BLOGGING IN THE (COUNTER) PUBLIC SPHERE: THE CASE OF RUSSIAN LGBT BLOGGING COMMUNITY A Dissertation Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Institute for Media and Communication Studies at the Department of Political and Social Sciences of the Freie Universität Berlin by Evgeniya Boklage 2018 Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Klaus Beck Second examiner: Prof. Dr. Margreth Lünenborg Date of defence: January 6, 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Problem statement · 1 1.2. Blogs: the new public sphere? · 3 1.2.1. Public sphere and its critique: Habermas and beyond · 3 – Bourgeois public sphere: its rise and decline · 3 – Critique of the Habermasian public sphere · 7 – Enduring significance of the concept of the public sphere · 9 1.2.2. The rise of the blogosphere · 10 CHPATER 2: LGBT COMMUNITY IN RUSSIA: AN OVERVIEW 2.1. Homosexuality in Soviet Russia · 14 2.1.1. From sodomy to muzhelozhstvo · 14 2.1.2. Homosexuality in Socialist press · 17 2.2. LGBT in post-Soviet Russia · 19 2.2.1. Decriminalization and early LGBT activism · 19 2.2.2. LGBT in Vladimir Putin’s Russia · 22 2.2.3. Ban on “homosexual propaganda” · 24 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY 3.1. Analytical framework of the study and research questions · 27 3.2. On methodology · 36 3.2.1. Sample · 36 3.2.2. Data analysis · 37 – Quantitative and qualitative content analysis · 37 – Coding scheme and unit of analysis · 39 – Quantitative inquiry · 42 – Qualitative inquiry · 45 CHAPTER 4: BLOGOSPHERE IN THE RUSSIAN MASS MEDIA SYSTEM 4.1. Media system in Russia: historical overview · 49 4.2. Mass media in contemporary Russia · 52 4.2.1. Structural characteristics of Russian mass media · 52 4.2.2. Characteristics of the Russian public sphere · 53 4.2.3. Freedom of press in Russia · 58 4.3. Russian blogosphere: networked and politicized · 60 4.3.1. Runet and the political · 60 4.3.2. Formation of Russian blogosphere · 61 4.3.3. From LiveJournal to Zhivoi Zhurnal · 63 4.4. AntiDogma: LiveJournal blogging community · 66 4.4.1. Blogging communities on LiveJournal · 66 4.4.2. AntiDogma: 2006 – nowadays · 68 CHAPTER 5: ANTIDOGMA AS NEWS PRODUCING COMMUNITY 5.1. Media and the representation of reality · 72 5.1.1. Construction of news · 72 5.1.2. Mainstream news and hegemony · 74 5.1.3. Alternative media: a conceptualization · 77 5.1.4. The growth of citizen journalism online · 81 5.2. Blogging and journalism: relationship dynamics · 83 5.2.1. Journalism as a profession · 83 – The concept of profession · 84 – Is journalism a profession? · 85 5.2.2. News blogs and traditional media · 88 5.2.3. News blogging practices · 90 5.3. AntiDogma as news-producing community · 93 5.3.1. The ideology of news-producing community · 93 – Mission · 93 – Objectivity, verification, and tone in blog content · 96 5.3.2. News blogging practices in AntiDogma · 100 – Alternative news and agendas · 100 – News commentary · 105 – Networked news gathering · 109 CHAPTER 6: ANTIDOGMA AS COUNTERPUBLIC SPHERE: DELIBERATIVE COMMUNITY BUILDING 6.1. Deliberative communication · 114 6.1.1. Public discourse and deliberation: conceptual delineation · 114 – The concept of discourse · 114 – Deliberative communication · 116 – Criteria of deliberative discussion · 118 6.1.2. Online deliberation: promises and limitations · 120 6.2. Counterpublicity and issue publics · 123 6.2.1. Theorization of counterpublicity and counterpublics · 123 6.2.2. Counterpublics online · 126 6.3. AntiDogma as counterpublic: the function of deliberative community building · 129 6.3.1. Communicative structure of AntiDogma discussion and its deliberative dimension · 129 – Identification and openness · 130 – Moderation of comments · 131 – Rules of commentary: in search of ideal deliberation · 135 6.3.2. Counterpublic deliberation in AntiDogma · 138 – AntiDogma as an online counterpublic: a balancing act · 138 – Discursive community: safe space, dangerous space · 141 – Counterpublic discourse: from individual to collective self · 144 CHAPTER 7: ANTIDOGMA AS SITE OF ACTIVISM AND MOBILIZATION 7.1. LGBT activism in context of new social movements research · 149 7.1.1. LGBT movement · 150 7.1.2. The role of identity in gay and lesbian activism · 153 7.1.3. Activist identity work · 155 7.2. The role of media in mobilization and coordination of collective action · 159 7.2.1. Social movements and the mass media · 159 – Mediation opportunity structure ·161 7.2.2. Activism and online communication · 162 7.3. AntiDogma as an activist platform · 166 7.3.1. Organization of protest: mobilization and coordination · 166 – E-tactics · 166 – Mobilization and coordination · 169 7.3.2. Identity work in AntiDogma blogging community · 171 – “Provocation?” · 172 CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSION 8.1. Summary · 178 8.2. Citizens