Formation of Communication Facilities in the Media

The article concerns the factors of the formation of communicative attitudes, linguistic security, and speech aggression in the media. Studying the language characteristics of modern society, the authors analyze regressive phenomena in the information and communication environment. The influence of journalistic texts on the worldview of readers of the modern press is manifested in the changing information background. Of particular interest is the influence of connotations on the media text and on postindustrial society in general. Considering the communicative process in the media taking into account the linguistic traditions, the connection of generations, ethnic unity, the authors identify specific ways of communication that evolve under the influence of a changing information environment. The relevance of the study consists in revealing the forms of manifestation of speech aggression in the texts of print media. Given that the perception of media text takes into account background information, it is assumed that negative communication patterns are being formed in the society, with special focus on the examples containing a violation of communicative and ethical norms. The practical importance of the study of the formation of communicative attitudes in the media is connected with the careful study of journalistic materials and the definition of the quality characteristics of means of influence on the audience of the media.


Introduction
Speech aggression in the texts of modern press is increasingly the subject of linguistic analysis.The change in the literary normative language, the frequency appeal to connotative vocabulary, including lowcolloquial, the violation of the postulates of the ethical code of the journalist has nothing to do with freedom of speech and, undoubtedly, influences the speech and mentality of the society.
The ethical problems of the language of the press are being inquired into question at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries.T.A. Vorontsova establishes the reasons of deformation of the information background from the point of view of communicative discourse, paying attention to the cognitive aspect of speech aggression (2010, p.91).Y. V. Shcherbinina focuses on practical aspects of the psychology of verbal aggression, taking into account the linguistics and ethics of this issue (2004, p.7). N. E. Petrova analyzes the language practice of media texts, singling out linguistic means of verbal impact (2011, p.16).The scientific publications cover the following aspects of violations of linguistic security: extralinguistic, linguistic, cognitive, and communicative.Speech aggression in the media exerts a negative influence on media text to a marked degree, at that, influencing linguistic security.Following L. G. Lisitskaya (2009, p.87), we define the term "linguistic security" as "the absence in its deployment of the strategies that lead to negative perlocutive effects in the spheres of knowledge, feelings and aspirations of the primary and indirect addressee".Modern researchers of printed texts emphasize the prevention of speech extremism.It appears to be fair that "It is possible to confront extremism and strengthen the positions of tolerance observing the rules of linguistic security as well" (Goryacheva & Gunko, 2016, p.48).
The topic of speech security is also relevant for foreign scientists.The article by an Indian professor Kiran Bala explores how new media is redefining social roles that are more vulnerable to dissolution as interpersonal communication is taking place on public platforms (Bala, 2014).McNamara, in particular, draws attention to modern research, which traces a close relationship in setting the agenda of organizations that create the mainstream of media flows and social networks (Macnamara, 2014).Srisaracam Sakulsri (2017) studies this relationship between social networks and mainstream media which can sometimes drive public debate or stimulate social movements.Agner Fog (2012) draws attention to the fact that stiff economic competition forces the media to produce entertaining stories that appeal to people's emotions.Preferred topics include danger, crime, and disaster, which the media select in ways that make the audience perceive the world as more dangerous than it is.
In general, the ethical issues of the language of the press have been actively studied in recent years by A. A. Belchikov, N. D. Bessarabova, M. V. Gorbanevsky, L. I. Krysin, V. S. Elistratov and other researchers.Verbal aggression in the media "often aims to provoke or maintain an aggressive state of the addressee" (Zavialova, 2017), directly threatening the linguistic security of media text.

Materials and Research Methods
The language of modern journalism has been changing before our eyes: the words and expressionsjargon, argotisms, low colloquial words to be banned previously have been penetrated into it.Even in information genres, the authors of journalistic texts permit themselves evaluative elements, which leads to the appearance of verbal aggression -"the use of linguistic means to express enmity, hostility; the manner of speech that wounds one's self-esteem, dignity" (Stylistic Encyclopedia, 2016, p.340).The reasons that prompted a journalist to resort to speech aggression may different: "from a general lower level of a journalist's speech culture, reinforcement of the subjective author's beginning in information messages to the deliberate creation of a negative and hostile description of a phenomenon or an event" (Strokova, 2014).The communicative process of the mass media involves, on the one hand, language traditions that make for maintaining the contacts between generations and ethnic unity, and on the other, specific modes of communication that have evolved under the influence of a changing information environment.With this in mind, the methods of sampling and hermeneutic reconstruction are used in the work, which contribute to the understanding of the whole being created from parts, and the singling out of a part from the whole.Description and observation are auxiliary methods.

