The problem of interethnic tolerance is especially actual for multinational Crimea. Separate politicians, public figures, representatives of mass-media sometimes maintain the given theme, is frequent thus using «enmity language» which is defined as distribution, provocation, stimulation or the justification of racial hatred, xenophobia, anti-Semitism or other kinds of hatred on the basis of intolerance.
Probe of the facts of kindling of international enmity and not tolerant relation to representatives of other ethnic groups in the Crimean printing mass media is the project purpose «the Crimean mass-media. Enmity language» which since September of this year is carried out by public organization «Evpatoriya center of regional development» with support of International Fund «Renaissance».
Within October on the basis of certain indicators have been analysed by experts of GO CRR materials 29 allcrimean and local printing mass-media.
The analysis has been spent on 4 directions:
1. Directly «enmity language», as the tool of kindling of international enmity and not tolerant relation to representatives of other ethnic groups.
2. «A language question» as one of factors of kindling of international enmity.
3. Creation of a negative image of participants of Liberation movement 40 50 ХХ in in Ukraine, as one of factors of kindling of international enmity.
4. Discussion of «enmity language».
As a result of probe the following has been established:
1. Directly «enmity language», as the tool of kindling of international enmity and not tolerant relation to representatives of other ethnic groups.
1. In total 53 materials (articles, statements, reports of information, jokes) which were distributed under the relation of subjects of «enmity language» to it as follows have been fixed:
Support 47 (88,68 %)
Neutrality 0 (0 %)
Condemnation 6 (11,32 %)
2. The basic subjects (authors) «enmity languages» which it is fixed 48:
Politicians 8 cases (16,67 %), from them: support 6, condemnation 2;
Political scientists 4 cases (8,33 %), from them: support 3, condemnation 1;
Representatives of mass-media (journalists, edition) 30 cases (62,5 %), from them: support 27, condemnation 3;
Ordinary citizens of 6 cases (12,5 %), from them: support 6.
The difference between quantity of materials and authors of «enmity language» is predetermined by that one subject (author) uses some kinds of «enmity language».
3. Ethnic groups and their separate representatives, who became objects of «enmity language»:
Russian 8 (16 %);
Ukrainians 10 (20 %);
Inhabitants of the Western Ukraine 7 (14 %);
Inhabitants of Ukraine (as whole) 8 (16 %);
The Crimean Tatars 7 (14 %);
Tadjiks 2 (4 %);
Nonecrimeans 1 (2 %);
Moldavians 1 (2 %);
Bulgarians 1 (2 %);
Peruvians 1 (2 %);
Jews 1 (2 %);
Vietnameses 1 (2 %);
Azerbaijanians 1 (2 %);
Caucasians (as whole) 1 (2 %).
4. Kinds «enmity languages» which were used:
Mention of an ethnic group or its representatives as those in a humiliating or offensive context 12 cases (22,64 %);
Charges of this or that ethnic group in nationalism, chauvinism or extremism of 8 cases (15,09 %);
Statements about inferiority (a lack of culture, mental abilities, inability to creative activity) this or that ethnic group
6 cases (11,32 %);
Charges in negative influence of this or that ethnic group on a society, the state of 6 cases (11,32 %);
Citizenship Negations (that is a mention of the Ukrainian citizens as foreigners depending on their ethnic identification) 5 cases (9,43 %);
The Veiled appeals to violence and discrimination 3 cases (5,66 %);
Creation of a negative image of an ethnic group 2 cases (3,77 %);
Statements about criminality of this or that ethnic group 2 cases (3,77 %);
Charge of this or that ethnic group in extortion of granting to it of privileges to a national sign 2 cases (3,77 %);
Appeals to violence 1 case (1,89 %);
Publications and statements which call into question the conventional historic facts of violence and discrimination 1 case (1,89 %);
Statements about historical crimes of this or that ethnic group 1 case (1,89 %);
Reasonings on disproportionate advantage of this or that ethnic group in a material prosperity, representation in power structures, a press, language 1 case (1,89 %);
Mention of an ethnic group or its representatives in the criminal chronicle 1 case (1,89 %);
Citing of obviously xenophobic statements and texts without the comment 1 case (1,89 %);
Charges of this or that ethnic group in kindling of international enmity, xenophobia 1 case (1,89 %).
5. Mass-media in which «enmity language» was used:
«The Crimean echo» 9 cases;
«The Crimean time» 9 cases;
«Komsomol truth in Ukraine Crimea» 7 cases;
«Rusichi» 5 cases; (from them condemnation of «enmity language» 3);
«The communist of Crimea» 3 cases;
«The Crimean truth» 3 cases;
«The Crimean newspaper» 3 cases;
«The first Crimean» 3 cases;
«An evening kitchen garden» 2 cases;
«The Crimean news» — 1 case;
«Province» 1 case (from them condemnation 1);
«Peninsula» 1 case (from them condemnation 1);
«Glory of Sevastopol» 1 case;
«Sholem» 1 case (from them condemnation 1).
