mk.ru
Anthology Showcases Heroism of Russian Soldiers in Ukraine
Five volumes of personal accounts from families of Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine, totaling 850 stories, have been published, showcasing their heroism and contributions; the project began in 2021 and continues beyond the SMO.
- What are the long-term implications of this project for national memory and identity in Russia?
- The continued publication of these anthologies, even after the SMO concludes, underscores the enduring legacy of those involved. The use of these accounts in schools and their distribution to soldiers on the frontlines emphasizes the project's role in shaping national identity and supporting troop morale.
- How does the geographic diversity of contributors to the anthology reflect the broader scope of the SMO?
- This project, initially focused on World War II heroes, expanded to encompass the SMO, collecting over 70,000 stories since 2021. The current anthology features contributions from diverse regions of Russia, Belarus, and Pridnestrovie, highlighting a broad national participation.
- What is the significance of publishing these five volumes of stories from families of Russian military personnel participating in the SMO?
- The fifth anthology of stories about the Russian military participants in the special military operation (SMO) in Ukraine contains 150 accounts, bringing the total to 850 across five volumes published over three years. These stories, from family members of soldiers, detail the heroism of those fighting, recovering, or supporting the war effort.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative consistently frames the war as a heroic struggle against fascism, emphasizing Russian bravery and sacrifice. Headlines and introductions highlight positive stories, creating a predominantly celebratory tone. The repeated use of terms like "heroic," "victory," and "patriotic" reinforces this positive framing, potentially downplaying critical questions or potential negative consequences.
Language Bias
The article employs heavily charged language, such as "heroic," "patriotic," "zverstki" (brutally), "podlo" (treacherously), and "fascism." These terms shape reader perception by evoking strong emotional responses and promoting a specific interpretation of events. More neutral terms such as "brave," "dedicated," and "conflict" would improve objectivity. The repeated emphasis on 'victory' creates a sense of inevitability.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on positive portrayals of Russian soldiers and the war effort, potentially omitting negative aspects or dissenting voices. The article does not mention civilian casualties or the impact of the conflict on Ukraine. While acknowledging space constraints is valid, the lack of diverse perspectives could mislead readers.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a stark dichotomy between 'Russia fighting fascism' and the enemy, significantly oversimplifying the geopolitical conflict. It avoids nuanced discussion of motivations, interests, or the complexities of the situation on the ground. This binary framing could affect reader perception by limiting understanding of the conflict's multifaceted nature.
Gender Bias
The article does not exhibit overt gender bias in its representation of soldiers. However, the focus on the heroism and sacrifice of male soldiers is more pronounced than any focus on women's contributions. More balanced representation, acknowledging roles of women in the military and civilian support, would improve the article.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses a military conflict, which directly contradicts the goal of promoting peaceful and inclusive societies. The conflict causes suffering, displacement, and loss of life, undermining justice and strong institutions. The focus on heroism and military actions overshadows efforts toward peaceful resolution and international cooperation.