15 Review

This genre was not invented by journalists, the review was used long before the appearance of the periodical press. The forms and ways of displaying reality that are inherent in this method are possible, for example, Plutarch (I-II cc.), Luis Sebastien Mercier (XVIII c.). He is considered the founder of a journalistic review, since the first few “Glavs” from his twelve-volume edition he originally published in the newspaper.

Modern review does not apply to the daily and intensively used journalistic genres. However, it is important for analytical journalism. Reviews are published in many newspapers and magazines. The main programs of radio and television in Russia have corresponding headings: “Results”, “Panorama” (NTV), “Observer” (TV-6), “Football Review” (ORT), “Mirror”, (RTR), “Parallels” ( TVC), etc.

The defining feature of the review genre is the unity of visual coverage of social events and the thoughts of the observer, which is deeply penetrating the essence of the process and situation. To observe is to observe and think about what is seen. The review clearly shows the position of the journalist. The browser should:

- to excite the interest of the audience, telling it about events, processes occurring in public life;

- to defend advanced points of view and contribute to the improvement of the “personal strategy” of citizens;

- to discover their essence in phenomena, to show the contradictions of reality;

- through the elucidation of the essential connections, the definition of the line of development of the phenomena, the forecast to reflect on the course of social development;

- contribute to the practical solution of problems of society.

Defining these functions of the genre helps to outline the subject matter. It consists of general issues of politics, economics, characteristic social phenomena and their development trends, issues of lifestyle and interpersonal relations, and much more. The subject of a review may be ideas drawn from philosophy, history, literature. The subject of the review is characterized by the space-time or thematic connection of the observed phenomena. It is not by chance that reviews have a strict frequency of publication (daily, weekly, monthly). They seem to sum up a certain period of life, activity in a particular sphere of social being. It is this particular feature of the links of the subject that allows us to mainly distinguish the review from the article (for the subject, the last characteristic feature is the causal relationship of the displayed phenomena).

In contrast to the commentary, the subject of which is primarily a variety of new events and phenomena, for review are important those processes, events that are symptomatic for modern social relations, interrelations, regardless of how important they are (events, processes) by themselves; they serve as examples demonstrating, illustrating specific author's ideas that are significant to society [4].

The main method of review is to use the in-depth consideration of a certain set of facts, united by time, space, to acquaint the audience with the processes occurring in society, the situations that have arisen, the problems that have arisen. Overlooking the phenomenon in its external and essential characteristics, the author leads the audience to the necessary idea.

In contrast to the article, where logical arguments are actively used, the survey uses primarily expressive examples, details that give the text a clear, concrete character. This is primarily because the browser wants to focus its attention on general problems. To attract the attention of the audience, he operates with very specific facts, uses the effect of visibility, dwells on the details in order to quickly move away from them, aiming for a generalization. Therefore, the browser should have both the talent of microcopying life, and the talent of its wide vision, as if examining the world through the lenses as reducing, and increasing its objects.

Since reviews are published at regular intervals, this also affects the choice of topics, character, and depth of analysis. The less often the reviews are published, the more opportunities the author has to find the facts that are most interesting to the audience in the stream of events, analyze them and summarize them. At the same time, long periods of time between the exits of surveys lead to the fact that the audience already knows quite a lot about the events that become the subject of a review from operational publications (reports, reports, correspondence, etc.). This implies that the browser, having enough time to think, analyze, can detect interrelationships in these events that are still unknown to the audience, which will draw her attention to the published review.

Browser is important to answer first the following questions:

1) What gave rise to this phenomenon (situation) 2) What is the significance of the events reviewed. How do they affect different aspects of public life, the lives of individual citizens or groups? 3) How will the observed phenomena or situation develop and what should be done in this connection? These questions are the most difficult for the browser. Trying to answer them, to give forecasts, observers often rely not only on someone else's opinion, but also on knowledge of the tendencies and patterns that give rise to events and control them.