Public consciousness under the influence of manipulative technologies

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Public consciousness under the influence of manipulative technologies

M. P. Trebin



The article analyzes the impact of manipulative technologies on public consciousness. The peculiarities of manipulative technologies are determined: the presence of a subject interested in manipulation; focus on the spiritual, psychological components of the human personality, social consciousness in general; hiding the real goals of the manipulator; availability of a wide set of methods and technologies of manipulation; influence not only on the sphere of the conscious, but also on the sphere of the unconscious; managing the attitude of the object of manipulation to objects and phenomena of the surrounding world in a given direction; establishing control over the thoughts, feelings, behavior, attitudes and life attitudes of the object of manipulation; deliberate distortion of the facts of reality; destructiveness. manipulative technologie public consciousness

It is proved that the phenomenon of manipulation is a vector process carried out either directly or through the media. Technologies of manipulative influence, their strategies, tactics and rules have been analyzed. Some methods of manipulating public consciousness are singled out: the use of stereotypes that form the representation of a social object in a simplified schematic form; substitution of names, titles, planting of stamps and "gluing" of labels; exchange of messages of a semi-true nature; a reference to someone's anonymous authority, to someone's professional opinion; "Spiral of silence", or manipulation of public opinion polls; distraction of attention to something insignificant; the principle of applying contrasts; creation of associations; information blockade of "unfavorable" information, etc.

As a mechanism that protects society from the destructive influence of manipulative technologies, a method of forming in the mass consciousness of peculiar "filters" that allows to recognize manipulation is proposed. This method is based on educational activities: bringing to the population information about strategies, tactics, methods, forms, possible consequences of both overt and covert influences on the mass consciousness.

Keywords: manipulation, manipulator, manipulative technologies, manipulative strategies,

manipulative tactics, manipulative communication, public consciousness.

* Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor,

Head of the Department of Sociology and Political Science, (Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Kharkiv, Ukraine)



СУСПІЛЬНА СВІДОМІСТЬ ПІД ВПЛИВОМ МАНІПУЛЯТИВНИХ ТЕХНОЛОГІЙ

М. П. Требін

У статті проаналізовано вплив маніпулятивних технологій на суспільну свідомість. Визначено особливості маніпулятивних технологій: наявність суб'єкта, зацікавленого в маніпулюванні; спрямованість на духовну, психологічну складові людської особистості, суспільну свідомість у цілому; приховування справжніх цілей маніпулятора; наявність широкого арсеналу методів і технологій маніпулювання; вплив не тільки на сферу свідомого, але й на сферу несвідомого; управління ставленням об'єкта маніпуляції до предметів і явищ навколишнього світу в заданому руслі; встановлення контролю над думками, почуттями, поведінкою, стосунками й життєвими установками об'єкта маніпуляції; навмисне спотворення фактів дійсності; деструктивність.

Доведено, що феномен маніпулювання - векторний процес, що здійснюється або безпосередньо, або через ЗМІ. Проаналізовано технології маніпулятивного впливу, їх стратегії, тактики та правила. Виокремлено деякі прийоми маніпулювання суспільною свідомістю: використання стереотипів, які формують уявлення соціального об'єкта у спрощеному схематичному вигляді; підміна імен, назв, насадження штампів і «наклеювання» ярликів; обмін повідомленнями напівправдивого характеру; посилання на чийсь анонімний авторитет, на чиюсь фахову думку; "спіраль замовчування", або маніпуляції з опитуванням громадськості; відволікання уваги на щось незначне; принцип застосування контрастів; створення асоціацій; інформаційна блокада "невигідної" інформації тощо.

Як механізм, що захищає суспільство від деструктивного впливу маніпулятивних технологій, запропоновано метод формування в масовій свідомості своєрідних "фільтрів", що дозволяють розпізнавати маніпуляцію. Цей метод ґрунтується на просвітницько-освітній діяльності: доведення до населення інформації про стратегії, тактики, методи, форми, можливі наслідки як явних, так і прихованих впливів на масову свідомість.

Ключові слова: маніпулювання, маніпулятор, маніпулятивні технології, маніпулятивні

стратегії, маніпулятивні тактики, маніпулятивна комунікація, суспільна свідомість.



Problem setting. Manipulation of people's consciousness is one of the most pressing problems of our time. The growing importance of related issues proportional to the devastating consequences of manipulative technologies in society:destruction of accepted moral norms, transformation of social values and ideals, spread of violence, cultivation of immeasurable consumption, legal nihilism and others.If we want to protect the world in which we live, the future of mankind, we must reduce the perlocutionary effect of manipulation on the collective recipient; create an effective mechanism to counteract this destructive phenomenon on the social and individual consciousness of people.

