The campaign of FEFU teachers and students for the purity of the Russian language is in full swing. Its main event was new lecture Doctor of Philology, writer, journalist, School professor humanities FEFU Oleg Kopytov about Russian swearing. But the problem of using obscene language concerns not only philology. Foul language has its own psychology, and it shows that those who abuse obscene language have obvious psychological complexes. DV-ROSS reports about this.

About what subconscious psychological mechanisms are the basis for the use of swear words, said Oksana Baturina, head of the psychology department at the FEFU School of Humanities, candidate of psychological sciences.

Indeed, the reasons for the abuse of swear words largely lie in human psychology. For example, using swear words at the everyday level is, as a rule, an involuntary reaction to a mistake or some unpleasant accident. This means a person’s subconscious attempt to “renounce” the mistake and start over. But when swear words are used publicly and demonstratively, it has a different meaning. The most obvious example: when a man loudly uses swear words in a group of men, he thereby betrays his subconscious desire for superiority, leadership and power.

As the psychologist explained, such a subconscious meaning of demonstrative abuse is quite obvious. When young people swear loudly, they want to say: “I’m an adult!”, “I’m independent!”, “I’m taller than those present here!” But in reality, this rather indicates self-doubt, insufficient internal satisfaction and other psychological problems from this person. Otherwise, why demonstratively convince those around you, and most of them strangers, that you are an “adult” and “independent”? Especially if you are over 30? Thus, a person exposes his psychological complexes. This is clearly visible from the outside, but is often incomprehensible to the “speaker” himself, due to his low culture. As psychology shows, this method of self-actualization is often used by children.

You know that swearing is quite common among children in kindergarten and school age? - asks Oksana Baturina. - Once they hear an “interesting” and, most importantly, forbidden word, they begin to use it as a weapon. For example, to compete for the attention of adults and peers, which is very important for a child, or to manipulate parents. And this is not surprising. Mat is a product of humanity’s childhood, the simplest forms of communication. Such verbal aggression- the simplest, most primitive way of gaining power and one’s place in society. That is why it is common in the lower social classes. But in reality, we are well aware that the gentleman’s set of a modern leader and successful person is not a collection of swear words, but organizational skills, the ability to analyze, master literary speech in order to explain, convince and attract people to your side.

Not long ago, biologists discovered that swearing is especially harmful for girls. Frequent use of swear words has a negative energy-physiological effect on the female body. When a woman swears, she provokes the production of male hormones in herself and acquires masculine features in appearance: their hairline, the voice deepens. Moreover, biologists have found that this even leads to a change in the DNA structure of a woman.

In ancient times, swearing was not prohibited. This was a primitive form of communication, common in men’s groups; it helped to establish contacts and achieve some results. But with the development and complexity of society, it lost its necessity. In a broad sense, swearing is a cultural rudiment, a kind of appendix, which is now of little functionality and has remained as a relic and a means of primitive communication, emphasizes Oksana Baturina.

“Among journalists, very few people actually have a journalistic education - it would seem a paradox. As a rule, journalists are people who either read a lot or are ordinary philologists. As I think, philology - the most important science in the world, because she works with text, and everything that we see around us is, to some extent, a correctly meaningful and accurately understandable text. The same journalism is just an “appendix” of philology. There is no need to study to be a journalist, this is a very strange and dubious education,”

Zakhar Prilepin.

July 7 is Zakhar Prilepin's birthday. He was one of the first to receive the title “Russian writer”. Journalist, philologist, businessman, politician, musician, actor. His talent finds the most bizarre expressions. The name Zakhara of the “liberal public” is like a red rag for a bull, for the one hundred and thirtieth bullfight. This circumstance, perhaps, adds even more charm to Prilepin. The ideological National Bolshevik taught the reader a simple thing: even if the latter does not agree with every word he says, he will still read the article, column or book.

