Crime, Mass Media and the General Public in Lithuania

The project investigated the presentation of crime in the Lithuanian media and its possible impact on the general public's understanding of crime-related problems in society. Dobryninas concentrated on three main aspects of this problem: the development of the image of crime in the Lithuanian press and television, journalists' principles in presenting crime-related information, and the public attitude to the presentation of crime in the media. A content analysis of national newspapers from the period of 1992-1997 showed not only increasing interest in crime problems, but also the distorted nature of the image of crime in the media. In-depth interviews with Lithuanian journalists demonstrated that they understood their role in presenting crime-related information firstly as providing information oriented to high public demand, although at the same time they did not deny the commercial and entertainment aspects of crime reporting. Readership and audience research illustrated the clear influence of the media on the public understanding of crime problems in society. However, the virtual image of crime did not greatly affect the system of values and beliefs of Lithuanians, nor did it challenge their insistence that problems of crime could and should be managed within the framework of a civil and open society.

Russian Writers and the Third Section

The Third Section was an instrument not so much of oppression as of information, propaganda and education. Under Nicholas I, the press did not represent public opinion, but rather the official point of view. It was intended to shape public opinion rather than to express it and much of the Third Section's activity focused on creating the best possible contacts with journalists and men of letters. The Third Section supervised literary activities by examining works in print and collecting information through its agents. It rewarded those authors whose work was approved by the emperor, it used writers to pursue its goals, especially in order to "direct minds", but acted as a mediator between the tsar, censors and writers, or sometimes as arbiter in conflicts between writers themselves, and it also acted as a censor. Writers, for their part, served in the Third Section, becoming its agents or consultants, delivering reports to it and writing texts commissioned by the Section. The majority of writers did not see any problems with serving or assisting the Third Section. Ideologies offering an alternative to state monarchism /in professional literature or individual liberalism/ were very weak. The only exception was a small group, mostly composed of eminent and highly educated aristocrats who possessed alternative moral and financial resources. Reitblat showed that the strong ties maintained by some journalists and writers with the Third Section were not unfortunate exceptions due to the low moral qualities of those individuals, but rather a natural phenomenon which reflected the specific nature of the Russian literary system and, more generally, of Russian society as a whole.