Recent research and publications analysis. Extensive scientific development of the phenomenon of manipulation of consciousness began in the second

quarter of the XX century by the follower of S. Freud Ernest Dichter, who in 1946 founded the Institute for Motivational Research. However, the real "boom" for the problem of manipulation happened during the Cold War. Thousands of authors studied the problems of mass communications, psychological warfare and manifestations of mass culture during the 70-80s of the XX century. And today the problem of the influence of manipulative technologies on the public consciousness is in the center of attention of both domestic and foreign researchers:it was studied by O. Boyd- Barrett, V. Bushansky, D. Colon, A. S. Curran, M. Danesi, I. Dimante, E. Dotsenko, D. S. Heidler, N. Hi don,

M. Huff, S. Kara-Murza, M. Karinch, G. Kopnina, D. Kononovich, P. Lisovsky, N. Nechaeva-Yuriychuk, T. A. VanDijk, R. M. Wallnerandothers [1-3; 9-13; 15-17; 20-35]. In our opinion, modern research on the problem of manipulation of public consciousness suffers from excessive attention to the "technical" side of the issue. The problem of manipulation today is studied mainly in the context of the theory and practice of election technologies, the construction of methods of election campaigns, the use of modern information technology in advertising and more. But studies that cover mainly one or another side of the problem of manipulation, although necessary, unfortunately, do not provide a theoretical understanding of the problem as a whole.However, socio-philosophical reflection on the phenomenon of manipulation of consciousness is fundamentally important because it is closely related to the problems of individuals and social groups in modern society, with the formation of total ideologies and ways of alienation in misinformation and deception.

Paper objective. The purpose of the article: to determine the strategies, tactics and rules of manipulative technologies, to analyze their features and impact on individual and social consciousness.

Paper main body. In the scientific literature there are a number of definitions of the concept of manipulation. Thus,

O. Bykova characterizes manipulation as a type of "influence that is used for the covert introduction into the psyche of the addressee of goals, intentions, attitudes that do not coincide with those that the addressee has at the moment" [3: 99];

O. Boyko interprets manipulation as "a set of psychological, ideological and organizational actions aimed at covertly correcting the mass consciousness in order to stimulate public sentiment and social activity in the right, for the manipulator, direction" [18: 422]; for

V. Danilyan, manipulation is "a system of means of ideological and spiritual- psychological influence on the mass consciousness in order to impose certain ideas and values; … reception, a way that affects the behavior of an individual or group of people in society" [19: 398]; for

O. Kozlova "technology of overcoming critical reflection of individuals, instilling in them the ideas, goals and values set by the manipulator as a basis for the reproduction of social practices" [10: 114];

M. Skripkar gives the following definition: "a set of latent processes that shape or change the consciousness of a person, group of people or society as a whole, in the direction set by the manipulator, in order to achieve certain results in the formation of motivational attitudes, ethics, behavior and other psychological properties of the object of manipulation" [21: 288-289]; authors "Hostile social manipulation: present realities and emerging trends" determine that "manipulation is the purposeful, systematic generation and dissemination of information to produce harmful social, political, and economic outcomes in a target area by affecting beliefs, attitudes, and behavior" [34: 15]. Thus, there are many points of view on the definition of "manipulation".

We can determine the most significant features of manipulation (both public and individual consciousness), which we consider as following: 1) the presence of an entity interested in manipulation [5: 59]; 2) the manipulation is not material, is not physical violence or even a threat of violence; it is aimed at the spiritual, psychological components of the human personality, social consciousness in general; 3) the object of manipulation is not aware of the influence exerted on it, due to the concealment of the true purposes of the manipulator [8: 32]. H. Schiller explains it this way: "... in order to succeed, manipulation must remain invisible. The success of manipulation is guaranteed when the manipulated person believes that everything that happens is natural and inevitable ...manipulation requires a false reality in which its presence will not be felt" [24: 27], viz. manipulation has an important sense of independence in decision- making; 4) the presence of a wide set of methods and technologies of manipulation [24: 99]; 5) the manipulator exerts influence not only on the sphere of the conscious (mind), but also on the sphere of the unconscious (instincts, emotions, needs); 6) the manipulator controls the attitude of the object of manipulation to objects and phenomena of the surrounding world in a given direction; 7) the manipulator establishes control over the thoughts, feelings, behavior and life attitudes of the object of manipulation; 8) the manipulator operates by presenting information, which as a result undergoes significant changes (misinformation, selection, suppression, etc.) and indicates a deliberate distortion of the facts of reality; 9) manipulation is a destructive phenomenon that leads to a violation of social norms, the damage of the object of influence [35: 360].

The phenomenon of manipulation is a vector process carried out either directly or through the media. By vector process we mean that manipulation is characterized by direct communication between the subject and the object of influence; the subject is hidden from the object, but the "vector" direction allows, albeit with little probability, to expose the subject of manipulation (for example, Wikiliaks exposures, Fahrenheit 9/11 exposйs, media investigations, etc.); the presence of feedback represented by the object's reaction to the manipulation (specific actions or omissions).