Results and Discussion
The range of techniques, that a journalist who uses aggressive vocabulary adverts to, may vary depending on whether the explicit or implicit form of speech manipulation he selects.
Explicit speech aggression is manifested in a negative attitude towards someone plainly.The easiest tool in this sense are pejoratives -the words having a negative connotation, as well as being limited in use: jargons, low colloquial words.The striving of a journalist via a stylistically marked word for attracting the addressee's attention is associated with fierce competition in the industry.However, it is important to remember that the predominance of valuation vocabulary can cause the effect of hostility.
Implicit speech aggression -a consciously hidden influence on the audience -is introduced into the minds of the readers by means of precedent texts, allusions, irony, polysemy giving rise to ambiguity, or preterition.For example, Y. A. Strokova (2014) focuses on how the word "Islamist" with a neutral coloring turns into a symbol of "cruelty", "terrorism" and "aggression".The Large Dictionary of the Russian Language (1998) treats "Islamist" as "1.A supporter of Islamism.2. Coll.An adherent of Islam; Muslim".We find another meaning in the media: "Islamist" is comprehended exclusively as "a supporter of the radical wing", which is not true: "The Islamists have shot 56 Syrian military" (RBC), "CIA: Islamists plan the terrorist attacks in the US" (Vesti.ru).As we see, the journalists, probably implying the definition "radical", miss it and thereby substitute the concepts: an adherent of Islam is equated to the concept of "militant".Here we have an example of the disorientation of the audience by fixing a negative connotation The issues of linguistic security of public texts are an actual problem of modern media, on the one hand, reflecting the aggressive mood of society, on the other hand, using evaluation vocabulary as a tool for forming the attitudes for oppositeness.All this leads to the fact that negatively colored vocabulary increases the growth of aggression in society.Based on L. Enina's (2000) observations, as well as on the linguistic analysis of the texts of the modern press, several variants of pronounced oppositions "offered" by journalists can be singled out: "the local" -"newcomers / ethnic strangers"; "people" -"power"; "the province" -"the capital"; "We are Russians" -"They are foreigners".
The opposition of "the local" and "the newcomers" is being deeply entrenched in the readers' mind.This is confirmed by G. Trofimova in the interview for "The Parlametskaya Gazeta" (2016): "In Russia for past two years the number of linguistic expertise has rapidly increased.It is connected with the fomentation of international enmity and discord.The number of applications has increased by 20-25%".
At the heart of many manipulative methods of discrediting used by journalists is the imposition of shortcuts.Here are some illustrations: "Migrants: atrocities of the beasts" (Socio-political newspaper "The President"); "Are the Serovites ready to help a man if he is a Tajik?" (Globus) "The Asians cut two teenagers among broad daylight near the Petropavlovsk Fortress (GAZETA.SPb.ru);"The Asians cannot integrate into a civilized society" (Socio-political newspaper "The President"); "Kuschevka was captured by the Caucasians!" (Express newspaper); Along the Krasnoselskoye highway, hot Caucasians scuffled after the "international" road accident (GAZETA.SPb.ru).These examples demonstrate a negative evaluativity at different levels -this is the lexical repetition of the "atrocities of the beasts", which intensifies the negative coloring; and the syntactic constructions "Are you ready ... if ..." -the second part clearly implies a lexeme with a negative meaning, and there is a neutral word denoting the representative of the nation; and generalizations "the Asians, the Caucasians" with the aim of creating / maintaining in the reader's mind a concrete, in this case negative, attitude to the perception of the reality.Note that this kind of verbal aggression is opposed not only by linguists, but also by law enforcement officials.
The opposition "people" -"power" is found in journalistic materials, in which politicians of different levels of power structures are abstract (power, officials) and are evaluated in an emphatically negative way: "Official brutality is off scale" (PRAVDA); The Caucasians are not yet a mafia, the mafia are our officials!(Express Newspaper); "The lands have been saved from cars and officials" (The Volokolamskaya week); "Officials will be deprived of warm places" (The Komersant); "On bureaucratic-oligarchic criminal groups" (The Pskov Province); "Caution: an official!"(The Evening Kazan); "Do the officials care only about their benefit?"(The Evening Kazan).The latter is interesting because it is an affirmation expressed in a questionnaire form, that is, a rhetorical question intensifies the negative evaluation of the whole phrase.
