Pocheptsov: Winner must be the most active

Photo: InterMedia consulting

Author: Hryhoriy Potseptsov, Professor, Doctor of Philosophy

So, to choose such special actions is a complicated process. How can you prove that activity of mass media was not occasional? I propose such set of factors. An active beginning and a sudden end are necessary. Public discussion of the problem includes involving of all TV news programs and talk shows. Concerns of third-parties must be predictable.

Incident with vaccination has all these factors. But a death has taken place, at the same time. This death makes only a small percentage for the Ministry of Health, but it makes all 100% of tragedy for the family.

We have seen recently that journalists can draw attention of the society to a problem only if certain persons are interested in it. They are more particularly political or financial rivals. This problem fades as a new one comes to its place. The next day this one will be changed with the next one. A theme can be still topical if it is unaccomplished, for example, such events as hostage taking in Somalia or salvage of a vessel in China. An event can be in progress, so it must be elucidated till the hostages will have been saved or "Neftegaz" vessel will have been surfaced. 

All crisis situations need filling of informational vacuum. Those who violate this rule will be struck back. The negative situation itself will act against them. Mass mind tries to elaborate such situations choosing the most negative interpretations as they have to be potentially rendered harmless. If you hear a dry branch cracked behind, you will think first of all about a prowling enemy. Only later you will agree with a hypothesis of a fallen branch. If you think in a different way you can not survive in a hostile environment.

What did the mass mind enriched this theme with? There was such a set of factors to be discussed: corruption within the Ministry of Health, and violated regulations of import and registration of drugs. And journalists have added here some scandalous information about special antinatalist medications intended for Third World countries.

Nobody addressed such development of the situation. The Ministry of Health had to refute the most scandalous topics first passing ahead of journalists. But nothing had been done. We know nothing even about vaccination, though it has been spoken about widely for some weeks.

It is more difficult to create a disproof than an accusation. The most harmful thing here is that disproves are not addressed to those who received accusations, so, information is spreading.

What conclusion can be made? It is a common rule: winner must be the most active. The Ministry of Health failed to justify itself. By the way, nobody has seen the Minister inoculating himself with this vaccine in live broadcasting.