The nature of manipulation has a double effect. Along with the openly sent message, the manipulator sends a "coded" signal to the recipient. This hidden influence is based on the "implicit knowledge" possessed by the addressee, on his ability to create in his mind images that affect his feelings, thoughts and behavior. The essence of manipulation is that the manipulator, pursuing their goals, covertly, implicitly seeks to cause the recipient (person, community, which they are manipulating) intentions that do not coincide with their current desire [5: 165-167]. Manipulation is an action with two purposes: explicit and implicit.An explicit purpose is in favor of the recipient, implicit - in favor of the manipulator. The addressee should not understand about the hidden purpose of the manipulator. The manipulator hides its true purpose because: 1) this purpose reveals the intentions of the manipulator; 2) the addressee may not agree to such purpose; 3) explicit formulation of this purpose requires a lot of effort from the manipulator to implement it and cannot always be, in this case, achieved.

The scientific literature describes various types of manipulative influence and often attempts to classify them, but a single generally accepted standard still does not exist.Since many types of manipulative influence are combined and complement each other, it is possible to build them in a linear way only with a certain degree of conventionality. Therefore, raising the question of streamlining the types of manipulative influence, it should be recognized in advance that to create a universal sample classifier is not easy. In our opinion, one of the most successful attempts of such systematization is presented by

G. Kopnina with reference to researches of E. Dotsenko, S. Kara-Murza, V. Sheynov [11: 17-23]. Taking into account the experience of these specialists, in some way supplementing, changing or updating some of the examples given by them,I. Dimante modeled the scale of the most common types of manipulative influence in the process of communication as direct or indirect communication. She proposes to classify the main technologies of manipulative influence as follows [4: 55- 61]:

1) theimage-based strategy. The main tool of this strategy is to present incentives that concentrate a certain need (fancied image given by the text). You can also manipulate based onkind of formulaic frames, which can recognize familiar images;

2) the strategy based on sign systems. This technology is based on the fact that when proving the numbers, the impression of the reliability of the given facts is created. This is often used by representatives of business and political circles, when in the reporting period they have to cover their omissions with "new" growth rates;

3) therole-based strategy. Like manipulation based on images or frames, this strategy involves appealing to a "chosen" role by the subject, that they are willing to "try on". Quite common are ideas about the role of a boss, a happy business woman, a housewife, a successful businessman, etc.;

4) the strategy based on the method of exploitation the addressee's personality, as a result of which the addressee creates the illusion of an independently made decision;

5) the strategy based on the appeal to the values of life. The manipulator refers to the basics of biological and material life (health, family, income, security, etc.);

6) the strategy based on the appeal to spiritual values: the exploitation of the concepts of patriotism, religious affiliation, decency, responsibility, morality - opens a wide field of activity for manipulation;

7) the strategy of presenting information using the features of parts of speech;

8) thestrategy of presenting information with the use of words- signals and words-effectors, designed to increase attention and form more vivid impressions.

O. Mikhalyova systematizes manipulations on the basis of a ternary strategic system: 1) reduction strategy; 2) strategy for improvement; 3) strategy of theatricality. Under the strategy she proposes "to understand the plan of optimal implementation of communicative intentions, which takes into account the

objective and subjective factors and conditions in which the act of communication takes placeand which in return determine not only the external and internal structure of the text, but also the use of certain language tools" [15: 45]. The existence of strategies is explained by

A. Mikhaleva from the point of view of the cognitive approach as follows: there are some cognitive structures that can be called interpretive schemes. "Interpretive schemes help to form the intentions and thoughts (of course, due to the context) that guide people's actions. Interpretive schemes, allowing to comprehend situations, promote development of alternative ways of realization of these actions and realization of intentions. The speaker chooses the type of action and the method of its implementation from a number of alternatives. This is called a strategy. A strategy understood in this way does not involve conscious planning" [14: 62]. Each strategy is implemented using a certain set of tactics. Tactic is a specific stage in the implementation of communicative strategy, determined by the intention of the speaker, explained by a set of techniques that determine the use of language tools. We will consider in more detail the use of tactics in the implementation of communication strategies.

Focus on the opponent, the desire to debunk his position involves a strategy of "downplay". This strategy is implemented through the following tactics [15: 46-52]:

a) the tactic of analysis-"minus" based on analysis of the situation, which implies an implicit expression of a negative attitude to the described, as well as to people, their actions and deeds; b) the tactic of accusation that isascribing blame to someone, convicting in guilt, as well as disclosure, detection of someone's dishonest actions, intentions, qualities; characteristic expression of the negative subjective attitude of the speaker to the referenced situation; c) the tactic of impersonal accusation, in which the perpetrators of convicted actions or deeds

are not indicated,i.e. those people whose exploitation, secret intentions, etc. become the subject of open discussion and conviction; d) the tactic of exposure - guidance in order to expose the facts and arguments to curb the obvious guilt, malignity of someone. This tactic is kind of a combination of analysis-"minuses" and accusations. It is united with the first by the analytical component, installation on argumentation; the difference is the presence of an indication of a specific guilt (which in the analysis-"minus" is not phrased). In turn, the explicit indication of guilt combines the tactics of exposure and accusation; the difference between them is related to the parameter "presence/absence of argumentation". When implementing the tactic of exposure, the speaker provides facts that confirm his arguments; e) tactic of insult - humiliation of someone, accompanied by an explication of the emotional constituent of the component instead of providing evidence; f) tactic of threat - intimidation, promise to cause the addressee a trouble, harm. As a result of the analysis of tactics that represent the strategy of "downplay", we can conclude that their common feature is both explicit and implicit expression of the negative attitude of the speaker not only to the subject of speech, but also to the recipient.The choice of reduction strategy reflects the presence of a negative nature of the speaker's attitude, as the recipient is often an opponent. In addition, it should be noted that the confrontation of the participants determines the activity aimed at mastering the communicative initiative. Thus, the reduction strategy implements the setting, which consists in debunking the pretension on the role, in blocking the "game of improvement". The consequence of this attitude is the desire of the manipulator to discredit the opponent.

