Sociological study of public opinion. Formation of public opinion through the media

Date of writing: 14.04.2022

Reading time: 41 minutes

play the most important role in shaping public opinion, establishing norms of behavior in modern society, as well as exercising control over world political, cultural, social, economic processes. The media are a kind of "relays", with the help of which the information needs of modern society are satisfied.

It should be noted that the media are institutions of various forms that are created to transmit and disseminate information of various content using technical means and communication channels: print media, radio, television, Internet resources, etc. The mass media system directly depends on society in which it functions. In turn, the media perform the function of regulating social processes and the function of influencing society: its state, speed and vector of development, etc.

With the help of these functions, public opinion is formed, and thus a person is programmed for certain actions. The media have long been an important tool for disseminating information that influences public consciousness. Abraham Mol - French scientist, philosopher, wrote about the media: “They actually control our entire culture, passing it through their filters, single out individual elements from the general mass of cultural phenomena and give them special weight, increase the value of one idea, devalue another, polarize thus the whole field of culture. What did not get into the channels of mass communication in our time has almost no effect on the development of society.

In this case, we can conclude that it is impossible for a modern person to be completely protected from the influence of the media on his life as a whole. This article discusses such a concept as "public opinion" - this is a kind of "configuration" of mass consciousness, with the help of which the attitude of society to certain events is demonstrated, the behavior of individuals and social institutions is regulated, beneficial forms of social relations are introduced and established.

In everyday use, this concept most often implies the point of view of society on a particular socially significant issue. It should be noted that the significance of public opinion is determined by the level of development of such indicators as: politics, economics, culture, social rights and freedoms, etc. Public opinion is reflected in voting in elections, public opinion polls, in the mass media, etc. Analyzing public opinion as a system, three main components can be distinguished: - rational; - emotional; - volitional. Let's take a closer look at each of them. The rational component is defined as people's knowledge in the field of facts, events that are significant for society.

This component is inextricably linked with the level of awareness, education of the subject. The next component is emotional. These are feelings, moods concerning this or that object of public opinion. If we analyze the ratio of emotional and rational in the composition of public opinion, then we can identify the degree of possibility of manipulating this society: the dominance of the emotional component makes it possible to easily put pressure on public opinion, as well as set it in the right direction.

The third component - volitional - certain actions of the subjects of public opinion. All of these components are inextricably linked, so that public opinion is an integral system with its own specific properties.

By nature, due to limited opportunities, a person cannot make direct contact with public opinion. He can personally learn and take into account only the opinion of another person, and the opinion of society - from the media.

Further, the collected "mosaic" of public opinion is introduced into the consciousness of the individual, who unconsciously compares himself with the majority, since in the public consciousness it is this majority that is designated as the owner and disseminator of moral truths and principles. A person perceives information that is disseminated by the media through the prism of his worldview, beliefs in a particular issue, psychological and social state. The media consciously form a person's ability to perceive in a certain way various pictures of reality.

At the same time, not only the consciousness of people changes, but also the state of the audience, its properties and characteristics. In this article we will consider the methods of influence of mass media on public consciousness. There are both overt and covert mechanisms of influence. Today, the so-called “subconscious stimulation method” is widely popular. It lies in the fact that the attitude of society to certain problems of the surrounding world is formed through the creation of simplified standardized representations, that is, images and stereotypes.

There are two main methods of forming and changing attitudes in the mass consciousness - suggestion and persuasion. Let's take a closer look at each of them. Persuasion is one of the methods of influencing a person's consciousness by appealing to his own critical judgment. This method is based on a careful selection and logical ordering of facts in accordance with the worldview and psychological attitudes of a particular person. The media can select and shape a variety of data that is distributed in society. All this is done for the purpose of persuasion.

In this case, there is a direct relationship: further actions and behavior of people depend on the content of the information they receive. Therefore, the most important task of the media is to select the most objective, meaningful and reliable information. The method of persuasion includes a fairly large number of information dissemination techniques, the purpose of which is to convince a person of the reliability of the data provided.

Let's list them: - fragmentation of presentation, that is, fragmentation of information into fragments;  ritualization - display of official meetings, events easily accessible for the TV camera;  personalization - the priority is to focus not on the meaning and content of the event, but on the media - politicians, show business stars, etc.;  diverting attention from the most important information.

The next method of influencing public consciousness is suggestion. It, in comparison with persuasion, is more effective, as it has an emotional impact on a person. Suggestion is a special process of influencing the mental state of a person.

This process is associated with a decrease in consciousness and criticality in the perception of information, as well as the lack of a detailed logical assessment of reality. Suggestion is the only possible way to convey any ideas that cannot be proven by logical reasoning.

The power of the word and the visual image is very great when it comes to the emotional impact on a person: these forms of information transfer can override rational arguments and facts.

In the arsenal of the media, a large stock of techniques has been accumulated that can effectively influence the feelings and emotions of people. Let's list them:  acceptance of "certificate";

 “sticking labels” technique;  technique of “radiant generalization”; - reception of "unattractive angle"; - reception "spiral of default";  “creating an image” technique;  “playing the common people” technique (populism); - use of color. So, in this article, the basic concepts of journalism were considered: "mass media", "public opinion", "the main methods of influencing public consciousness". The development and formation of public opinion directly depends on the data that the media carry to society through technical channels for disseminating information.

By virtue of his nature, a person cannot make direct contact with public opinion. Therefore, he perceives important information for him with the help of the media. Based on this, over time, a large number of effective methods impact on public consciousness, the main ones are persuasion and suggestion.

Literature

1. Humanitarian technologies. Information and analytical portal. Public opinion. URL: http://gtmarket.ru/concepts/7106 (date of access: 03/30/2017).

2. Mol A. Sociodynamics of culture / transl. from French, foreword. B.V. Biryukov. Ed. 3rd. M.: LKI Publishing House, 2008. 416 p.

3. National political encyclopedia. Mass media. URL: http://politike.ru/termin/sredstvamassovoi-informacii.html (date of access: 03/30/2017).

4. The influence of the media on the formation of public opinion // Sociology: methodological assistance to students and graduate students. URL: http://smolsoc.ru/index.php/home/2009-12-28-12-53-33/69-2010-12-30-12-24-46/663-2010-12-31- 03-05-00 (date of access: 03/30/2017).

Public opinion

Public opinion- a form of mass consciousness, in which the attitude (hidden or explicit) of various groups of people to the events and processes of real life that affects their interests and needs is manifested.

Public opinion is expressed publicly and influences the functioning of society and its political system. It is precisely the possibility of a vowel, public statement of the population on topical problems of public life and the influence of this position expressed aloud on the development of socio-political relations that reflects the essence of public opinion as a special one. At the same time, public opinion is a collection of many individual opinions on a specific issue affecting a group of people.

At the moment, this point of view is reflected in most scientific works and is considered generally accepted.

Public opinion has existed in all historical epochs, even in the period of Antiquity, however, the term itself, denoting this unique phenomenon of the social life of Mankind, appeared in England in the 12th century.

According to some reports, the emergence of the term "public opinion" is associated with the name of the English statesman and public figure, writer J. Salisbury, who used it in the book "Polycratic" to denote the moral support of parliament from the country's population. Then the term "public opinion" was a literal translation of the combination of two words "Public Opinion".