Zakhar is a broad person. Serving in the riot police and studying at the evening of the Faculty of Philology, you see, is not the destiny of a person from the crowd. A modest part-time job as a bouncer in nightclubs looks more than appropriate against this background. In American conditions, he would certainly have made an actor. Textured, charismatic. Vin Diesel, Jason Statham... Zakhar Prilepin would not get lost in this line of action heroes. Cleaving skulls with blows as heavy as a good anvil, he would, unlike template diesel engines, certainly produce a bright speech containing thoughts and images of varying degrees of depth. But that is in American conditions. Our loams promised a slightly different fate and completely different laurels. Here, in order to survive, they had to take shifts on the Moscow highway and slow down trucks from the Caucasus in order to expropriate oranges, watermelons, and bananas from southern guests. In the Prilepin house there were only potatoes...

I graduated from college, and I had to change something in my life. In 1999 (oh, the magic of nines) Prilepin decided to try himself as a journalist. At that time he was 24 years old. “I, a philologist by training, took up journalism myself quite by accident. When I urgently needed work, I met my old friend from the philology department, who suggested that I write articles: “God be with you, what kind of journalist am I? I don’t know anything!” As the same friend ironically answered me, those who work in journalism are those who know nothing, but have their own opinions about everything.”

The Nizhny Novgorod newspaper “Delo” welcomes Zakhara to its staff. His materials are published under various pseudonyms (the most famous was “Evgeniy Lavlinsky”). “The newspaper, however, was yellow, scary, in some places even Black Hundred, although it was part of Sergei Kiriyenko’s holding,” the newly minted journalist would later say, “And I realized that I was wasting my life on nothing,” and began to write a novel. At first it was a novel about love, but gradually (I worked for three or four years) it turned into a novel about Chechnya as about my strongest life experience“As they say, no matter what you do with us, a Kalashnikov assault rifle comes out.”

Journalistic work quickly became routine. And the owner of a character similar to Prilepin’s shuns everything routine by definition. All that remains is to decide where to run and outline an escape plan. “I realized that I was wasting my life on nothing, and I began to write a novel.” Thus, Russian literature gained a new phenomenon in its tenacious clutches.

Journalism, however, does not leave Prilepin’s life. Acquires other features. Now this is not conveyor work, but piece production. His articles will be published in various publications: “Literaturnaya Gazeta”, “On the Edge”, “Limonka”, “North”, “General Line”, “ New world", "Snob", "Russian Pioneer".

Already as a columnist, Zakhar was published in the publications “Snob”, “Ogonyok”, “Russian Life” and “Bear”. His lyrics found a place in such cozy corners as “Sex in the city” and “Glamour”.

Political views predetermined Prilepin’s work as editor-in-chief of the newspaper “People’s Observer”, which belongs to the National Bolsheviks branch in Nizhny Novgorod. He would later become the general director of Novaya Gazeta in the same city. And he will assume the powers of editor-in-chief of the Free Press portal.

At a time when the expression of radical ideas is condemned and punished, Prilepin could hardly fail to earn the position of “political freak.” His “Letter to Comrade Stalin” caused a storm of indignation. On behalf of the liberal public, the writer and journalist expressed extremely unfashionable assessments of the merits of Comrade Dzhugashvili. “My letter itself was conceived after another bestial bacchanalia in the press, which happened last May 9, and another repeated bacchanalia on June 22 of this year. Many have become accustomed to these bacchanalia, and many have come to terms with them. Except, in fact, millions of people living in Russia. In order to somehow explain the colossal feeling of respect for Stalin among the people, my opponents argue that everyone in the camps died, and now the children of the executioners and informers miss Stalin.”

At the end of June this year, Zakhar’s name was again associated with media hype. The newspaper “Arguments and Facts” approached him with a request to comment on an article about gays. On the topic, as the “commentator” would later say, which “generally worries him a little,” he presented two theses: “1. All people are free and have every right to dispose of their genitals at their own discretion. Gays and gays - yes to your health.

2. Male couples should not adopt children. This is my point of view. This is not your freedom: in the end, children are not asked whether they want such parents for themselves.”