The strategy for improvement reflects the desire of the manipulator to maximize the significance of their own status. This strategy is implemented through the following tactics: a) the tactic of analysis-"plus" based on analysis of the situation, which implies an implicit expression of a positive attitude of the speaker to the described situation; b) thepresentation tactic - presenting someone in an appealing way; when implementing this tactic, the speaker makes a direct indication of the positive qualities of the subject of speech, so used language tools explicitly express the positive psychological orientation of the speaker; c) the tactic of implicit self-presentation - expressed indirectly, without a direct indication of the object of positive evaluation of the speaker's presentation of himself in an appealing, favorable light; d) the tactic of deflecting criticism given in order to prove the innocence of arguments and/or facts,through which can be explained (justified) any actions and deeds; e) theself-justification tactic is denying any negative judgments about the object of criticism and its involvement in a reason ofgiven negative assessment.

The presence in the manipulative discourse of the addressee-observer determines the implementation of the strategy of theatricality - "theatrical" approach to the situation represents its "interpretation as a drama where people try to make a certain impression on each other" [6: 37]. According to O. Sheigal, the theatricality of manipulative discourse is due to the fact that one of the participant of communication - the people - perform mainly the role of the not direct addressee, but the addressee- observer, who perceives the events as an act that takes place for them [23: 92]. The allocation of theatricality strategy is motivated in linguistic terms by the fact that the expression of focus on the addressee receives specialized means of implementation. Performative and imperative statements are in the lead among such means [15: 57-61]. Like other strategies, it is represented by a set of tactics: a) the motivation tactic -call for any action, acceptance of a point of view. As the analysis shows, motivation very often interacts with the tactics of self-presentation and cooperation, which is psychologically easy to explain: by motivating to action in which the speaker is the subject of benefit, he is forced to position himself on the positive side and address those facets of his collective image which unite them with the addressee; b) the tactic of cooperation-is a way of addressing the recipient, with which the speaker constructs the image of the latter, appealing to the ideas and values of which they (according to the speaker) possess; c) the tactic of differentiation -identification of differences and dissimilarities in positions and opinions; d) the information tactic- the presentation of data and facts that are not accompanied by the speaker's attitude to the information; e) the promise tactic- a voluntary commitment to do something; the event is spoken of as a fact of the nearby future; its possible / impossibleoccurrence is not discussed at all; f) the forecasting tactic- predictions, judgments about the future, the development of something based on the interpretation of various available data;

g) the warning tactic - warnings that precede the notification of possible events, actions, situations, etc.; h) the tactic of irony - the implementation of influence through the contrast between what is said and what is meant; i) the tactic of provocation - inciting someone to such actions that may cause severe consequences for him.

The tools of language manipulation are difficult to classify due to a wide range of different techniques, but attempts to identify groups of tools used in language for the purpose of influence have been made repeatedly. For example, Yu. Ilyichova identifies two main groups of techniques [7]:

1. Lexical and grammatical techniques of language manipulation: a) a reference to an unknown source, for example: "it's said", "it turns out", "as is known", "according to a reliable source"; b) lexeme- limiters: optimization which is indicating that the statement is characterized by a number of inaccuracies, and the speaker is aware of this, but in these circumstances, the statement still remains true, for example: "formally", "in a certain respect"; statement force limiters, that allow you to absolve yourself of responsibility for the thesis,for example: "it seems", "as if"; mental delimiters used to oppose the opinion of the quoted person, for example: "affirm", "confirm", "declare" in the form of a third person, "according to", "ostensibly"; c) the method of creating complex equivalence used in order to pass off the hypothetical as an axiom, for example: "respectively", "thus", "it follows";

d) nominalization, which means replacing verbs with abstract nouns, which allows not to mention in the text important aspects of the described situation, namely:actants of the situation, consequences of action, causes of events, etc.; e) multiplication reception, which consists in creating a plurality: pluralization of actions and situations ("commonly", "constantly", "better"); f) the method of intimation of the story, the use of language tools to create the effect of confidential communication between the author and the audience (pronoun "we/us" with a vague meaning); g) the method of labeling, which is used to form and fix in the minds of readers someone's discredited image, for example: "communists", "fascists", "Bandera", "vatnik", "vyshyvatnik"; h) allusion, i. e. a hint at a historical, political, cultural or domestic fact; i) euphemisms that distract the reader from the object that can cause antipathy, by creating a neutral or positive connotation ("conflict" - "war", "operation"- "attack"); j) affective words, which have a mental impact on public consciousness and cause different kinds of feelings and experiences ("freedom", "patriotism", "crisis", "belief in ideals").