From England, this expression penetrated into other countries and from the end of the 18th century. became generally accepted. It was then that the French abbot Alcuen uttered the phrase that went down in history: "Vox Populi - Vox Dei" - "The Voice of the People - the Voice of God."

Interpretation of the concept

Such a unique phenomenon as "public opinion" is one of the social phenomena that have attracted the attention of thinkers since ancient times.

In recent years, the ever-increasing level of participation of representatives of the world community in the political sphere is evident. In many respects, this circumstance also explains the ever-increasing attention of researchers from around the world to problems in the context of their consideration through the prism of such a phenomenon as “public opinion”.

Public opinion is one of the phenomena that with great difficulty lend themselves to comprehensive analysis and strict definition. Currently, you can find hundreds of definitions of public opinion.

The concept of "public opinion" in philosophical thought

The origin of ideas about public opinion dates back to the era of Antiquity, however, even in the texts of ancient Chinese philosophy, it was discussed the importance of studying people's public opinion in order to adequately use it in management. In particular, in Taoism it was believed that of the four reasons for the death of the state, one is when the feelings and moods of the people are not used by the rulers in the management.

In the future, other definitions began to spread. R. A. Safarov, agreeing with B. A. Grushin that public opinion is a phenomenon of a mass nature, located in the sphere of public consciousness, at the same time, believed that it should be active. The activity of the subjects of public opinion in the view of R. A. Safarov indicates that this is really “public”, and no other opinion. Therefore, it is expressed not only in judgments, but also in practical actions. Hence - public opinion is a value judgment of social communities that is distinguished by relative prevalence, intensity and stability on issues of interest to them.

In the 1980s, some, however, not very significant adjustments were made to the interpretation of the concept of "public opinion". V. S. Korobeinikov noted that it is plural, that is, it reflects a variety of points of view related to a large number of communities and, in the aggregate, is a kind of "opinion pyramid" .

VN Anikeev gave a historical and philosophical analysis of the concept of "public opinion". He made a conclusion about the relationship between the level of democracy in society and the development of the institution of public opinion.

Also of interest is the work of V. M. Gerasimov, published already in the 1990s, who attempted to develop an interdisciplinary concept of public opinion from the standpoint of political psychology and acmeology. Considering public opinion in a political context, he concludes that there is a close relationship between power and public opinion and it is impossible to neglect it.

It is also important to name a number of works authored by a researcher from St. Petersburg D. P. Gavra, who compared public opinion with the air that is necessary for the breathing of democracy: when it exists, it is not noticed, but its absence can lead to the death of the whole organism . In addition, D. P. Gavra introduced the concept of “modes of interaction between power and public opinion”, which, in particular, means “a generalized description of the measure of the real involvement of public opinion in political decision-making, managing the affairs of the state and society and the opportunities for functioning provided by government institutions." At the same time, D.P. Gavra, on the basis of the system of criteria developed by him, identifies the following “modes of interaction between the authorities and public opinion”: 1. The mode of suppression of public opinion by the authorities. 2. Mode of ignoring public opinion. 3. Regime of paternalism of power in relation to public opinion. 4. Mode of cooperation (mutual implementation). 5. Mode of pressure of public opinion on the authorities. 6. Regime of the dictatorship of public opinion.

E. Egorova-Gantman and K. Pleshakov, speaking about the subjects of public opinion, suggested using the “three strata” method. In this case, we are talking about the three main, in their opinion, carriers of public opinion: firstly, the leadership of the country, represented by official leaders, secondly, the elite, and thirdly, the masses.

Marxist-Leninist concept of public opinion

Public opinion from the point of view of Marxism-Leninism is reflected in the Third Edition of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, published by the Soviet Encyclopedia publishing house in 1969-1978.

With the exception of certain points that reflect the approaches that existed in Russian science in the Soviet period, in the era of the dominance of the ideology of Marxism-Leninism, the material presented in this article fully reflects the features of the process of formation and functioning of public opinion at the present stage.

Story

Antiquity

The term "public opinion" came into use relatively recently, only a few centuries ago, however, the phenomenon itself was observed in almost all historical eras. This can be evidenced by studies of the mechanisms of formation of public opinion among primitive peoples, which was carried out by the famous anthropologist Margaret Mead. She noted the effectiveness of public opinion in regulating the life of the tribes: "Public opinion is effective if someone acts as a transgressor of the commandments, or in case of conflict, or if it is necessary to decide on future actions."

In one of the written sources dating back to the era of Ancient Egypt, “A conversation with your soul, a person who is tired of living” mentions events that apparently deeply shocked public opinion:

Who will I talk to today?
Everyone is greedy...
Nobility has no more place
People laugh at crimes
There are no honest people
The earth fell into the power of villains

The mass media (media) play an important role in shaping public opinion, in particular: television, radio broadcasting, print publications (press). In recent years, in the context of the development of the information society, the influence of electronic media concentrated on the Internet - numerous social networks, blogs, forums, Twitter, Youtube - has significantly increased.
Public opinion is influenced by the opinions of people recognized by society as authoritative and competent, personal experience of people.

The instruments of influencing public opinion on the part of the state are propaganda and censorship.

Expression of public opinion

In modern society, the usual channels (and forms) for expressing public opinion are: elections of government bodies, participation of the population in legislative and executive activities, the media, meetings, rallies, demonstrations, pickets, etc. Along with this, statements caused by political, economic, social, cultural, as well as research interest and taking the form of referendums and plebiscites, mass discussions of any problems, meetings of specialists, sample surveys of the population, etc. and so on.

According to the law, in Russian Federation public opinion can be expressed at the deliberative level, for example, at the stage of making decisions on the construction of various facilities. Thus, in 2004 St. Petersburg adopted a law “On the participation of citizens and their associations in the discussion and decision-making in the field of urban planning activities in St. Petersburg”. According to this law, any citizen has the right to express his opinion and, if there is evidence of a violation of the law, to prevent the construction of the facility.

Measurement of public opinion

Opinion polls are conducted to quantify public opinion.

Literature

Uledov A.K. Public opinion of the Soviet society. - M.: Sotsekgiz, 1963.
Grushin B. A. Opinion about the world and the world of opinions: Problems of methodology and research of public opinion. - M.: Politizdat, 1967.
Safarov R. Ya. Public opinion in the system of Soviet democracy. - M.: Knowledge, 1982.
Korobeinikov V. S. Pyramid of Opinions (Public Opinion: Nature and Functions). - M.: Thought, 1981.
Taker A. A. Formation and study of public opinion. - M.: Knowledge, 1987.
Gorshkov M.K. Public opinion. History and modernity. - M.: Politizdat, 1988.
Anikeev V. I. Public opinion as a historical concept. - Rostov-on-Don, 1982.
Gerasimov V. M. Public opinion in the mirror of political psychology. - M.: Luch, 1995.
Gavra D. P. Public opinion as a sociological category and as a social institution. - SPb., 1995.
Gavra D. P. Public opinion and power: regimes and mechanisms of interaction // Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology, 1998. Vol. 1. Issue. 4.

