|
English Language Page In order to avoid repetition, we decided to provide just one table (including positive and neutral hate speech perceptions by the author) rather than three. The totals of entries for each region varied greatly because the monitoring efforts were unequal. 5.1. Hate Speech Type Comparisons
Similar conclusions can be made to those following analyses of previous tables. Some additional observations do, however, need to be made. The Ryazan region had, by far, more frequent calls for violence and discrimination than the other Russian regions covered by the given monitoring effort. Ryazan has become infamous for such types as “releasing publications and/or pronouncements designed to cast doubt on universally recognized historical facts of violence and discrimination” or “justifying historical cases of violence and discrimination.” It is precisely in that Russian region where one can readily encounter the marginal calls for “proportional representation” in the government. As a matter of fact, the Ryazan-based “mainstream” media continues to contain hate speech types long since pushed to the margins (for now?) by other regions. The federal center is clearly the leader in making claims assaulting moral integrity and other similar assertions about a “target,” to say nothing of the “crime” issue that is increasingly attracting public attention. Notably, similar proportions have been reported in the Kemerovo and Perm regions — the more benign provinces in terms of hate speech practices. It is not surprising that migrant-related types of hate speech (“calls for migrants not to be allowed to settle in the region”) continue to be widespread in the Krasnodar territory, but it is most unusual that such calls are still heard in St. Petersburg. It is important to point out that some regions report the presence of hate speech types of “claiming that some ethnic communities are criminal by nature.” The less “advanced” (in the sense of hate speech levels and diversities) Perm and Kemerovo regions show that the aforementioned “type” has figured in more than one-half of the entries, while in Ryazan and St. Petersburg this “type” has been mentioned in only one-fifth of the entries. A different pattern is seen in the Krasnodar territory, with this type of hate speech seen in just one-third of the entries. Claims that the local Meskhetian Turks and migrants in general are criminal by nature are particularly common in the Krasnodar territory. 5.2. Hate Speech Target Comparisons
Not much new information can be derived from this table. While the Krasnodar territory has its own “migrants,” the Ryazan region “luckily” can boast of having the, politically essential, Jews. It is rather odd that Ukrainians almost exclusively appear on the federal level, while Muslims are particularly “popular” in St. Petersburg (though a little bit less visible than in the federal center, where they were “showered” with numerous articles). Notably, Americans figure more prominently in the “second capital” than in Moscow. Back |
Íàøà êíîïêà  |
|