The opposition "the province" -"the capital" with a tinge of evaluativity emerged in journalistic texts at the turn of the 20th-21st centuries.The journalists deliberately and emphatically use the opposition "the Muscovites" -"the provincials", distancing the latter in a semantic sense not only from the Muscovites, but also the residents of big cities: "the Muscovites and the provincials" (Nezavisimaya gazeta); "Moscow against the province" (business newspaper "Vzglyad"); "Take courage, provincial.Moscow is looking for "cultural heroes" of the 21st century in the province" (socio-political newspaper "Pacific Star"); "And around -the evil and inhuman Moscow, which grinds people and fortunes ..." (Business Online).The title "Why Does the Russian Province Hate Moscow?" (InoSMI) exposes a hidden manipulation: the opposition "the province -the capital" is not questioned and thus imposed on, the author of the material only understands the causes of this phenomenon.At the same time, the statement of the fact of this opposition is clothed in a sharply negative word "hate".There is a kind of stereotype: "a province that" forges wealth, "and Moscow, which "devours" everything", the fact that these two worlds are different has become a common place in journalistic publications.
The opposition of the positive "We are Russians" -the negative "They are foreigners" was aggravated in connection with the global crisis and the imposition of sanctions against Russia.The media maintains a positive image of Russians, that is opposed to the image of an alien, as a rule, charged with negative connotations.The examples of such opposition are sufficient even in the federal media: "The West likes Russia, which can be plundered" (Arguments and Facts); "The United States is deceiving Greece, Germany is robbing it, and only Russia can save it" (Komsomolskaya Pravda); "On "the moral superiority" of the West and its crooked mug" (The Journalistic Pravda); "The West is seriously ill!" (The Continent); "Poisoned arrows are flying to Russia" (Trud); "Paul Craig Roberts: 'The US is number one evil in the world, and Russia and China should neutralize it'" (Business Online); "Naryshkin in PACE called the US foreign policy 'an absolute evil for Europe'" (Novaya Gazeta).
The categorical statements, backed up by vernacular expressions such as the "crooked mug", contain deliberately exaggerated oppositions (Russia saves, the West ruins), creates the appearance of a stiff alternative.Such a presentation of information provokes the readers to be aggressive, and, of course, does not promote the spread of a tolerant position in society.

Summary
The study of media materials revealed the regularity of the formation by the journalistic community of the position of consolidation of Russian society not "in the name of" something but "against someone".Payel Sen Choudhury (2011) believes that "Media plays an important role in development communication through circulation of knowledge, providing forum for discussion of issues, teach ideas, skills for a better life and create a base of consensus for stability of the state".The position of I. I. Khaleeva seems to be fair: "The culture of interethnic communication, interpersonal communication is an indicator of the moral health of a society counting on historical longevity" (Khaleeva, 2006, p.110).Unfortunately, a negatively colored text often draws the attention of the reader and is better remembered, while a positive evaluation provokes skepticism.Probably, that's why modern journalists try to aggravate contradictions, but neutrality is not offered: the audience needs to make a choice what position it adheres to.

Conclusion
When analyzing specific linguistic means that reflect phenomena of reality, describing them from a certain angle, the journalist should take into account the correlation of negative and positive details and remember that "the mass media play a significant role in the construction of the social reality" (Enina, 2000), and the evaluative oppositions in publicistic texts operate to the formation of black and white thinking, which does not make it possible to see the world differently than divided into "one's own" and "others".A careful public attitude to the cultural and verbal charge of the press with an emphasis on ethical standards will undoubtedly help to reduce tensions in society.