Founding works

Bryce, James. American Republic: At 3 o'clock. Ch. 1-3 / Per. from English. - M.: K. T. Soldatenkov, 1889-1890.
Tarde, Gabrielle. Personality and crowd: Essays on social psychology / Per. from fr. - M.: Publishing house of t-va type. A. I. Mamontova, 1902.
Holzendorf, Franz von. Public opinion / Per. with him. - St. Petersburg: Ya. Orovich, 1895.
Bourdieu P. Public opinion does not exist // Bourdieu P. Sociology of politics: Per. from fr. G. A. Cherednichenko / Comp., total. ed. and foreword. N. A. Shmatko. - M.: Socio-Logos, 1993. - S. 159-177.
Kara-Murza S. G. Manipulation of consciousness. - M.: Eksmo Publishing House, 2000.
Yadov V. A. Strategy of sociological research. - M.: OMEGA-L, 2005.

History of the study of public opinion in the XX century

Doctorov B.Z. Pioneers of the world of opinions: from Gallup to Grushin. - M .: Institute of the Fund "Public Opinion", 2005.
Doctorov B.Z. Advertising and public opinion polls in the USA: the history of the origin, the fate of the creators. - M .: Center for Social Forecasting, 2008.
Doctorov B.Z. George Gallup. Biography and fate. - M .: Publishing house of LLC "Polygraph - Inform". 2011
Doctorov B.Z. Modern Russian Sociology: Historical and Biographical Searches. In 3 volumes. - M .: Center for social. forecasting, 2012.

Mutual influence of foreign policy and public opinion

American public opinion and politics / Ed. ed. Zamoshkin Yu.A., Auth. coll. Zamoshkin Yu.A., Ivanyan E.A., Petrovskaya M.M. and others - M .: Nauka, 1978.
War and society in the XX century: In 3 books. / Hand. project and comp. O.A. Rzheshevsky. – M.: Nauka, 2008.
Zamoshkin Yu.A. Challenges of civilization and US experience: history, psychology, politics. – M.: Nauka, 1991.
Ivanyan E.A. Public opinion - its role in political life // USA: economics, politics, ideology. - 1974. - No. 8. - P.15-27.
Kertman G.L. Mass consciousness. "Vietnamese Syndrome" and Its Consequences // Problems of American Studies. - M., 1989. - S.255-271.
Kosolapov N.A. Foreign policy consciousness: category and reality // Bogaturov A.D., Kosolapov N.A., Khrustalev M.A. Essays on the theory and methodology of political analysis of international relations. - M.: NOFMO, 2002. - S.207-222.
Kosolapov N.A. Social psychology and international relations. – M.: Nauka, 1983.
Kuznetsov DV Arab-Israeli conflict and France: foreign policy and public opinion. - Blagoveshchensk: Publishing house of BSPU, 2005.
Kuznetsov DV The events of September 11, 2001 and the problem of international terrorism in the mirror of public opinion. - M.: URSS, 2009. .
Kuznetsov DV The Yugoslav crisis: a look through the prism of public opinion. - M.: URSS, 2009. .
Kuznetsov DV Problems of the Middle East and public opinion. In 2 parts. Part I. Arab-Israeli conflict. - Blagoveshchensk, BSPU Publishing House, 2009.
Kuznetsov DV Problems of the Middle East and public opinion. In 2 parts. Part II. Iraqi crisis. - Blagoveshchensk, BSPU Publishing House, 2009
Kuznetsov DV The problem of WMD non-proliferation and public opinion. Iran's nuclear program. - Blagoveshchensk: Publishing house of BSPU, 2009.
Kuznetsov DV The problem of non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and public opinion. North Korea's nuclear program. - Blagoveshchensk: Publishing house of BSPU, 2009.].
Kuznetsov DV Interaction of foreign policy and public opinion in the USA. Some topical issues. - M.: URSS, 2010. .
Kuznetsov DV American Public Opinion and the Use of Military Force: The Presidency of William J. Clinton (1993-2001). - M.: URSS, 2011. - .
Kuznetsov D. V. American public opinion and the use of military force: the period of the presidency of George W. Bush (2001-2009). - M.: URSS, 2011. .
Kuznetsova T.V. Americans about issues of war and peace // USA: economics, politics, ideology. - 1984. - No. 7. – P.48-56.
Ledovskikh Yu.M. Problems of participation of the American public in the formation of US foreign policy. Scientific-analytical review. – M.: INION AN USSR, 1987.
Malashenko I.E. USA in search of "consensus": Foreign policy orientations in the American mass consciousness. – M.: Nauka, 1988.
Malashenko I.E. Evolution of Foreign Policy Orientations in the American Mass Consciousness // Problems of American Studies. - M., 1987. - S.273-292.
Nikitin A.I. The Evolution of American Globalism: The Ideological Struggle in the US over America's Role in the World. – M.: Intern. relations, 1987.
Public consciousness and US foreign policy / Col. author: Zamoshkin Yu.A., Ivanyan E.A., Petrovskaya M.M. and others - M .: Nauka, 1987.
Petrovskaya M.M. American mass consciousness and militarism // Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. - 1989. - No. 1. - P.23-35.
Petrovskaya M.M. An unprecedented turn in American public opinion // USA: economics, politics, ideology. - 1973. - No. 10. - P.32-35.
Petrovskaya M.M. In response to the challenge of the century. Changes in the mass consciousness of Americans. – M.: Intern. relations, 1988.
Petrovskaya M.M. Militarism and mass consciousness in the USA // Problems of American Studies. - M., 1989. - S.235-254.
Petrovskaya M.M. Moods of Americans in the Mirror of Polls // USA: Economics, Politics, Ideology. - 1981. - No. 3. - P.71-74.
Petrovskaya M.M. On the mood of Americans // USA: economics, politics, ideology. - 1976. - No. 6. - P.88-91.
Petrovskaya M.M. US Public Opinion: Polls and Politics. – M.: Intern. relations, 1977.
Petrovskaya M.M. US Public Opinion and Foreign Policy // Questions of History. - 1981. - No. 1. - P.63-75.
Petrovskaya M.M. Public Opinion Polls in the USA // Questions of History. - 1976. - No. 2. - P.113-123.
Petrovskaya M.M. The President and Public Opinion // USA: Economics, Politics, Ideology. - 1991. - No. 10. – P.23-33.
Petrovskaya M.M. USA: politics through the prism of polls. – M.: Intern. relations, 1982.
Petrovsky V.F. American foreign policy thought. – M.: Intern. relations, 1976.
Plekhanov S.M. American Society and US Foreign Policy // USA: Economics, Politics, Ideology. - 1986. - No. 3. - P.3-15.
Popov N.P. America in the 80s: Public Opinion and Social Issues. – M.: Thought, 1986.
Rukavishnikov V.O. Cold war, cold world. Public opinion in the US and Europe about the USSR / Russia, the foreign policy and security of the West. – M.: Academic project, 2005.
Ryabtseva E.E. Foreign policy preferences of the American public (second half of the 20th century). - Astrakhan: Publishing House of AF MOSU (ASI), 2001.
Ryabtseva E.E., Karabuschenko P.L. Elite and public of the USA: opinions and preferences. - Astrakhan: Publishing House of ASTU, 2002.
Samuilov S.M. American Society and the Iraq War // The Iraq War: American Institutions and Society. Proceedings of the scientific conference held on December 22, 2005 at ISKRAN. M.: ISKRAN, 2006.
Modern political consciousness in the USA / Ed. ed. Zamoshkin Yu.A., Batalov E.Ya. – M.: Nauka, 1980.
USA: Discussion on problems of war and peace / Ed. ed. A.Yu. Melville. – M.: Nauka, 1984.
Shakleina T.A. US foreign policy: consensus between government and public? // USA. Canada. Economy, politics, culture. - 2000. - No. 11. - P.54-68.
Shumilina I.V. Mechanisms and Methods of Forming Public Opinion in the USA after September 11, 2001 // Anti-Terrorism as a System-Forming Factor in the Foreign and Defense Policy of the USA / Ed. A.I. Shumilina. – M.: ISKRAN, 2005. – P.66-73.

