Quote Originally Posted by Antonio1986 View Post
Nope.
The level of democracy in one country is not calculated by the number of parties that take or leave the power.
Japan which is a real democracy for many years (I think half century) had only one ruling party with overwhelming majority.
At the moment Russia cannot become a real democracy because the "social capital" which is indispensable for the formation of a real democracy simply does not exist.
Media will remain under the control of Putin.
Nevertheless let's hope that things will change, but in order the things to change we should have an improvement of the economic conditions in Russia.
I have been in Japan quite a lot because my step-mother comes from there.

As a democracy, it is a joke! The Japanese never particularly wanted democracy.The reason they have it, is because the US defeated them in the second world war, and decided that it should be a democracy.

My step-mums elderly relatives for example, didn't seem to even understand the concept. I think they believed that it was some kind of patriotic duty to turn up and cast their vote for the LDP every year, so they did it. In reality, their actual opinions on things were not even in line with the LDP.

There is an "emperor" mentality about leadership in East Asia and I think Russia has a touch of that too. And there is nothing wrong with that - it's a matter of culture and circumstances. In many ways it's better than just worshipping money and rich people, like the US and it's supporters do.

Quote Originally Posted by iCake View Post
Another example would be a very interesting trait a lot of Russian shows exhibit when talking about Ukraine. They often invite a Ukrainian guest, needless to say that guest holds a pro-Ukrainian view and that'd be fine if the guest was there to provide a different perspective on the situation in Ukraine, so that the viewers could draw their own conclusions. Instead, everyone there would just treat the Ukranian as if he is utterly insane, they'd never give them an opportunity to speak out or defend. Others would just constantly interrupt, yell or just shut them up. Oh, boy, such a cheap trick to sway people's minds.
Yeah, I noticed that when I was watching Rossiya 24.
In comparison with two countries I know well:

I think that British media is a little bit better than Russian media. All British mainstream media have more or less the same view albeit with variation about their views on the EU and immigration. There can be a debate as long as everybody stays within "acceptable" parameters. But you couldn't for example see somebody who was pro-Assad and speak freely.

On the other hand, a British paper was able to publish the Snowden material. In comparison, if somebody defected from Russia with compromising material, I don't think a Russian mainstream paper could publish it (?) So in that respect, British media is more free.

On the other hand, Russian media is better than Swedish media which is extremely narrow. There is only one acceptable view on everything in Sweden, and all mainstream media with no exception take this view. People who think differently can't have a say at all. As a result, people blog and use forums online.

In Russian media on the other side, you see quite lively debates on a wide spectrum of things, with lots of very different viewpoints represented, including very controversial ones.
In many ways, Russian media reminds me of American media - just with different opinions, but the format and presentation is quite similar - a bit more "serious" but more flashy and in-your-face than European news.