2. Syntactic techniques of language manipulation: a) repetition as the basis of selection figures, that create associations and stereotypes in the mind of the reader; b) parallel constructions, which rhythmically highlight the most significant for the author fragments of the text; c) gradation, i. e. the deployment of words in a synonymous series, which causes increased expressiveness of the text.

Techniques vary in linguistic influence, their modifications in reality much more than in the above classification. As a rule, the techniques of linguistic manipulation are used in a complex manner, having one common purpose - to impose a certain opinion on the addressee and induce him to take certain actions.

We can suggest some ways to isolate the manipulation of public opinion [26; 28; 32-33]: the use of stereotypes that form the representation of a social object in a simplified schematic form (these techniques form stereotypical thinking, that are fixed in the mind over time; such thinking is not subject to verification by experience, it is very difficult to change); substitution of names, titles, imposition of stamps and "sticking" labels (mainly such techniques are used for negative evaluations, expressions of dissatisfaction); the use of rhetorical questions in the content of messages (such questions seem simple at first glance, but if the answers to them are filled with the context of a particular direction, the target audience will think in the direction required for the manipulator); selective repetition of information (some news or messages are repeated very often, resulting in automatic reinforcement in the minds of users); assertion of facts (this technique involves the acceptance of statements provided by the manipulator often without evidence, instead of discussion; such statements contain ideas favorable to the manipulator);the exchange of messages of a semi-true nature (this technique consists of detailed and objective consideration of insignificant facts, really important issues are almost not raised or even hidden; this approach results in misinterpretation of events and helps maintain user confidence in the issues under discussion); a reference to someone's anonymous authority, to someone's professional opinion, herewith, the reported information receives significance and plausibility; "The Spiral of silence" or public survey manipulation (collections of content comments aimed at convincing users that an idea or position is supported by the vast majority of the audience; this method is based on the laws of mass psychology forcing people with opposite views to hide them so as not to be in social and psychological isolation);the effect of presence, which is achieved through the use of special technologies that mimic reality and enhance the illusion of authenticity; the manner of "everyday story" in which information about significant political events, social conflicts or tragic events are presented in a businesslike and calm tone, which contributes to the indifference of perception by its audience; the primacy effect (the communicator's attempts to provide information quickly can also be used as a manipulative technique that does not allow the mass audience to understand the received information, because it is immediately replaced by new, unrelated to the previous one); statement of a certain fact (the position desirable for the imposition is presented as a fact that has already taken place); distracting attention to something insignificant (aimed at distracting the audience from important events to less significant ones and reducing psychological resistance from society); using stories of alleged eyewitnesses (at the same time, people are specially selected and the event is edited with the necessary meaning); the principle of applying contrasts (used when it is necessary to provide negative information about any events, but the tactic of direct accusations cannot be applied, because then the imposition of the idea will become too obvious); psychological shock (proof of news about emergencies that cause psychological shock in society, destroy all levels of psychological protection and allow

you to introduce inspired schemes into the mind); creation of associations (the object of information messages in the eyes of the public is tied to the negative stereotypes of the mass consciousness); information blockade of "unfavorable" information, its conservation or presentation in a favorable context.

Conclusions of the research. Today, manipulation is widely used in communicative discourse. Knowledge of the strategy, tactics and rules of manipulation, analysis of the mechanism of this phenomenon in conjunction with a proper understanding of the state and demands of society can help any manipulator in their struggle for power and the promotion of their own interests. The key to successful manipulation in communicative discourse is the realization of the paramount importance of the ultimate purpose. Depending on it, the strategy, tactics and methods of manipulation will be chosen.Careful selection of linguistic tools, persuasiveness and suggestiveness of the provided information will help to keep manipulative processes out of the zone of awareness and will guarantee their effectiveness.

As a mechanism that protects society from the destructive influence of manipulative technologies, we can propose a method of forming set of "filters" in the mass consciousness, which allow recognizing manipulation and thus preventing the formation of social illusions undesirable for society.This method is based on educational activities: bringing to the public information about strategies, tactics, methods, forms, and possible consequences of both overt and covert influences on the mass consciousness, a competent explanation of internal mechanisms of destructive technologies for the state, society and personality, description forms of protection against such actions at the individual level.



Literarure

1. Алексєєва О. Р. Маніпуляція свідомістю як негативний чинник соціалізації студентської молоді сходу України в умовах гібридної війни. Вісник Луганського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. Педагогічні науки. 2017. № 1(1). С. 6-17.

2. Бушанський В. Маніпуляція свідомістю: від фрустрації до нової ідентичності. Наукові записки Інституту політичних і етнонаціональних досліджень ім. І. Ф. Кураса НАН України. 2011. Вип. 5. С. 74-87.

3. Быкова О. Н. Языковое манипулирование. Теоретические и прикладне аспекты речового общения: Вестник Российской риторической ассоциации / Краснояр. гос. ун-т; под ред. А. П. Сковородникова. Вып. 1 (8). Красноярск, 1999. С. 99-103.