as news makers · 182 8.3. Deliberative community building in counterpublic arena · 184 8.4. Online mobilization and activism · 187 8.5. General notes on the contribution of this study · 189 8.5. Limitations and directions for future research · 191 LITERATURE (1) INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1. Problem statement The present study arises from the premise that the media plays a crucial role in sustaining democratic societies by acting as vehicles for public discourses and representations of individual and collective identities. In Russia, which has been in a state of transition since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, mass media did not develop into institutions of representation for civil society. Instead, since President Vladimir Putin came to power in 2000, the country has been experiencing an authoritarian turn (Lonkila, 2008: 1130), which has strengthened the instrumentalization of mass media for political gain at the hand of the government. Within this situation, many social groups that fall outside of mainstream society have remained largely invisible in public discourse. When achieving social visibility through mainstream media becomes a challenge for minorities, ordinary people can try to take control of communication streams by producing their own media (Rodriguez, 2001). In this context, the internet and surrounding technologies have been seen as holding democratizing potential and giving ordinary people multiple instruments to produce and disseminate information through the use of alternative media channels (Best & Wade, 2009; Breindl, 2010; Dahlberg, 2001; Dahlgren, 2000; Groshek, 2009; Witschge, 2002). Some studies specifically address the question of whether the internet can contribute to the strengthening of the public sphere and political representation, as well as the formation of the so-called networked or virtual public sphere (Bruns, 2008a; Dahlgren, 2003, 2005; Downey & Fenton, 2003; Papacharissi, 2003; Trenz, 2009). Research on the blogosphere, and particularly its political and activist segments, became one of the central perspectives of academic efforts, both "1 (1) INTRODUCTION theoretically and empirically, from which to re-address the concept of public sphere as a new inclusive space for democratic deliberation (Habermas, 1989; Reese et al., 2007; Wright, 2009). The relationship that blogs devoted to public matters have with traditional mass media outlets, and the media ecosystem, which was formed as a result of this symbiosis, became another pivotal research subject (Bruns, 2008a; De Zúñiga et al., 2011; Mitchell & Steele, 2005; Singer, 2005; Wall, 2005). Blogging, as only one aspect of online communication, has received profound attention for the possibilities it opens up to citizens in order to engage directly in the process of media production and in public debate and to avoid the long-established channels of news dissemination and gate-keeping (Bruns, 2008b). Much of the attention of researchers has been paid to the influence the blogosphere wields upon mass media and politics in Western democracies and beyond (Adamic & Glance, 2004; Bruns, 2006; Alexanyan & Koltsova, 2009; De Vries, 2009; El-Nawawy & Khamis, 2011; Ibrahim, 2009; Siapera, 2009; Woo- young & Park, 2012; Yu, 2011). For example, the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University conducted extensive research, which centered on the impact the internet has on Russian politics, media, and society. The study indicates the significant potential of the Russian blogosphere, a space mostly free from the governmental control, to create an alternative political public sphere in a country where the freedom of the mass media system has been perpetually decreasing over the last decade. Russian bloggers appeared to cover a broad spectrum of political and social agendas and attitudes, while also supporting more cross-linking debate, and creating less self-referential “echo-chambers” than their US American counterparts (Etling et al.,2010: 17). In this context, the present work is set to consider the Russian LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) community, which remains one of the least represented communities in mainstream media. The issues related to the position and rights of LGBT people are still among the most obscure subject matters in the Russian public debate. With a longstanding tradition of discrimination, and despite the decriminalization of homosexuality in 1993, sexual minorities in Russia continue "2 (1) INTRODUCTION to face prejudice and hatred, as well as human rights violations and physical violence. The most recent development, which has had a detrimental effect on Russian LGBT community, has been the passage of the nationwide ban on “homosexual propaganda” in the summer of 2013. It explicitly