The Aif creative team decided to give the material a more kosher sound. The headlines blazed. "Let them find their hell!" (at least not an ass) and “Gay, shoot from children” (which exposed the author of the title as a poet of the level of a child with disabilities mental abilities). Cute, isn't it? Prilepin, of course, was hostile to the newspaper’s creation. He responded briefly on his Facebook page: “Freaks.”

That’s why they didn’t try to incline Prilepin’s name any less, of course. As you know, the problem of the gay community is the most significant in modern Russia. If an issue of a newspaper or an update of an Internet portal does not say a word about representatives of sexual minorities, this means that their rights have been infringed, and the professional behavior of the publications’ employees has also made itself felt.

The writer Vadim Levental, who is a columnist for Izvestia, quite rightly judged the savagery of the situation when writing person they ask you to give a comment over the phone instead of asking you to write an article in which you could expand your opinion, express your thoughts in a restrained, balanced manner.

The liberal public can only rejoice. There are “reasons” to bark at an inconvenient opponent: “obscurantist!”, “bloodthirsty!” Inconvenience, by the way, is an integral feature of Prilepin, perhaps a defining one. He is both loved and hated for his inconvenience. For a writer and journalist, this is the norm. 36.6.

Perhaps, representatives of each profession have their own jokes that are understandable to a fairly narrow circle. But since many people have to learn the intricacies of the Russian language while still at school, philological jokes are understandable and always go off with a bang.

It is known that Lewis Carroll, while traveling around Russia, wrote down the word “defending”. In his travel diary, he noted it as “those who protest themselves,” and claimed that the very sight of this word caused horror in him. This is understandable; not a single foreigner is able to pronounce the word “zаshtsheеshtshaуоушtsheеkhsуа”.

A foreign delegation at a Soviet plant. The worker and the foreman, not noticing anyone, are talking temperamentally. One of the foreigners, who knows Russian tolerably, translates to the others:
“The foreman invites the worker to process the part, citing the fact that he is in an intimate relationship with the worker’s mother. The worker refuses to process the part, citing the fact that he is in an intimate relationship with the master’s mother, with the shop manager, with the plant director and with the part itself.”

A fifth-year student came to the dean’s office with a request to be expelled. “Are you having family problems? Need help? Let’s somehow resolve the issue, why should you be expelled?!” the dean is perplexed. “No, thank you,” the guy winced, as if from a toothache. - “Don't get me wrong. When in my first year they were constantly talking about stores, I simply didn’t pay attention. When in my second year they were constantly talking about fashionable underwear, I allowed myself sarcastic comments. In the third year, they began to discuss their love affairs, and I learned a lot of new and interesting things. On the fourth - I knew about the menstrual cycle of each of them, about abortions and the most intimate details family life. But when a month ago I had a dream that my stockings were torn..."

Grandma, hello. We are philology students from Moscow. We came to you to study dialects...
- Why study our Central Russian dialect! In the north at least there is contraction of vowels...

An Englishman, a Frenchman and a Russian talk about the complexities of languages.
Englishman:
- Our pronunciation is difficult. . For example, we say "Inaf" and write "Enough".
Frenchman:
- It’s even more complicated for us. We say "Bordeaux" and write "Bordeaux".
Russian:
- Yes, this is something else... We say: “What?”, and write: “Repeat, please.”

A British magazine has announced a competition for the most short story. The conditions of the competition were quite strict:
- Chief actor should have become queen.
- Be sure to mention God
- There must be a secret
- Definitely a little sex.
The first prize was awarded to the student who managed to fit the story into one phrase: “Oh God,” cried the queen, “I’m pregnant and it’s unknown from whom!”

A lawyer and a philologist meet in a university corridor. The lawyer has a small stack of books, and the philologist is not even visible because of the books. The lawyer is horrified: “Are these textbooks for the session?!” Philologist: “Are you kidding me?! This is the LIST of literature for the session.”

They will not only lift your spirits, but also help you be literate.