Topic 3. Structure of public opinion

1) Subjects of public opinion

2) Objects of public opinion

3) Channels for expressing public opinion

4) Judgments of public opinion

An effective and fruitful analysis of the phenomenon of public opinion, the problems and patterns of its formation and functioning is impossible without a detailed and reasonable consideration of its structure.

Public opinion is not amorphous, it is structured on a number of important grounds: the subjects of public opinion; objects of public opinion; channels of expression of public opinion; types of judgments of public opinion.

Subjects of public opinion.

So, we will have to start the analysis of the structure of public opinion by returning once again to the seemingly elementary question: "Whose opinion is public?" That is, by whom should an opinion be expressed so that it can be attributed to the public?

So: attempts to answer this question lead to unexpected difficulties. At one time, during the period of the so-called "Taganrog project" (a study devoted to the analysis of the functioning of public opinion in the city and the activities of government bodies, carried out in 1967-1974 under the guidance of Prof. B.A. Grushin), a similar question was asked to journalists, those. persons whose professional function is to study and express public opinion.

The answers to this question were very different: public opinion is the opinion of the whole people; public opinion is the opinion of the advanced strata of society; public opinion is the opinion of the majority, as opposed to the opinion of the minority, and so on.

By the way, this problem has not only a scientific sociological meaning, it is also relevant in terms of politics. Presidents, members of parliaments, heads of governments usually refer to public opinion. Moreover, with the uncertainty of the very concept of the subject of public opinion, their references sometimes acquire a completely vague and populist character: whose public opinion is meant in each specific case (for example, when deploying market relations or social protection of citizens): the entire people, the majority, or representatives of the “advanced layers" is not clear. Here we proceed to the analysis of public opinion already from the point of view of a sociological, and not an epistemological approach.

Let us consider the problem of the subject of public opinion on the basis of the available theoretical sources and applied research in more detail.

In general, we are dealing with the need to clarify four problems:

Firstly, problems of expressing public opinion in individual (opinion);

Secondly, problems of "monism" or "pluralism" of public opinion;

Thirdly, problems of the relative nature of the subject of public opinion;

fourth, the problem of identifying groups, communities, whose opinion is public.

The first of these problems, in the formulation in which we put it forward, is the simplest. Here we are not talking about the process of forming public opinion on the basis of individual, not about the most complex dialectics of the correlation and interpenetration of individual and public opinions; we will consider these issues in detail when analyzing the processes of formation of public opinion.

The problem of EXPRESSION OF PUBLIC OPINION IN INDIVIDUAL arose in connection with the analysis (especially in political science) of the issue of public leaders elected by vesting, the public, the adequacy of their expression of the opinion of the public, voters.

As for the very possibility of identifying individual opinion with public opinion, this, of course, cannot be discussed. and speech. An individual opinion (we mean its specificity and the mechanism of formation) cannot be identical to the public one, just because the mechanisms of their formation are different. After all, public opinion belongs to one of the states of mass consciousness, and we have already discussed the specifics, the nature of the formation of the latter.

Therefore, the following conclusion should be drawn: individual(public or political figure, leader) cannot be a carrier of public opinion, but can be its spokesman. In other words, a politician expresses public opinion only when he directly transmits, conveys the opinions that have developed among his voters. In the same case, when he “processes” it in one way or another, works with it, then trying to present it as public, he becomes, as it were, an independent carrier of public opinion, which in reality cannot be.

The second problem connected with the subject of public opinion is THE PROBLEM OF "MONISM" AND "PLURALISM" OF PUBLIC OPINION. There are two prerequisites for its appearance. The first, which has already been discussed, is terminological confusion, according to which the meaning of “opinion of the whole society” is assigned to public opinion in Russian. The second prerequisite is the existence in our country over a long historical period of a socialist society, a totalitarian system, within which either the unified public opinion of the Soviet people was recognized, or only the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the people was considered public opinion (see the works of V.S. Korobeinikov, A. K. Uledova).

In fact, this problem is certainly far-fetched. After all, one spoke of unanimous public opinion under conditions when, even in a socialist society, there were different social classes and the dependence of public (including group) consciousness on social existence was recognized. As for the opinions of the majority and the minority (and such a “minority” can include tens of millions of citizens, for example, those who spoke out in a referendum against any option for solving a social problem), such a formulation of the question of the subject of public opinion also does not stand up to criticism. Moreover, often (and this is especially emphasized by the American sociologist G. Bloomer), the opinion of a minority can have a much greater influence on the formation of a collective opinion than the views of the majority.

Real questions arise only in relation to the distinction between the processes of formation and functioning of the formed public opinion. Some scientists believe that in the process of forming public opinion can be pluralistic, but as for the already formed public opinion, it is usually united. Moreover, such assumptions are confirmed by references to the existence of practically unanimous public opinion on certain aspects of the life of society (for example, in relation to the possibility of nuclear war, the fight against racism, etc.). Public opinion is constantly in the process of formation: therefore, there can be no question of any emerging or already formed opinion. Thus, the problem of "monism" of public opinion- contrived. Public opinion is always pluralistic, it implies the presence of different points of view on a particular social problem among different segments of the population, social groups, groups of consciousness. Another question is whose opinion, which group can be considered public?

Here we come to the discussion of an important problem connected with the subject of public opinion, the problem of the RELATIVE CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT OF PUBLIC OPINION.

Let us once again emphasize the importance and relevance of this problem, not only theoretically, but also politically. Indeed, if we take, for example, the opinion of a factory team or an enterprise team, then how can and should it be called: “opinion of the team” or “public opinion of the team”, “public opinion of the enterprise team”. Where is the objective “border” between public and non-public opinion?

Some scientists (V.S. Korobeinikov, A.K. Uledov and others) distinguish between the concepts of group opinion (collective, regional, etc.) and public opinion. However, the question arises: what is the difference between them? Nature, the specifics of formation, or only the number of Individuals included in one or another community? If we are talking only about quantitative characteristics, the volume of social communities, then we have already talked about terminological confusion, showed that public opinion is a function of a certain, significant number of individuals included in the corresponding community.