6. The relation of journalists, editions to «enmity language»:
In total 47 materials (articles, interview, reports of information), from them have been analysed:
Support of «enmity language» from journalists, edition 34 cases (72,34 %);
Neutrality of 7 cases (14,89 %);
Condemnation of 6 cases (12,77 %).
2. «A language question», as one of factors of kindling of international enmity.
1. In total 56 materials (articles, statements, reports of information) which were distributed under the relation of subjects (authors) to «a language question» as follows have been fixed:
Reasonings on granting to Russian of the status of the second state or regional:
Support 26 (78,79 %);
Neutrality 3 (9,09 %);
Condemnation 4 (12,12 %);
Only 33 cases
The Scornful relation to a state language and languages of other nationalities:
Support 9 (100 %);
Neutrality 0 (0 %);
Condemnation 0 (0 %);
In total — 9 cases.
Reasonings on disproportionate advantage of a state language over languages of national minorities:
Support 13 (92,86 %);
Neutrality 1 (7,14 %);
Condemnation 0 (0 %);
Only 14 cases.
2. The basic subjects (authors) of statements whom it is fixed 48, were:
Politicians of 28 cases (58,33 %) from them: support 25, condemnation 3;
Journalists, edition 14 (29,17 %), from them: support 11, a neutrality 3;
Art workers, sciences, formations 5 (10,42 %), from them support 4, condemnation 1;
Political scientists 3 (6,25 %), from them: support 3;
Officials 1 (2,08 %), from them: support 1;
Newspaper caricaturists 1 (2,08 %), from them support — 1.
3. Mass-media in which «the language question», as one of factors of kindling of international enmity was mentioned:
«The Crimean echo» 9 cases, from them condemnation 1;
«The Crimean truth» 9 cases, from them condemnation 1;
«The Crimean time» 6 cases;
«The Crimean news» — 5 cases;
«Glory of Sevastopol» 4 cases, from them condemnation 1;
«The first Crimean» 3 cases;
«Southern capital» 3 cases;
«Bospor» 2 cases;
«The communist of Crimea» 2 cases;
«Rusichi» 2 cases;
«An Evpatoriya health resort» 1 case;
«The Crimean newspaper» 1 case;
«The Crimean observer 1 case;
«Province» 1 case;
«Free territory» 1 case.
4. The relation of journalists, editions to «a language question», as to one of factors of kindling of international enmity.
In total 50 materials (articles, interview, reports of information), from which have been analysed:
Support from journalists, editions of 25 cases (50 %);
Neutrality of 25 cases (50 %);
Condemnation of 0 cases (0 %).
3. Creation of a negative image of participants of Liberation movement 40 50 ХХ the item in Ukraine, as one of factors of kindling of international enmity.
1. In total 10 materials (articles, statements, reports of information) which were distributed under the relation of subjects (authors) to a negative image of participants of Liberation movement 40 50 ХХ the item in Ukraine as follows have been fixed:
Support 10 (100 %);
Neutrality 0 (0 %);
Condemnation 0 (0 %).
2. The basic subjects (authors) of statements who are fixed 13, were:
Politicians 6 (46,15 %);
Journalists, edition 5 (38,46 %);
Officials 1 (7,69 %);
Ordinary citizens — 1.
3. Mass-media in which the question of Liberation movement ХХ the item in Ukraine was mentioned 40 50:
«The Crimean truth» 3 cases;
«Glory of Sevastopol» 3 cases;
«The communist of Crimea» 2 cases;
«The Crimean newspaper» 1 case;
«The southern newspaper» a case.
4. The relation of journalists, editions to a negative image of participants of Liberation movement 40 50 ХХ the item in Ukraine:
Support of 9 cases (90 %);
Neutrality 1 case (10 %).
4. Discussion of «enmity language».
In total it has been fixed six articles on discussion by journalists of a problem of «enmity language», five of which concerned discussions of article of N.Astahova «Brought with a wind»
And decisions of the Central district court of Simferopol concerning newspaper edition «Crimean truth».
«Enmity language» has got support from journalists in two articles of the newspaper «Crimean truth» (N.Kisileva, K.Baharev), condemnation in two articles of the newspaper «Peninsula» (O.Pashaev) and the neutral relation in the newspaper «Voice of Crimea» (E.Abljazov) and the newspaper (E.Mustafaeva) «Peninsula».
So, a primary factor of kindling of international enmity on pages of the Crimean mass-media is «the language question» (56 cases). Further itself «enmity language»
(53 cases) and display of negative attitude to participants of Liberation movement 40 50 ХХ century in Ukraine (10 cases).
glas.1k.com.ua