Psychology and journalism have long found out that journalism is a profession in which there is neither childhood nor youth, but only adulthood

The class of the press is determined by the school of journalism created by editors and publishers

Russia needs a people's journalist and people's journalism like bread. One in the press is not a warrior, even if he is talented and unshakable

The law of a journalist’s activity: feathers become sharper only on the way to the top of the profession, otherwise they turn into brushes

Philology and journalism are in vain arguing for primacy at the journalism department. Journalism of fact, not journalism of words - this is the professional credo and the password for school

The half-century history of domestic journalistic education is based on a philological, and not a legal foundation, as is common throughout the world. Philology and journalism have been arguing pointlessly in universities for a long time. Our school was initially aimed at training not writers, but journalists, not desk work with a dictionary and word-bayonet, but the search and comprehensive study of facts, and only facts - the most important category of real journalism. But philology does not suffer at all from this.

“Great writers cannot write for a newspaper.”
Epigraph to the book by R. Sylvester
"The second oldest profession"

The lurches, fluxes and viruses of unrecoverable journalism are associated not only with its citizenship, but also with its malleability and inertia

Foreign journalism faculties initially bore fruit on a legal basis; in some cases they were based on the foundation social sciences. But “law faculties” in the USSR were the first post-war years- the time of their birth - they themselves were just rising from their knees, and the supreme power saw in them the same obedient hand weapons as the “journal departments”. And the choice of place of birth and “fatherhood”, similar to what befell journalism abroad, it seems, was not even discussed. Thus, philological faculties of universities became shelters for domestic journalistic education.

Philologists already had some experience, although it would be a stretch to call it journalistic. For example, in Leningrad back in 1925 they gave lectures on typography, and then studied the work of a literary editor, the history of criticism and magazine activity. All this concerns more the publishing part, rather than the newspaper part, although even the course in newspaper studies was born in the same years. And, nevertheless, it is precisely among philologists - for example, at the Faculty of Linguistics and Material Culture of Leningrad state university- a department was opened, and then, not without difficulty, the Faculty of Journalism was opened. It is possible that linguistics and I.V. Stalin played a decisive role here - his works in this area were widely known, and this then could not but influence the course of the history of Russian journalism. But perhaps there were other reasons.

At that time the “main fundamental training future journalists was connected with teachers of the Faculty of Philology.” However, this bias towards literature was also explained by the fact that it was necessary to “give the students of the department such training that, if necessary, would allow them to change journalism to teaching Russian language and literature in schools.” When the very fate of the faculty hung in the balance, its founders, apparently, were looking for a guaranteed breath of freedom in this ploy - what if it didn’t work out with journalism?

There is, of course, one more, perhaps very compelling reason. The journalist's pen in the ideological theater was still equated to a bayonet, and it had to be sharpened by word specialists - that is, philologists. Of course, under the supervision of party bodies and intelligence services. Therefore, with such close attention to themselves, faculties put emphasis on literature and the Russian language, diligently correcting the shortcomings of school and home education, completely overloading students with lists of literature for home reading. In essence, then, as now, they corrected the shortcomings of their colleagues - teachers of literature and Russian. But it was then that suddenly or not suddenly they started talking about the “literary tilt” of the journalism department, that is, about that addition to the propaganda concept of journalism education that the “philology department” became for journalism. Philology took the fire of criticism upon itself.

Journalism as a fragment of biography and a small springboard into writers has been perceived by all peoples and in all centuries, but our people - with special hope

The negative effect of the “literary bias” was noted, in particular, in 1959, at the First All-Union Congress of Journalists, that is, at the very beginning of the mass training of journalistic personnel and at the time of the creation of the Union of Journalists of the USSR.

“Among newspapermen, especially young ones, there is a current view of journalism as something transitional to “real literature,” states a speaker at the congress editor-in-chief newspaper "Izvestia" A.I.Adzhubey. In his opinion, this disease has already penetrated into educational institutions journalism, and those who did not enter the Faculty of Journalism flocked to literary institute, to philological faculties: “Some people have the opinion that anyone who picks up a pen can become a journalist... In order to be a journalist, you must have certain abilities, you must cultivate these abilities, develop them, you must work hard and hard work..." [Adzhubey A.I. Materials of the First All-Union Congress of Journalists. Stenographer. report. – M., 1959].