As for the nature, the specifics of the formation of public opinion, they practically do not differ, whether it is the opinion of the brigade or the population of the city, or the entire people. And in the first, and in the second, and in the third cases, we are dealing with public opinion, a certain state of mass consciousness (as opposed to group opinion, if we set out to study the specifics of the social consciousness of workers and its differences from the same - entrepreneurs). Consequently, the introduction of such terminological differences - group or public opinion - is not only unjustified, but even harmful.

But here there really is another important scientific and practical problem, so to speak, "locals" of public opinion. Let's put the question this way: can the opinion of the collective of the brigade or the collective of the enterprise always be considered public opinion? The answer will be: no! Here the question is methodologically correctly solved as follows. Society is a complex system that includes social groups of various levels (and we are talking not only about social groups, but also about groups of consciousness). Therefore, the opinion of any community will be public, but only in relation to itself or the structure in which it is included. Thus, the opinion of the production team will be public when it comes to the problems of its own or of the shop, where it enters as an integral element. However, in relation to the enterprise, city, country as a whole, this opinion, of course, will not be public. And the point here is not in the "minority" or "majority" and not in the size of the brigade itself. Just on the basis of the opinions of one, moreover, non-representative part of the "universe" (B.A. Grushin's expression), one cannot draw conclusions regarding the totality of the elements of this "universe". Both quantitatively and qualitatively, as we have already noted, when referring to the public opinion of a particular community, the concept of "social system" or "social organism" should be taken into account. The opinion of this entire “organism” or its constituent parts will be public.

So, if we talk about the country as a whole, then the public opinion will be the opinion of the entire population (both the “majority” and the “minority”), as well as the opinions of other social communities, mass-like groups at the level of the social class structure; ethnic or socio-demographic structures; population of certain regions (Galicia, Dnieper or Donbass), which represent the structural elements of the whole society. If we are talking about the collective of an enterprise, then here, in relation to the problems of this collective, the opinion of either the entire collective, or its constituent shops and services, individual large groups of workers, will be public.

Let's pass to the analysis of the fourth of the problems mentioned by us, connected with the subject of public opinion, namely: PROBLEMS OF SOLIDING THE SOCIAL COMMUNITIES WHOSE OPINION IS PUBLIC. Let us immediately warn that the judgments expressed must be taken as debatable due to the presence of different positions of scientists in this regard.

So, With On the one hand, scientists express (and quite justifiably!) Judgments that if in public opinion polls (pollings) we can easily operate with a certain amount of individual opinions (among which, we have already noted, there may be artifacts), then saying about the real subjects of public opinion, we must single out any more or less definite, with pronounced boundaries, structural groups of the population.

On the other hand, social groups (for example, workers, entrepreneurs, etc.) can hardly act as such groups - after all, in this case, as noted above, we will be dealing not with a public, but with a group opinion, which differs in many ways, including the mechanisms of formation.

The way out of this situation probably lies in the fact that it is necessary to take into account the existence in society of two main types of social communities.

The first is social groups in the proper sociological sense of the word, i.e. associations of people with common social interests, whose relations are regulated by social institutions functioning in society.

As for the social consciousness of these groups, it (for example, the social class consciousness of entrepreneurs or workers contains signs that are formed mainly on the basis of the social existence of a given social class group. That is, it is based on the social, economic, political position of its representatives, their way of life, etc.

In other words, there are fairly stable, “crystallized” social class positions of the group that characterize the attitude of its representatives to the market, labor, property, democracy, lifestyle, etc. It is difficult, for example, to imagine an entrepreneur who has a negative attitude towards private property in principle. This is what we call group social consciousness.

The second type of social communities is mass-like social communities, i.e. the masses, the public, political and social "circles", the audience of the media, etc. These groups are less stable, they have a number of characteristics, which have already been discussed above. Scientists (F. Tennis, G. Blummer, X. Arendt, B.A. Grushin, etc.) identify such characteristics of the masses as the unification of people who are territorially divided; who live in different conditions, belong to different social class groups; are not organized and do not have leaders, clearly defined programs of action; do not have common traditions, institutions that regulate their behavior. Thus: the main feature of such groups is that in reality the individuals in them are “recruited” from different social-class and socio-demographic groups and social differentiation is not inherent in them.

At the same time, these people, who belong to different groups, may have almost identical opinions on certain issues.

And, if we now return to the essence of the scientific discussion that takes place regarding those social communities that constitute the subjects of public opinion, then it comes down to the following. Some scientists believe that the subjects of public opinion are both social groups as such and mass-like social communities. Others single out the former as "carriers" of group social consciousness, referring only the latter to the subjects of public opinion.

From our point of view, this is the most important scientific problem, the analysis of which is really extremely necessary today. In the course of studying public opinion, conducting a survey, for example, we received a sum, an "aggregate" of various opinions of people belonging to a variety of social, socio-demographic, national and other groups. In this case, it is really possible to speak about the subject of public opinion rather conditionally, although ... it is still possible.

So, based on the survey data, we assert that one politician is trusted by so many people, respondents; another - more (or less). This is really a "product" of public opinion, which has the right to exist. But in this case, we really cannot talk about the real subject of public opinion (the expressed points of view can be held by representatives of various groups, i.e., entrepreneurs, employees, and students can support the corresponding politician, in particular).

However, if we single out certain socio-demographic or social class groups (men and women, entrepreneurs and workers, etc.) within the entire array of respondents, then we can already, from our point of view, talk about the existence of subjects of social opinions, since we choose opinions regarding the ratings of this or that politician of representatives of different social groups.

The following should be borne in mind here: from our point of view, when, according to the data of a public opinion poll, the results are given, where the opinions of workers, employees or entrepreneurs appear, then in this situation we are not dealing with group opinions (i.e. we cannot speak about the fact that the workers as a social class rush towards a given policy or market reforms in precisely this way), but with a mass differentiated in a certain way, i.e. public opinion. We can say that the workers who are part of the mass, the array of respondents, in contrast to the entrepreneurs or employees who are part of the same group, have such and such an opinion. This will be precisely public opinion, since the array of respondents included representatives of a certain social stratum, selected spontaneously, since the mechanisms for “measuring” their opinions were focused on studying mass opinions, and we are really talking only about the opinions of a clearly indefinite set of workers (but workers!).

But in general, we can conclude that WITHIN EACH GENERAL, THE BEARER (SUBJECT) OF PUBLIC OPINION CAN BE BOTH THE WHOLE THIS COMMONITY AS A WHOLE AND THE MOST IMPORTANT STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS OF ITS “PARTS”, REGARDLESS OF THE CONTENT OF THEIR JUDGMENTS, THAT, THE STATEMENT DO THEY FOR” OR “AGAINST”, WHETHER THE “MAJORITY” OR “MINORITY” FORM THE SOCIAL MASS-LIKE COMMUNITIES INCLUDED.

2. Objects of public opinion.

One of the deepest delusions of non-professional sociologists and, most importantly, employees of government bodies that form an order for research, is the belief that the population has public opinion on any issue (from attitudes towards the president to evaluating the effectiveness of a portal crane). In other words, we are talking about what real facts, events, relationships, ideas, etc. can act and act as objects of public opinion.

