At least two approaches are possible to the object of study. Coming from political science, we will call the object of politics – the general area of analysis for a given spider. Political science invariably remains within its competence, regardless of what fragment of reality falls into the sphere of its interests, be it the activity of the state, ethnic conflicts, or, say, the press. Moving from the theory of journalism, we, naturally, will consider journalism as an object, reflect on the level of its laws, principles of functioning and development, relationships with other social institutions, etc. At the same time, the study of political relations in which the press enters will turn out to be a special case of the application of a universal theoretical and journalistic methodology.
Obviously, the competition between the two areas of knowledge can lead rather to the absorption of one science by the other (if not to their unconditional separation) than to the birth of a related, original discipline.
This object is placed in the zone of intersection (overlapping) of sociology and journalism, psychology and journalism, communication theory and journalism, jurisprudence and the media, etc. Thus, each area of knowledge retains its autonomy as an integral system of ideas, categories and concepts and at the same time participates in the formation of a new discipline: sociology of journalism (SJ), communication theory of journalism (KTZ), political science of journalism (PJ), etc.
With this approach, the object of political science of journalism will include, on the one hand, political ideas and activities, on the other hand, the ideology and practice of journalism, primarily in the form of political journalism. These are not two separate objects, but elements of a two-part complex. With a general description of the field of knowledge, there is no need to dive into the questions of how exactly the content of political science and the theory of journalism is understood, what conceptual disputes are going on within each of them: the political science of journalism accepts “finished products”, the results of the life of its “parents”. It is clear, however, that in specific research situations one has to take into account the living variety of theoretical-political and theoretical-journalistic views, not rushing to thoughtlessly take this or that statement on faith. This applies, for example, to the fundamental question of the prospects for the political development of Russia and, in particular, the borrowing of Western models of democracy. Leading Russian political theorists note that “in the domestic political science literature, various, sometimes diametrically opposite judgments have been expressed about this hypothesis”. Thus, in its practice, the political science of journalism, as it were, inherits the debatable tension of the “mother” areas.
…