M.N. Kim points out that “in newspaper practice Soviet period The lightness of the pen, the refinement and sophistication of the style, the imagery and lexical richness of the material, etc. were especially appreciated.” [Kim M.N. Basics creative activity journalist. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2011. – 400 p. - P. 43]. But it was precisely this lightness and sophistication that propaganda needed at a time when its frontal attacks were no longer taken seriously. Perhaps literature played and played the role of the notorious 25th frame in journalism, acting on the subconscious of readers, listeners and viewers.

Perhaps because of this benefit, during the reign of N.S. Khrushchev, it was not possible to get rid of the “philological flux” [M.I. Shishkina’s term], and no one particularly insisted on this at universities. It was easier to get rid of A.I. Adzhubey and N.S. Khrushchev than to get rid of the cult of literature in journalism.

“Journalism under any circumstances is the art of working with words,” L.G. Svitich and A.A. Shiryaeva still say [Svitich L.G., Shiryaeva A.A. Journalism education. – M., 1997. – P. 214].

Until now, the question of the precariousness of the philological foundation of journalism has not been resolved, although it should be admitted that it has not been studied in depth either then or later. A revelation is the point of view of Professor M.V. Zagidullina, who specially studied the literary background of “journalism departments”. “Journalism education is a “superstructure” on a philological basis,” she believes, and was formed in universities “as part of literature (that is, journalistic speech).” The author notes that even “the highest attestation commission condemns journalism to an “in-between” position,” classifying it as a philological science and, thereby, limiting the initiative in its in-depth study. But literature at the “journalism department” did not become fundamental, but only a “general developmental discipline”, occupying almost a fifth of the teaching time. The author finds that “knowledge of literature is not in demand either when admitting applicants (there is no corresponding exam), or during the state exam, or in qualifying work graduate, nor in his future practical activities" The author admits: “We have to admit that when current state requirements for higher journalistic education, the history of literature turns out to be not only a secondary subject, but also of little significance in the practical activity of a specialist.” The author is convinced “that over time the situation must inevitably change. Either literary history should be abandoned altogether, or its significance for a journalist should be clearly defined.” And he concludes that “the inclusion of a lengthy course in the history of literature in educational standards in journalism... a sign of ambiguity and ill-conceivedness of the very concept of journalistic education, a compromise that arises in connection with the “philological nature” of most journalism faculties that exist either within the framework of philological faculties or that arose on their basis [Zagidullina M.V. The problem of the literary component of journalism education. – http://zagidullina.ru/my_articles/ ].

Journalistic education, swelling along the way, has reached a crossroads, from which there is no way straight, left or right, and therefore is about to burst under the pressure of applicants stepping on their heels

The overwhelming majority of researchers of this problem still remain faithful to the philological department [Zhidkova O.V., Zasursky Ya.N., Korkonosenko S.G., Svitich L.G., Shiryaeva A.A. and many others]. And no one is especially embarrassed that for most student journalists, lectures on literature are just a repetition of what they learned at school, that most of the books recommended for reading at the university had to be studied at one time.

How can one not recall the insightful teacher and respected European politician Earl of Chesterfield, who in his “Letters to his Son” advises remembering “that if you do not lay the foundation of the knowledge that you want to acquire before the age of eighteen, you will never You won’t master this knowledge in life.” Note that it was reading and literature that Chesterfield considered a source of knowledge. So, maybe, in fact, there is a time for everything?

M.N. Kim, speaking to students about the rethinking of journalistic work, points out how the literary preferences of journalists have changed: “To the process of work, to literary work (and it is rarely called creativity anymore) as a motive professional activity indicated only 4.3% of respondents, including 12% of graduates of the 1950s, brought up in the old tradition, when journalism was considered largely literary creativity" [Kim M.N. Fundamentals of creative activity of a journalist. – St. Petersburg: Peter, 2011. – P. 43]. But Professor L.P. Gromova insists on preserving the basic philological foundation, believing “that it is necessary to teach not only the “stamping” of news, not only technological subtleties, but also provide fundamental knowledge in the field of the humanities. It is this knowledge that forms the culture of thought, the richness of associations, the figurativeness of language” [See. open discussion on the website www.jf.pu.ru)]. I would like to add “lightness and sophistication,” but it would be more appropriate to include journalism itself here.