Outwardly, the matter is presented in such a way that not only any real fact or event, but also phenomena of consciousness - assessments, relations, etc. can really act as such objects. This happens because for sociology in general and the sociology of public opinion in particular, verbal “actions” of people are also social facts, i.e. judgments, opinions.

The problem (or rather - problems) here is different. Indeed, people can be asked about almost everything. But there is a series questions:

Are certain phenomena, events, facts, assessments, judgments accessible to their reflection in public opinion? Is his "knowledge" sufficient here?

Is it advisable in this or that case to study public opinion? Or is it much better (more accurate, simpler, more objective, etc.) to get the relevant information in a different way?

Is it necessary to do this, given the fact that the functioning of public opinion is determined by a number of natural and artificial restrictions related to the relevance and debatability of the events reflected by it, the level of competence of public opinion itself?

The answers to these three groups of questions determine what can act as an object of public opinion.

So the first problem is availability of phenomena, facts, estimates, etc. reflection in public opinion. Researchers of mass consciousness and public opinion almost unanimously answer this question in the affirmative. Indeed, in principle, public opinion can be formed and expressed both in terms of facts and phenomena of objective reality (the conditions of people's material life, economic processes, etc.) and in terms of phenomena of subjective reality (systems of values, moral ideas, etc.).

The problem here is different - COGNITIVE ABILITY of public opinion. So far, it is not about his competence (see below), but about how “subject” certain phenomena of reality are to reflection in the mass consciousness. For example, if we take the problems of medicine, then some of them are quite within the power of the group consciousness (for example, the intelligentsia), however, are in no way “subject to” the mass consciousness. Others are the competence of exclusively specialists.

The whole point here is in the specifics and mechanisms of the formation of mass consciousness (recall that the process of its formation is characterized by spontaneity, fragmentation, strong influences of stereotyping phenomena). In this case, can the mass consciousness "cope" with the serious problems of society? At the same time, let's not confuse objective and competent public opinion with any statements "about" - such statements can really always be received.

So, in order to determine the degree of accessibility of certain phenomena of reality to reflection in public opinion, you need to do the following. If we are talking about the facts of social life (for example, an assessment of the birth rate, the spread of drunkenness, drug addiction, etc.), then it is necessary to determine the degree of reflection of these phenomena in the public consciousness in general and in the mass consciousness in particular. It is known, for example, that significant segments of the population believe that the causes of drunkenness are in the traditions of the people, an increase in the birth rate can be achieved by “giving out” apartments to newlyweds, etc.

When it comes to the "reflection" in public opinion of the facts of consciousness, assessments, judgments, then one should generally think about the fundamental need to appeal to public opinion in this situation. For example, in 1985-1987. very popular was the appeal to public opinion about its assessment of the planned and market economies and the need to move to the latter. However, was it possible, in principle, for public opinion to reflect those phenomena with which it was not familiar, the implementation of which “threatened” the population with serious economic and social (albeit temporary!) losses? Of course not!

Another thing is when such questions are asked in public opinion polls today. The country's population has already to a certain extent experienced the "taste" of market reforms, albeit at their stage, which is associated with the period of initial accumulation of capital and the sharp impoverishment of the bulk of the people. Therefore, if certain groups of respondents (for example, pensioners) strongly oppose such reforms and are in favor of a return to socialism, then it is clear that the problem is not whether they know or not what it is, but in the real (albeit often and situational) rejection of the market path. Then it is possible, in particular, to explain why these people vote for the communists. Consequently, in situations related to public opinion on the facts of consciousness, it is first of all necessary to decide whether it is worth turning to public opinion for obtaining relevant information.

Having considered the problem with the "principle of accessibility" of certain phenomena of reality to public opinion, its "reflective" ability, let's move on to the analysis of the next and no less important problem: clarifying how appropriate in certain situations, turn to the study of public opinion, "extract" social information in this way. That is, we are talking about "principle of expediency".

Is it always worth it to turn to the mass consciousness or public opinion, the subjective world of people, knowing certain phenomena of reality? Certainly not!

On the one hand, because social information on many social problems can be obtained using other methods.

On the other hand, "use" public opinion Not always expedient and because it, of course, is not always competent, in the process of formation of mass consciousness, all kinds of “distortions” arise. In cases where it is impossible to obtain information by any other means, one has to go for it, carefully creating conditions that ensure the maximum possible representativeness, objectivity of the analysis,

However, this can and should be done in situations where the necessary information cannot, in principle, be obtained without referring to the subjective world of people.

In what cases it is necessary to "appeal" to public opinion?

Firstly, in those when the study of the world of consciousness is decisive (sometimes the only possible way) by obtaining information about social reality, when other approaches and methods of sociological empirical research, so to speak, "do not work." For example, a sociologist needs to "measure" the rating of politicians. In this case, he will certainly have to resort to the study of public opinion, since there are simply NO other methods for studying such a rating. Another thing is that he must conduct the survey with particular care, clearly identify the possibilities of the methodology used, the errors that it can give.

Secondly, appealing to public opinion is advisable when it can provide additional information to that obtained by analyzing statistics, behavioral acts, the real situation as a whole, when other (except for survey) sociological methods are used. For example, when studying labor motivation, working conditions are analyzed using organizational, economic and other methods, the level wages etc. However, it is necessary to conduct a public opinion poll here in order to take into account the motivation factors associated with the social aspects of the orientation of the individual and the relativity of labor activity (for example, the place of work in the general system of values of the individual, satisfaction with the profession and the team).

Finally, thirdly, appealing to public opinion is justified when the analysis of reality using the appropriate methods of studying it (surveys, etc.) is more preferable (convenient, accurate, economical, etc.) compared to other methods. In this case, we are talking, as a rule, about the phenomena of consciousness, the spiritual life of society. For example, to determine the attitude of people to different genres of music, the prestige of cinema and theater, the preference for certain forms of leisure organization, of course, is much more convenient and easier, using methods for analyzing the subjective world of people, in particular, public opinion polls.

Among other things, the three main “areas of use” identified above, or rather, the expedient application of methods of appealing to public opinion, also indicate that the “general” appeal to public opinion polls, their frequent conduct with or without reason, is not justified. And it’s good that such a “fashion” for polls is passing. Rather, they are being carried out more and more often due to actual expediency. This will strengthen the authority of sociology and improve the quality of research. After all, a professional sociologist will not only not turn to a survey, the study of public opinion, when it is inappropriate, but he will definitely back up the results of the survey with data obtained using other methods of obtaining information. This is a mandatory methodological requirement when conducting such studies, of course, in cases where obtaining such parallel information is possible.

Let us turn to the analysis of the problem of the need to study public opinion, associated with a number of limitations inherent in the phenomenon of mass consciousness in general and public opinion in particular. The point is that the object of public opinion is limited not only by the “threshold of accessibility” and the “principle of expediency”, but also by a number of formally expressed criteria that determine the fundamental need for its study, or rather, addressing it. This is about criteria of public interest, relevance, debatability, competence.

The criterion of "PUBLIC INTEREST" means that public opinion is not expressed on all the problems of society, city, enterprise, but only on those that are of public interest for them (these objects and relevant social communities). This public interest is specific in nature and is "not equal" to the sum of the individual interests of the people included in the respective communities. There is a dialectic of the general and the singular here.

