., Shkondin M. V. Synergetics and theory of journalism: aspects of media system research. Questions of Theory and Practice of Journalism, 2016, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 14–28. (In Russ.)

5. Solganik G. Ya. General characteristics of the language of modern media in comparison with the language of the media of the previous period. Language of mass and interpersonal communication. Moscow, MediaMir Publ., 2007, pp. 15–39. (In Russ.)

6. Neskryabina O. F. Methodological discourse in medialogy: meaning and significance in the context of journalism education. Professional Education in the Modern World, 2022, no. 12 (3), pp. 471–477. doi: 10.20913/2618-7515-2022-3-9 (In Russ.)

7. Neskryabina O. F. Methodological foundations of media analytics and the possibilities of methodological discourse. Current psychological, pedagogical, philosophical, economic and legal problems of modern Russian society : collective monograph. Issue 8. Ulyanovsk, Zebra Publ., 2023, pp. 42–61. (In Russ.)

8. Erofeeva I. V., Boguslavskaya V. V., Teplyashina A. N., Tolstokulakova Yu. V. Modeling of journalistic text and generalized methodology for analyzing media text. Linguistic and cultural modeling of media text : monograph. Rep. ed. I. V. Erofeeva. Chita, ZabSU, 2017, 202 p. (In Russ.)

9. Lazutina G. V. Journalism in the information field of modern Russia: what is due and what is real : monograph. Ed. G. V. Lazutina. Moscow, Aspect Press Publ., 2018, 176 p. (In Russ.)

10. Kazak M. Yu. Modern media texts: problems of identification and typology. Media text: social practices, technologies, theories : monograph. A. V. Beloyedova, M. Yu. Kazak, I. I. Karpenko and others. Edited by A. V. Polonsky, M. Yu. Cossack. Belgorod, 2018, pp. 24–35. (In Russ.)

11. Eco U. The role of the reader. Research on text semiotics. Transl. from English and Italian S. D. Serebryanyij. St. Petersburg, Symposium Publ., 2005, 502 p. (In Russ.)

12. Lotman Yu. M. Inside thinking worlds. Man – text – semiosphere – history. Moscow, Languages of Russian Culture Publ., 1999, 464 p. (In Russ.)

13. Leontovich O. A. Methods of communication research. Moscow, Gnosis Publ., 2011, 224 p. (In Russ.)

14. Davydova O. S. Between truth and fiction: the problem of evidence in documentaries by Chris Marker. Current problems of theory and history of art : collection. scientific articles. Vol. 10. Ed. A. V. Zakharova, S. V. Maltseva, E. Yu. Stanyukovich-Denisova. St. Petersburg, NP-Print Publ., 2020, pp. 624–631. doi: 10.18688/aa200-4-57 (In Russ.)

15. Kozhemyakin E. Mass communication and media discourse: towards research methodology. Scientific Bulletins of Belgorod State University. Series: Humanities, 2010, no. 2 (73), issue 11, pp. 13–21. (In Russ.)