According to Moscow researchers L.G. Svitich and A.A. Shiryaeva, in lately the motivation of young journalists has become closer to the orientations of Americans. And only the older generation still highly values ​​the literary side of the profession, the process of working with words [Russian and American journalist, 1996, 1,156 people surveyed]. This confirms that the views of teachers and students on the literary role in journalism education are increasingly divergent.

Will the forgotten prophets of journalism return to their fatherland, but who began with legal education in the first private schools

Research related to the search for an alternative foundation for journalism is almost impossible to find today. Basically, their authors speak in favor of in-depth study one discipline or another. Relatively recently it was the economy of means mass media, sociology of journalism, psychology of journalism, which partly replaced the previous courses in social disciplines of an ideological nature. The latest in this series is political science. Entered legal basis journalism and international humanitarian law also did not go beyond professional needs. There's talk about the need to equip the journalistic profession with pedagogical knowledge. But this will be another addition to the content of the training, and not to the didactic system itself.

Unfortunately, we were not able to find a single work directly related, for example, to the study of the reasons for choosing the legal foundation of the profession, which is typical for most foreign schools of journalism, at least during the inception of journalism education. Apparently, there it was a completely natural choice. But even in the legal prehistory of domestic journalism, not everything has yet been figured out, and it was the lawyers Boborykin and Vladimirov who initiated the first private schools in Russia.

However, when talking about improving and deepening the training of journalists, many focus not only on the need for change, but not even rethinking the legal part of education.

O.V. Tretyakova, reflecting on the role of journalism in the formation legal culture, notes the need to “raise the level legal literacy journalists themselves and the development of their legal culture as a necessary element of professionalism.” The author explains what caused this need. First of all, the fact that the media “are the main source of informing citizens, including in the field of legislation.” The extent to which journalists are legally literate, the society will be informed and literate, and the ideals will be feasible. rule of law. O.V. Tretyakova is convinced that “highly professional journalists who have not only appropriate training, but also experience working with information and analytical materials of a legal nature need to be involved in covering the results of lawmaking” [The role of journalism in the formation of legal culture. Journalism in the world of politics. 2007. – P. 120–131.], P. 130]. To justify a review of the legal training of journalists, such conclusions are quite sufficient. But will they be enough to replace the foundation of all journalistic education? Will these arguments be enough for the successful competition of the legal principle with the philological one within the walls of universities? Apparently, it is not enough, since, even having separated from the philological faculties, the faculties of journalism are vitally dependent on them. And the philological lobby of teachers dominates the departments of journalism in most universities in Russia - it’s easy to see this, you just have to look at the website of any such department. But the lawyers there are people who come.

In the press there is a slightly different balance of forces on this issue. Those who come from “journalism departments” do not strive for legally saturated problems. Most columns with a legal background are given to employees with little legal training and experience. Specialists from these areas are also assigned to work with legislators, with courts and the prosecutor’s office, with the police and investigators, of course, when they exist. It is no coincidence that in the old Russian press the corps of journalists was formed from former judges or detectives, or officials of government agencies, obliged by their status to thoroughly know the law and the law. But in order to solve the problems of the “fourth estate”, whose mission is competent monitoring of the actions of the legislative, judicial and executive powers, of compliance with laws strongmen of the world This, high-ranking officials and so-called business “stars”, the press today only has enough strength to top it off. The roots are waiting in the wings.

In order to fulfill its main purpose, journalism must be legally savvy. And this means standing on a legal basis from the very first lecture, from the very first editorial assignment. And for this it is necessary to “reboot” the “journalism departments” with legal “software” - system-forming program material. The more journalism relies on legally verified facts, the higher the price of evidence required by readers will be and the more educated and experienced journalists will be. Both for most people entering journalism begin within the walls of universities. Legal freedoms and restrictions there become the basis for studying reality. And knowing them is the primary indicator of professional education.