4. Диманте И. В. Инструментарий профессионального коммуникатора (приемы речового воздействия). Коммуникативные исследования. 2015. № 4 (6). С. 52-64.

5. Доценко Е. Л. Психология манипуляции: феномены, механизмы и защита. Москва: ЧеРо: Юрайт, 2000. 342, [1] с.

6. Желтухина М. Р. Комическое в политическом дискурсе конца XX века. Русские и немецкие политики. Монография. Москва: Ин-т языкознания РАН; Волгоград: Изд-во В. Ф. МУПК, 2000. 264 с.

7. Ильичева Ю. А. Речевое манипулирование в политическом тексте. Вестник Санкт- Петербургского университета. Серия

9. Филология. Востоковедение. Журналистика. 2013. № 4. С. 172-184.

8. Кара-Мурза С. Г. Манипуляция сознанием. Москва: ЭКСМО, 2005. 832 с.

9. Кара-Мурза С. Г., Смирнов С. В. Манипуляция сознанием-2. Москва: Алгоритм, 2015. 526, [1] с.

10. Козлова О. Н. Манипуляция сознанием и субъектность в ХХI веке.

Вестник РГГУ. Серия "Философия. Социология. Искусствоведение". 2010.

№ 3. С. 113-130.

11. Копнина Г. А. Речевое манипулирование: учеб.пособие. 4-е изд., испр. Москва: ФЛИНТА, 2012. 170 с.

12. Кононович Д. О. Маніпуляція свідомістю як об'єкт соціально- педагогічного дослідження. Науковий вісник Ужгородського університету. Серія : Педагогіка. Соціальна робота. 2019. Вип. 1. С. 80-83.

13. Лісовський П. М. Маніпуляція свідомістю: сутність, структура, механізм у сучасному

трансформаційному суспільстві (соціально-філософський аналіз). Київ: Видавництво Національного

педагогічного ун-ту ім. М. П. Драгоманова, 2006. 200 с.

14. Макаров М. Л. Основы теории дискурса. Москва: ИТДГК "Гнозис", 2003. 280 с.

15. Михалёва О. Л. Политический дискурс: Специфика манипулятивного воздействия. Москва: Книжный дом "ЛИБРОКОМ", 2009. 256 с.

16. Нечаєва-Юрійчук Н. В. Маніпуляція свідомістю людини в умовах зародження нової світ-системи: досвід Великої війни для ХХІ століття. Історична панорама. Спеціальність: Історія. 2018. Вип. 26-27. С. 169-179.

17. Первушина В. Н., Князева И. В. Манипуляция общественным сознанием: сущность, исторические формы, трансформация: монография / Военный авиационный инженерный ун-т (г. Воронеж). Воронеж : Изд-во ВАИУ (г. Воронеж), 2011. 267, [1] с.

18. Політична енциклопедія / Редкол.: Ю. Левенець (голова), Ю. Шаповал (заст. голови) та ін. Київ: Парламентське видавництво, 2011. 808 с.

19. Політологічний енциклопедичний словник / уклад.: [Л. М. Герасіна, В. Л. Погрібна, І. О. Поліщук та ін.]; за ред. М. П. Требіна. Харків: Право, 2015. 816 с.

20.

21. Прокопенко И. С. Штурм сознания: правда о манипулировании сознанием человека. Москва: Э, 2017. 382 с.

22. Скрипкарь М. В. Манипулятивные технологии кинематографа. Вестник Бурятского государственного университета. Педагогика. Филология. Философия. 2009. № 6. С. 288-291.

23. Черкасова В. П. Медиа- манипулирование общественным сознанием. Телевидение и Интернет. Москва: Весь Мир, 2019. 149, [2] с.

24. Шейгал Е. И. Театральность политического дискурса. Единицы языка в их функционировании: Межвуз. сб. науч. тр. Саратов: СГАП, 2000. С. 92-96.

25. Шиллер Г. Манипуляторы сознанием / Пер. с англ. предисл. Я. Засурского. Москва: Мысль, 1980. 326 с.

26. Boyd-Barrett O. RussiaGate and propaganda: disinformation in the age of social media. London; New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. 137 p.

27. Colon D. Propagande : la manipulation de masse dans le monde contemporain. Paris : Belin, 2019. 430 p.

28. Curran A. S. Diderot and the art of thinking freely. New York: Other Press, 2019. 520 p.

29. Danesi M. The art of the lie: how the manipulation of language affects our mind. Guilford, Connecticut: Prometheus Books, 2020. xiii, 240 p.

30. Heidler D. S., Heidler J. T. The rise of Andrew Jackson: myth,manipulation, and the making of modern politics.New York: Basic Books, 2018.ix, 433 p.

31. Higdon N., Huff M. United States of distraction: media manipulation in post-truth America (and what we can do about it) / foreword by Ralph Nader. San Francisco : Open Media Series/City Lights Books, 2019. 245 p.

32. Hwang T. Maneuver and manipulation: on the military strategy of

online information warfare. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute and U.S. Army War College Press, 2019. xiv, 77 p.