On the one hand, the public interest is already the sum of individual interests, since it does not include all individual interests in their totality. On the other hand, the public interest is wider than each individual individual, because it may contain separate “sections” that are of interest to society as a whole, but do not affect individual individuals (for example, the problems of choosing a president that are not of interest to a significant part of the public).

One of the first researchers of public opinion, the American sociologist Floyd Allport, formulating the methodological postulates of the existence of public opinion, named among the most important that public opinion should be well-known and significant for many; It is on such issues that public opinion can be formed. For example, during the years of stagnation, the phenomenon of “scissors” was clearly observed between those problems that were of real interest to the population of the country and those that the governing bodies directed their efforts to discuss (ideology, the fight against remnants, etc.).

How can one not recall here the “effect of imposing problems”, which P. Bourdieu spoke about (see above). Indeed, even today, attempts are rarely made by the governing bodies and the formation of public opinion and its analysis on problems that do not act as objects of “public interest” (privatization large enterprises, administrative reform, etc.). By the way, public opinion polls conducted on these issues, as research experience shows, do not give practical results; as a rule, we get simple reactions of the population to questions that do not interest them.

Another criterion for the formation of public opinion, which determines the need to address it, is the "RELEVANCE" of the problems to which the attention of the public is riveted and on which public opinion is formed.

The latter has such a property that it arises on issues that not only arouse public interest, but are relevant at each specific moment of historical time. For example, the problems of private ownership of land, political pluralism, etc. almost always aroused public interest in our country. But it was hardly possible to talk about the presence of public opinion on them (if not talking about the public opinion of specialists, scientists) until the moment when the democratization of society began and the countdown to the transition to a market economy began.

The criterion of "disputability" is central in determining from what "point of view" public opinion considers the problems of reality and, consequently, in clarifying the need to appeal to public opinion. We have already said that public opinion is a value judgment, suggesting a greater or lesser moment of controversy, debatability of a phenomenon, problem, judgment on which it is formed. In other words, public opinion is formed, as a rule, in cases where alternative assessments and different opinions are possible. In addition, in order to identify differences in opinions, to talk about the existence of a certain public opinion, it is necessary, according to F. Allport, that each of its "carriers" knows that others react to a certain object in the same way as he does.

What remains undiscussed is so-called consensus problem. Those. we are talking about cases when the opinions of the whole society, the population of the whole city, all the employees of the enterprise coincide. Two situations are possible here. One of them is the presence of so-called absolute truths, statements on which can hardly be classified as judgments of public opinion ("The Dnieper flows into the Black Sea").

However, there are other situations when the opinions of the whole society or the overwhelming majority of its members practically coincide. Today, such problems, for example, include the problems of nature protection, the need to fight AIDS, the need to predict earthquakes, etc. There are also problems from the category of eternal ones, for example, the attitude of the vast majority of the population towards incest, violence, and murders. So, can such judgments of the public be attributed to statements of public opinion, given such a criterion for its formation as debatability? Of course, since in all the above cases, even with the maximum unanimity of the opinions expressed, at least potentially there is a moment of discussion. And while it exists, even with absolute unanimity, the corresponding statements will have the character of public opinion, and they cannot be attributed to a number of absolute truths.

Finally, the last most important criterion for the formation of public opinion is its "COMPETENCE". Giving the definition of public opinion as one of the states of mass consciousness, we have already said that public opinion (as opposed to public mood, feeling, etc.) is always a competent value judgment.

However, the concept of the competence of public opinion certainly needs to be clarified. Let us point out that society, like the individual, can "make mistakes", that the collective is not always right. and society as a whole cannot competently judge all the problems of its life, which is especially evident in the example of the fusion of public opinion with science (despite the public interest, relevance, debatability, many problems, for example, medicine, biology, do not go beyond the walls of laboratories).

It is important to establish that the incompetence of judgments that claim the status of public opinion can be both organic and inorganic.

The first case is the one that has already been mentioned: not on all problems, especially scientific ones, the public can be competent due to the fact that its opinions belong to the sphere of mass (and not group, specialized) consciousness. Such "incompetence" of public opinion is absolutely understandable and only indicates that it does not always make sense to question the people on all problems.

As for inorganic incompetence, it proceeds from the fact that, in principle, public opinion could be competent on one or another issue, but it is not, because in the corresponding situation it is not sufficiently informed. These situations are quite common, and if the majority of respondents answer the question of the questionnaire “I don’t know,” I find it difficult to answer, then here we are dealing with a case of inorganic incompetence. And in case of detection of such incompetence, one can doubt whether we have recorded public opinion (or maybe a mood, a feeling).

The term public is used in many senses. In everyday speech, this concept simply means people, members of a given society. Sociologists use this term in two senses: 1) a set of people scattered in space who have similar interests in relation to some object, for example, the public supporting a political movement or party, supporting the undertakings of the government or the president; 2) a lot of people related to ongoing events or actions, divided among themselves on the basis of their attitude to this event, who are able to evaluate or influence the course of this event and discuss its consequences.

Members of the public may not come together as members of the crowd, but each member of the public may communicate with only a subset of the other members of the public. The public maintains internal connections only through the means of mass communication. For this reason, control over the media most often means power over public opinion.

The structure of the public and its opinion are determined by cultural differences and heterogeneity. In a society with a homogeneous culture (a small number of subcultures) there is a public with similar, indistinguishable interests. The presence of a large number of subcultures gives rise to an extremely heterogeneous public, whose groups represent competing directions in the pursuit of their own interests. For example, one part of the public believes that a significant share of the budget should be directed to solving environmental problems, another part believes that the money should be spent on the development of national industry, and the third is sure that the same money should be transferred to the Ministry of Defense to maintain Russia's influence on the world stage. . The more complex the structure of society, the more positions that members of the public can take on the solution of a particular issue.

The simple stable culture of a society usually does not provide the public with many alternatives in dealing with pressing issues, since the situation can be managed on the basis of tradition and moral norms. For this reason, the differences in public opinion for various social groups are insignificant and not conflicting. But in a complex, conflicting culture, the points of view of different groups of members of the public on the solution of a problem can be extremely diverse. In other words, it is impossible to manage the emerging situation with the help of a certain set of norms, since these norms are accepted only within certain groups, subcultures of a given society. For example, at present, many members of the public are concerned about the ecological imbalance due to the development of minerals in Siberia, while other groups are interested in developing industry and increasing the extraction of oil and other minerals, believing that any means are acceptable for this. Traditional norms do not allow to resolve this issue, since they can be applied to support both points of view - the preservation of Russia's forests and the increase in its power and influence in the world. Thus, in a complex society, separate segments of public opinion are created, behind which are public groups with their own interests, attitudes and various opportunities to influence the solution of a particular problem. This leads to the need to study and take into account public opinion.

The phrase "public opinion" appeared in England in the second half of the 12th century. It was first used by the English politician and writer John Salisbury. In the 18th century, this concept began to be widely used in other countries. The power of public opinion, its active influence on the activities of the subjects of the historical process have become undeniable.

