Given that virtually all Russian TV channels are state-owned or controlled, their content is shaped by Kremlin directives. According to the World Press Freedom Index 2024, published by Reporters Without Borders, the media is required to follow orders from the president’s office on subjects deemed off-limits and must practice strict self-censorship.[1] As a result, these channels serve as effective tools for spreading propaganda and disinformation, which accounts for the NEPLP’s extensive ban on Russian TV channels.
Entertainment as a Tool for Propaganda: Insights from Experts
Peter Pomerantsev, a Soviet-born British journalist, author, and TV producer with firsthand experience in Russian television, offers an insider’s perspective on the industry in his 2014 book “Nothing Is True and Everything Is Possible”. He notes:
“The first thing the President [Vladimir Putin] had done when he came to power in 2000 was to seize control of television. It was television through which the Kremlin decided which politicians it would ‘allow’ as its puppet-opposition, what the country’s history and fears and consciousness should be. And the new Kremlin won’t make the same mistake the old Soviet Union did: it will never let TV become dull. The task is to synthesize Soviet control with Western entertainment.”
Humorous entertainment shows can act as powerful instruments for strategic messaging. This finding is highlighted in a 2017 study by the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (NATO StratCom) in Riga, titled “StratCom Laughs: In Search of an Analytical Framework.” The research involved analysing case studies on how humour in Russian TV shows is employed for strategic communication.[2]
Sigita Struberga, one of the co-authors of the research and Secretary General of the Latvian Transatlantic Organisation (LATO), recalls:
“Generally speaking, at the time, Latvian society was very fond of Russia-produced entertainment programmes. However, it was poorly acknowledged that such content could impact public opinion negatively; people didn’t have such an in-depth understanding. Opinion polls indicated that not only Russian speakers but also Latvian speakers watched entertainment shows on Russian television and perceived them to be relatively harmless.”
The Subtle Influence of Comedy: Public Perception and Historical Context
Sigita Struberga notes that public opinion polls suggest people generally approach entertainment programs, including comedy shows, with less critical scrutiny compared to news content. Because comedy is often perceived as merely for amusement and outside the realm of political influence, it can subtly function as a powerful tool for shaping public opinion.
It could be argued that in the post-Soviet space, the belief that humorous content is free from political influence has been shaped by the historical use of 'anecdotes' [jokes]. Anecdote-telling was a highly popular pastime and served as a way to criticize the regime and expose the system’s paradoxes, allowing people to laugh off the absurdity and highlight the disconnect between the party’s rhetoric and reality. As one popular anecdote goes:
“An elderly man visits a clinic and asks to make an appointment with a doctor who can treat his eyes, ears, and nose. The receptionist explains, “The doctor for ears and nose is different from the one for eyes.”
“But my problem involves both my eyes and ears!” the elderly man insists.
“And what seems to be the issue?” he’s asked.
“I hear one thing,” the elderly man replies, “but I see something completely different...”
In fact, anecdote-telling was deemed so subversive that people were persecuted for it. As official documentation from the Latvian State Historical Archive attests, as early as 1946, a Latvian national was sentenced to prison for circulating counter-revolutionary and anti-Soviet articles, as well as for telling anecdotes that vulgarised Communist leaders and the leadership of the party and government.[3]
Drawing from this historical context, the broadcast of comedy shows on television can create the illusion that society is free to express its opinions and that humor operates independently of political constraints. However, as Sigita Struberga highlights, in authoritarian regimes like present-day Russia, humor functions differently compared to democracies. While democratic countries permit the freedom to critique and laugh at anything, this is not the case in Russia – satire targeting the president remains strictly off-limits. Even though jokes about Vladimir Putin may appear in Russian programs, they lack genuine criticism of his leadership.
This view is also shared by Rytis Bulota, a lecturer at Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas, Lithuania. He illustrates the case with a Soviet poem about an absent-minded person:
“Instead of tea early in the morning
He drank three glasses of vodka.
Look, what an absent-minded person
From Swimming Pool Street!”
As Bulota illustrates, imagine a joke about Putin mistaking vodka for his morning tea and drinking it instead. The joke lies in his distraction, but the underlying message could be that he’s preoccupied with the well-being of the Russian people. People might say, “See, we can joke about Putin!” – but such a joke would actually cast Russia’s political leaders, particularly Putin, in a favourable light. “The jokes aren’t truly critical or hard-hitting”, emphasises Bulota. Therefore, although the humorous poem about absent-minded person is old, it depicts how comedy shows function in present-day Russia.
This ties into Sigita Struberga’s observation of a recent trend in Russia, where humor is increasingly used to perpetuate the illusion of freedom. Struberga notes that in reality, “Everything produced in the Russian entertainment sector, regardless of how insignificant it seems, is monitored by the Kremlin if it has any political undertones. True freedom of expression no longer exists.”
In reality, the true disinformation is the pretence of freedom; while it may appear that people can joke about anything, this supposed freedom is merely an illusion.
The Dual Role of Comedy in the Russia-Ukraine Conflict and Beyond
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, comedy shows have been leveraged to normalize the war. Whereas Soviet slogans once championed peace, contemporary comedians now use humor to promote acceptance of the war. This tactic serves multiple purposes. By turning serious events into jokes, it downplays the gravity of the situation and diverts public attention from critical issues, leading the audience to underestimate or ignore them. Additionally, by repeatedly presenting contradictory ideas in a humorous context, these ideas can gradually become socially acceptable and ingrained in the public consciousness, making it less likely for people to react strongly to controversial messages or to mobilize in protest.
However, humor can serve not only as a tool for propaganda but also as a means of resistance. The Ukrainian people illustrate this by using humor to make dire situations more bearable and to sustain hope for a positive outcome.
Reflecting on this, Latvian comedian and actor Jānis Skutelis comments, “Humor fosters a sense of belonging and unity.” He recalls that during Latvia’s Soviet-era struggles, making jokes about Brezhnev and other leaders wasn’t just for entertainment; it was a strategic tool for enduring difficult times, maintaining resilience, and boosting morale. Drawing a parallel with Ukraine, Skutelis suggests that joking about Putin can make the situation more manageable.
Humor therefore extends beyond mere entertainment; it functions as a social and political tool that influences public perception and emotional responses. It unites people, strengthens community bonds, offers emotional support, and sustains morale during difficult times. Humor can be likened to a double-edged sword: while it may sometimes trivialize serious issues, it also has the power to shed light on a decayed system and expose injustices, much like the jester who dares to speak truth to the king.