33. Mandel R. Global data shock: strategic ambiguity, deception, and surprise in an age of information overload. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2019. xi, 254 p.

34. Mass media in the post-Soviet world: market forces, state actors, and politicalmanipulationin the informational environment after communism / Peter Rollberg, Marlene Laruelle (eds.).Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag, 2018.446 p.

35. Mazarr M., Casey A., Demus A., Harold S. W., Matthews L. J., Beauchamp-Mustafaga N., Sladden J. Hostile social manipulation: present realities and emerging trends. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, 2019. xx, 282 p.

36. Van Dijk T. A. Disсourse and manipulation. Disсourse&Soсiety. 2006. Vol. 17, Issue 2. P. 359-383. DOI: 10.1177/0957926506060250.



References (Translated And Transliterated)

1. Aleksieieva, O. R. (2017). Manipuliatsiia svidomistiu yak nehatyvnyi chynnyk sotsializatsii studentskoi molodi skhodu Ukrainy v umovakh hibrydnoi viiny. Visnyk Luhanskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Pedahohichni nauky [Manipulation of consciousness as a negative factor in the socialization of student youth in eastern Ukraine in a hybrid war. Bulletin of Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University. Pedagogical sciences],1(1), 6-17[in Ukrainian].

2. Bushanskyi, V. (2011). Manipuliatsiia svidomistiu: vid frustratsi do novo identychnosti. Naukovi zapysky Instytutu politychnykh i etnonatsional nykh doslidzhenim. I. F. Kurasa NAN Ukrainy [Manipulation of consciousness: from frustration to a new identity. Scientific notes of the I.F. Kuras Institute

of Political and Ethnonational Studies NAS of Ukraine],5, 74-87 [inUkrainian].

3. Bykova, O. N. (1999). Yazykovoe manipulirovanie. Teoreticheskie i prikladnye aspekty rechevogo obshcheniya: Vestnik Rossijskoj ritoricheskojassociacii / Krasnoyar. gos. un-t; podred. A. P. Skovorodnikova [Language manipulation. Theoretical and applied aspects of speech communication: Bulletin of the Russian Rhetorical Association / Krasnoyar. state un-t; ed. A.P. Skovorodnikov],1(8), 99- 103 [in Russian].

4. Dimante, I. V. (2015).

Instrumentarij professional'nogo kommunikatora (priemy rechevogo vozdejstviya). Kommunikativnye issledovaniya [Toolkit of a professional communicator (methods of speech influence). Communication research],4(6), 52-64 [in Russian].

5. Docenko, E. L. (2000). Psihologiya manipulyacii: fenomeny, mekhanizmy i zashchita [Psychologyof manipulation: phenomena, mechanisms and protection.]. Moskva: CheRo: Yurajt [in Russian].

6. Zheltuhina, M. R. (2000). Komicheskoe v politicheskom diskurse konca XX veka. Russkie i nemeckie politiki. Monografiya [The comic in the political discourse of the late 20th century. Russian and German politicians. Monograph]. Moskva: In-t yazykoznaniya RAN; Volgograd: Izd-vo V.

F. MUPK [in Russian].

7. Il'icheva, Yu. A. (2013). Rechevoe manipulirovanie v politiches komtekste. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 9. Filologiya. Vostokovedenie. Zhurnalistika [Speech manipulation in a political text. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Series 9. Philology. Oriental studies. Journalism], 4, 172-184 [in Russian].

8. Kara-Murza, S. G. (2005). Manipulyaciya soznaniem [Manipulation of consciousness]. Moskva: EKSMO [in Russian].

. Kara-Murza, S. G. & Smirnov, S. V. (2015).

Manipulyaciya soznaniem 2

[Manipulation of consciousness 2]. Moskva: Algoritm [in Russian].

10. Kozlova, O. N. (2010). Manipulyaciya soznaniem i sub'ektnost' v XXI veke. Vestnik RGGU. Seriya "Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Iskusstvovedenie" [Manipulation of consciousness and subjectivity in the XXI century. RGGU Bulletin. Series "Philosophy. Sociology. Art history"],3, 113-130 [in Russian].

11. Kopnina, G. A. (2012). Rechevoe manipulirovanie: ucheb. posobie. 4-e izd., ispr. [Speech manipulation: a tutorial. 4th ed., rev.].Moskva: FLINTA [in Russian].

12. Kononovych, D. O. (2019). Manipuliatsiia svidomistiu yak ob'iekt sotsialno-pedahohichnoho doslidzhennia. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho universytetu. Seriia: Pedahohika. Sotsialnarobota [Manipulation of consciousness as an object of social and pedagogical research. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhhorod University. Series: Pedagogy. Social work],1, 80-83[inUkrainian].

13. Lisovskyi, P. M. (2006). Manipuliatsiia svidomistiu: sutnist, struktura, mekhanizm u suchasnomu transformatsiinomu suspilstvi (sotsialno- filosofskyianaliz) [Manipulation of consciousness: essence, structure, mechanism in modern transformational society (social and

philosophicalanalysis)]. Kyiv: Vydavnytstvo Natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho un-tuim.

