Book Review: Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century by Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman

IF 4.1 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION International Journal of Press-Politics Pub Date : 2022-10-26 DOI:10.1177/19401612221132643
Rodney Tiffen
{"title":"Book Review: Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century by Sergei Guriev and Daniel Treisman","authors":"Rodney Tiffen","doi":"10.1177/19401612221132643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1976, I was living in Singapore doing a research project on Western foreign correspondents in Southeast Asia. One of my interviewees was James Fu, who deftly combined the roles of Lee Kwan Yew’s press secretary with being news director at the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation. He spent mornings in the Prime Minister’s office and afternoons at the TV studio. He was an early embodiment of the theme of this book Spin Dictators. Guriev and Treisman argue that over the last generation the earlier “fear dictators” who intimidated their citizens through violence and sought total control have been increasingly supplanted by dictators using more sophisticated control measures. Their examples include Singapore’s pioneering Lee, Russia’s Putin, Peru’s Fujimori, Venezuela’s Chavez, Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamed and his successors, Hungary’s Orban, and Turkey’s Erdogan. The rich array of examples under these and other rulers are complemented by quantitative data on different regime types, including for example numbers of political prisoners and political killings. The move from fear to spin dictators is very much a result of—and in turn a driver of —what they call “the modernisation cocktail.” It reflects the changing political dynamics in a postindustrial society. Whereas fear dictators aim to intimidate their citizens and often publicly parade their violence in suppressing dissent; spin dictators aim to encourage affection and respect. They are more likely to conceal or camouflage any violence. Rather than instilling fear, they place a higher priority on projecting their competence, and ability to advance the country. Whereas fear dictators sought total and obvious censorship spin dictators aim for “sensible censorship,” with a much lighter, less publicly visible touch and more sophisticated means of surveillance. Many have moved from censoring the media to coopting them, seeking celebrity endorsements, or staging international sporting events. Book Review","PeriodicalId":47605,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Press-Politics","volume":"28 1","pages":"323 - 325"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Press-Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612221132643","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1976, I was living in Singapore doing a research project on Western foreign correspondents in Southeast Asia. One of my interviewees was James Fu, who deftly combined the roles of Lee Kwan Yew’s press secretary with being news director at the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation. He spent mornings in the Prime Minister’s office and afternoons at the TV studio. He was an early embodiment of the theme of this book Spin Dictators. Guriev and Treisman argue that over the last generation the earlier “fear dictators” who intimidated their citizens through violence and sought total control have been increasingly supplanted by dictators using more sophisticated control measures. Their examples include Singapore’s pioneering Lee, Russia’s Putin, Peru’s Fujimori, Venezuela’s Chavez, Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamed and his successors, Hungary’s Orban, and Turkey’s Erdogan. The rich array of examples under these and other rulers are complemented by quantitative data on different regime types, including for example numbers of political prisoners and political killings. The move from fear to spin dictators is very much a result of—and in turn a driver of —what they call “the modernisation cocktail.” It reflects the changing political dynamics in a postindustrial society. Whereas fear dictators aim to intimidate their citizens and often publicly parade their violence in suppressing dissent; spin dictators aim to encourage affection and respect. They are more likely to conceal or camouflage any violence. Rather than instilling fear, they place a higher priority on projecting their competence, and ability to advance the country. Whereas fear dictators sought total and obvious censorship spin dictators aim for “sensible censorship,” with a much lighter, less publicly visible touch and more sophisticated means of surveillance. Many have moved from censoring the media to coopting them, seeking celebrity endorsements, or staging international sporting events. Book Review
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
书评:《旋转的独裁者:21世纪不断变化的暴政面貌》,作者:谢尔盖·古里耶夫和丹尼尔·特雷斯曼
1976年,我住在新加坡,做一个关于西方驻东南亚外国记者的研究项目。我的一位受访者是傅,他巧妙地将李的新闻秘书和新加坡广播公司的新闻总监的角色结合在一起。他上午在首相办公室度过,下午在电视演播室度过。他是这本书《旋转独裁者》主题的早期化身。Guriev和Treisman认为,在上一代人中,通过暴力恐吓公民并寻求全面控制的早期“恐惧独裁者”越来越多地被使用更复杂控制措施的独裁者所取代。他们的例子包括新加坡的先驱李、俄罗斯的普京、秘鲁的藤森、委内瑞拉的查韦斯、马来西亚的马哈蒂尔·穆罕默德及其继任者、匈牙利的欧尔班和土耳其的埃尔多安。这些统治者和其他统治者统治下的丰富例子得到了不同政权类型的定量数据的补充,例如政治犯和政治谋杀的数量。从恐惧到旋转独裁者的转变在很大程度上是他们所说的“现代化鸡尾酒”的结果,反过来也是其驱动力。它反映了后工业社会不断变化的政治动态。而恐惧独裁者的目的是恐吓他们的公民,并经常公开展示他们的暴力镇压异见人士;旋转独裁者的目的是鼓励感情和尊重。他们更有可能掩盖或掩饰任何暴力行为。他们没有灌输恐惧,而是更优先考虑展现自己的能力和推进国家的能力。恐惧独裁者寻求全面而明显的审查,而独裁者则以“合理的审查”为目标,采取更轻松、更不公开的手段和更复杂的监视手段。许多人已经从审查媒体转变为限制媒体、寻求名人代言或举办国际体育赛事。书评
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Press/Politics is an interdisciplinary journal for the analysis and discussion of the role of the press and politics in a globalized world. The Journal is interested in theoretical and empirical research on the linkages between the news media and political processes and actors. Special attention is given to the following subjects: the press and political institutions (e.g. the state, government, political parties, social movements, unions, interest groups, business), the politics of media coverage of social and cultural issues (e.g. race, language, health, environment, gender, nationhood, migration, labor), the dynamics and effects of political communication.
期刊最新文献
Rejoinder to the Review of Inside the Local Campaign: Constituency Elections in Canada Interpreters as Spin Doctors: The Interactional Role of Interpreters in China’s Political Press Conferences Do News Frames Really Have Some Influence in the Real World? A Computational Analysis of Cumulative Framing Effects on Emotions and Opinions About Immigration Political Viewpoint Diversity in the News: Market and Ownership Conditions for a Pluralistic Media System “Everything is Biased”: Populist Supporters’ Folk Theories of Journalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1