Public opinion is a specific manifestation of mass consciousness. This is a complex spiritual formation that contains judgments, ideas, ideas, assessments, and reflects the attitude (hidden and explicit) of social groups to current events, facts, phenomena and problems of society. Public opinion reflects the interests, moods, feelings of classes and social groups of society in a given historical period of time. In fact, public opinion is an indicator of how social groups and society as a whole reflect and perceive ongoing social processes.

In modern sociological literature (foreign and domestic) one can find many different definitions of public opinion. Public opinion includes a wide range of concepts. First, there are attitudes of the mind that accept statements as true, or reject them. Secondly, it is a point of view, a position, ideas about social reality. Thirdly, public opinion is seen as a value judgment or judgment about some object.

Researchers identify several approaches to determining the nature of this social phenomenon. Briefly they can be described as follows:

1) public opinion does not include all points of view on a particular problem that individual individuals have, but only those that are associated with an assessment of the situation in relation to which a given set of individuals acts as a community;

2) public opinion cannot be abstract, that is, it exists on a specific issue and arises in a specific situation;

3) public opinion is always publicly expressed, brought to the attention of society or any social group; otherwise, it will be the individual point of view of individuals;

3) public opinion appears when it reflects the attitude to the problems that interest a particular society or a particular community of people;

4) public opinion is formed only if the public has access to information about the problem of interest. It must be remembered that it can arise both on the basis of information that reflects the real state of things, and distort reality;

5) public opinion persists for a certain period of time, quite definitely, which allows us to consider it as a social phenomenon.

We can give the following definition of this phenomenon.

Public opinion is a specific manifestation of public consciousness, a complex spiritual formation, expressed in assessments and characterizing an explicit or hidden attitude to actual problems of reality, inherent in individual groups, social communities or society as a whole.

Public opinion always reflects the collective position and arises on issues of public interest.

At its core, public opinion is a combination of theoretical ideas, provisions of "common sense" and even delusions. It manifests itself first in emotions and judgments, and then in actions. In addition, researchers believe that public opinion is the most important mechanism of social interaction between people, since the functioning of any social group is impossible without the development of common ideas, judgments about common affairs, without collective assessments of events, without determining ways to solve pressing problems.

In the structure of public opinion, an object and a subject are distinguished.

The object of public opinion are specific phenomena, topics, problems on which judgments and points of view are expressed, that is, what public opinion is formed about. Thus, all the diversity of social life gives rise to the diversity of human judgments. Public opinion in its content is as complex as the processes taking place in society. The object of public opinion covers material production and political life, the state of ecology and health care, spiritual needs and socio-psychological well-being of people, and much more.

According to the sociologist B.A. Grushin, the object of public opinion must be studied, paying attention, firstly, to the analysis of the general ability of public opinion judgments to reflect reality; secondly, to highlight the criteria by virtue of which the phenomena of life become the object of public opinion

The subject and spokesman of public opinion are people who express judgments or give assessments to a particular problem that arises in society.

The subject of public opinion has a complex structure. The elements of this structure are classes, social communities, strata and groups of society. The inclusion of a particular group in the subject of public opinion depends on the significance of the problem under discussion, its importance for this group.

The diversity of opinions is due to the specifics of the perception of ongoing events, differences in the interests and social experience of people, which often leads to their clash, polarization and harmonization.

When does public opinion appear? What conditions affect its appearance and functioning? The most important condition is the social interests of people. Public opinion appears when a problem that arises in any sphere of public life (economic, political, spiritual, social) has practical significance and affects the interests of people. Most researchers consider this the first condition for the emergence of public opinion.

The second condition is related to the presence of debatability, that is, the problem or question under discussion must be debatable: social groups must have differences in assessments and judgments.

The third condition is the level of competence of people (they must have the knowledge to discuss a particular issue).

The mechanism of formation of public opinion has not been sufficiently studied by modern sociology. The complexity of this process lies in the fact that a common opinion is developed on the basis of individual judgments that "come into conflict with each other", agree or disagree. A common opinion arises in the assessment and discussion of topical, generally significant problems. Thus, a collective, group judgment is formed, and then an intergroup one.

Researchers say that there are two main sources that generate public opinion. The first source is associated with direct observation and assessment of the surrounding reality. This is the approval or condemnation by the population, social groups of certain actions, decisions of authorities or statements. Such public opinion is formed spontaneously. It is not amenable to targeted regulation.

The second source of public opinion is the mass media (newspapers, radio, television). Using these information channels, the population comprehends the expressed judgments, opinions, and assessments more rationally and logically. The mass media act as powerful levers for the formation and expression of public opinion.

What is the essence and what is the content of public opinion?

Most researchers note the following points:

public opinion is a specific conclusion (collective judgment) on any problem;

public interests and needs contribute to the formation of public opinion;

people's judgments have varying degrees of truth; public opinion that is not based on a scientific foundation can be erroneous; in case of lack of objective information, people use rumors or rely on their intuition;

public opinion becomes the driving force that regulates the behavior of social groups; at the same time, it reflects not only a certain level of knowledge of people on any issue, but also the attitude towards the object of opinion;

Public opinion is the result of the combination and interaction of people's opinions. It must be remembered that one opinion may become general, others will not be taken into account at all; the formed public opinion is integrative in nature;

public opinion exists in the minds of people and is always expressed publicly.

Social assessments are the main, but not the only element in the structure of public opinion. Other elements that assessments rely on are theoretical and practical knowledge, as well as feelings and emotions. Social attitudes and will play an important role in shaping public opinion.

Consequently, public opinion is a unity of rational, emotional and volitional aspects. It has qualitative and quantitative characteristics, can have a positive and negative orientation, or be indifferent. For a long time, public opinion remains stable. Moreover, it can be enshrined in norms and values.

Public opinion researchers concluded that public opinion has areas of social and regional distribution. Public opinion is strengthened in the minds of individuals, in the minds of groups or classes, i.e. has a social

spreading. It functions within the framework of the region, region, district, country as a whole (regional distribution).

In what areas can public opinion manifest itself?

These are all spheres of public life - economics and politics, morality and culture, science and education, religion and law. Most often, public opinion manifests itself in the sphere of politics: people evaluate the activities of the legislative authorities, the parties and deputies elected by them. Closely related to political assessments are legal assessments of people's actions. Moral assessments measure the behavior of people with generally accepted norms and principles. At the same time, they can act as an element of social control.

Examples of public opinion are the assessments and judgments of various social groups in Russian society about the problems of social and economic development of Russian society. These may be the development of the country's housing and communal complex, the adoption of a new law on education, the quality and cost of healthcare services, infill development of cities and the preservation of historical monuments, and much more. As a specific example, one can cite the results of a public opinion poll conducted by the Institute for Socio-Political Research of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 2009. The task of the study was to determine the phenomena that, in the opinion of the Russians, it is necessary to fight in the first place. The survey involved representatives of the population in various regions of the Russian Federation aged 18 years and older. The data are presented in table 1.

Table 1.

The opinions of Russians about the phenomena of public life, which must be dealt with in the first place, in %

Note: the sum of the answers is more than 100%, since the respondents could mark several items.