From the monograph by M.V. Belousov “School of Journalism”.

If you have a different opinion, or you have something to add or correct to what was said above, then my mailbox is at your service. Let's talk frankly? But on one condition - nothing personal!

Yesterday the conference hall of SurSPU was crowded: students and teachers of the university were waiting for the meeting (it took place thanks to the efforts of the staff of the Centralized library system within the framework of the project "Writer - Author of Destiny") with one of the most fashionable writers of the last decade, Zakhar Prilepin. The author of cult bestsellers, journalist, prominent oppositionist and public figure spoke about art, literature, education, but students were especially interested in his view of journalism:

“Among journalists, very few people actually have a journalistic education - it would seem a paradox. As a rule, journalists are people who either read a lot or are ordinary philologists. I think that philology is the most important science in the world, because it works with text, and everything that we see around us is, to some extent, a correctly comprehended and accurately understandable text. The same journalism is just an “appendix” of philology. There is no need to study to become a journalist; this is a very strange and dubious education. I, a philologist by training, took up journalism myself quite by accident. When I urgently needed work, I met my old friend from the philology department, who suggested that I write articles: “God bless you, what kind of journalist am I? I don’t know anything!” As the same friend ironically answered me, those who work in journalism are those who know nothing, but have their own opinions about everything.”

Agree, this is a rather controversial statement. It became interesting what philologists and journalists themselves, in particular those from Surgut, would say about this.

Dmitry Larkovich, Dean of the Faculty of Philology, SurSPU

“There is a certain amount of polemic in this statement, because journalism is not an “appendix”, but a completely independent branch. However, a strong philological foundation for a journalist is the basis for his successful professional activity. Journalism how scientific discipline is included in the category of philological sciences, therefore the connection between journalism and philology is very close and organic. After all, what is philology? Love for words. And the word is a journalist’s weapon, so a journalist who does not master it is nonsense.”

Evgenia Nikitina, specialist of the research association “Ethnika”, graduate student of SurSPU

“Undoubtedly, comparing journalism with an appendix sounds unusual and can cause both indignation and... a smile among media workers and journalists. There is some truth in this comparison. If we turn to anatomy, the appendix plays a life-saving role in the body in preserving microflora, the condition of which directly affects human immunity. Reasoning in this way, we can come to the conclusion that journalism, by the nature of its activity, is obliged to produce a lot of useful bacteria-materials to maintain balance in a single organism called Society. Is she coping? That's the question!
As for journalistic education, it is important for a media worker to be able to use tools for collecting and processing information. For a person who wants to become a journalist, study is not limited to five years at the university. He learns his skills all his life and it doesn’t matter what department he is a graduate of. In the West, journalists are also successfully trained in economics, law and other faculties. It has historically developed in Russia that journalists mainly come from the philological department. However, love for the word, having an analytical mind and knowledge in the field of psychology is not enough to become a journalist; it is also important not to forget your conscience and not to lose honor in the pursuit of money and fame. And yet, you can read a lot, but still not become wise, but a journalist simply must have a philosophical outlook on life.”

Marta Artyukhova, 5th year student of the Faculty of Philology of SurSPU

“Philology is, indeed, the ancestor of journalism, so by studying the disciplines of philologists at the university, you will learn more than by studying at the journalism department. Any good journalist must be literate and have a broad outlook. However, I have more than once met people from the journalism department who write illiterately, and what’s even worse, they speak the same way.”

Definitely, being a philologist by training, you can easily try yourself in the journalistic field and achieve success in it. An example is the same Prilepin, who runs a number of Nizhny Novgorod editorial offices and leads columns in at least a dozen publications. But you still need to correctly understand the meaning of the word “appendix”, with which the writer compared journalism. It is by no means a useless organ human body, and part digestive system, on which the state of our immunity depends. So maybe Evgenia is right, and it is journalism that helps maintain balance in the “social body”?