M. P. Drahomanova [inUkrainian].

14. Makarov, M. L. (2003). Osnovy teorii diskursa [Foundations of discourse theory]. Moskva: ITDGK "Gnozis" [in Russian].

15. Mihalyova, O. L. (2009). Politicheskij diskurs: Specifika manipulyativnogo vozdejstviya [Political discourse: Specificity of manipulativ einfluence]. Moskva:

Knizhnyjdom"LIBROKOM" [in Russian].

16.

17. Nechaieva-Iuriichuk, N. V. (2018). Manipuliatsiia svidomistiu liudyny v umovakh zarodzhennia novoi svit- systemy: dosvid Velykoi viiny dlia XXI stolittia. Istorychna panorama. Spetsialnist: Istoriia [Manipulation of human consciousness in the conditions of the emergence of a new world system: the experience of the Great war for the XXI century. Historical panorama. Specialty: History],26-27, 169-179 [in Ukrainian].

18. Pervushina, V. N. & Knyazeva, I. V. (2011). Manipulyaciya obshchestvennym soznaniem: sushchnost', istoricheskie formy, transformaciya: monografiya / Voennyj aviacionnyj inzhenernyj un-t (g. Voronezh) [Manipulation of public consciousness: essence, historical forms, transformation: monograph / Military aviation engineering university (Voronezh)]. Voronezh: Izd-vo VAIU (g. Voronezh) [in Russian].

19. Politychna entsyklopediia (2011) / Redkol.: Yu. Levenets (holova), Yu. Shapoval (zast. holovy) tain. [Political encyclopedia / Editor: Yu. Levenets (chairman), Yu. Shapoval (deputy chairman) and others]. Kyiv: Parlamentske vydavnytstvo [inUkrainian].

19. Trebin, M. P. (Ed.) (2015).

Politolohichnyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk

/ uklad.: [L. M. Herasina, V. L. Pohribna,

I. O. Polishchuk ta in.] [Political science encyclopedic dictionary / compiled by:

L. M. Herasina, V. L. Pohribna,

I. O. Polishchuk and others]. Kharkiv: Pravo [inUkrainian].

20. Prokopenko, I. S. (2017). Shturm soznaniya: pravda o manipulirovanii soznaniem cheloveka [Storm ing consciousness: the truthabo ut manipulating human consciousness]. Moskva: [in Russian].

21. Skripkar', M. V. (2009). Manipulyativnye tekhnologii kinematografa. Vestnik Buryatskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Pedagogika. Filologiya. Filosofiya

[Manipulative technologies of cinema. Bulletin of the Buryat State University. Pedagogy. Philology. Philosophy], 6, 288-

291 [in Russian].

22. Cherkasova, V. P. (2019). Media- manipulirovanie obshchestvennyms oznaniem. Televidenie i Internet [Media manipulation of public consciousness. Television and Internet]. Moskva : Ves'Mir [in Russian].

23. Shejgal, E. I. (2000). Teatral'nost'politicheskogo diskursa. Edinicy yazyka v ih funkcionirovanii: Mezhvuz. sb. nauch. tr. [Theatricality of political discourse. Units of languageintheir unctioning: Interuniversity collectionof scienti ficpapers]. Saratov: SGAP. 92-96 [in Russian].

24. Shiller, H. (1980). Manipulyatory soznaniem / Per. s angl. рredisl. Ya. Zasurskogo [Manipulators of consciousness / Translation from English. Foreword by Y. Zasursky]. Moskva: Mysl' [in Russian].

25. Boyd-Barrett, O. (2020). Russia Gate and propaganda: disinformation in the age of social media. London; New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

26. Colon, D. (2019). Propagande: la manipulation de masse dans le monde contemporain. Paris : Belin [in French].

27. Curran, A. S. (2019). Diderot and the art of thinking freely. New York: Other Press.

28. Danesi, M. (2020). The art of the lie: how the manipulation of language affects our mind. Guilford, Connecticut: Prometheus Books.

29.

30. Heidler, D. S. & Heidler, J. T. (2018). The rise of Andrew Jackson: myth,manipulation, and the making of modern politics.New York: Basic Books.

31. Higdon, N. & Huff, M. (2019). United States of distraction: media manipulation in post-truth America (and what we can do about it) / foreword by Ralph Nader. San Francisco: Open Media Series/City Lights Books.

32. Hwang, T.(2019). Maneuver and manipulation: on the military strategy of online information warfare. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute and U.S. Army War College Press.

33. Mandel, R.(2019). Global data shock: strategic ambiguity, deception, and surprise in an age of information overload. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

34. Rollberg, P. &Laruelle, M.(Eds.) (2018). Mass media in the post-Soviet world: market forces, state actors, and politicalmanipulationin the informational environment after communism.Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.

35. Mazarr, M., Casey, A., Demus, A., Harold, S. W., Matthews, L. J., Beauchamp-Mustafaga, N. & Sladden, J. (2019). Hostile social manipulation: present realities and emerging trends. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation.

36. Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Disсourse and manipulation. Disсourse & Soсiety, 17(2), 359-383. DOI: 10.1177/0957926506060250.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...