Historia walki na dwa fronty. Władza – prasa – dziennikarze 1953–1955/1956

Paweł Sasanka
{"title":"Historia walki na dwa fronty. Władza – prasa – dziennikarze 1953–1955/1956","authors":"Paweł Sasanka","doi":"10.12775/POLSKA.2018.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Oparte o obszerne kwerendy archiwalne, prasowe i literature przedmiotu studium polityki prasowej partii komunistycznej i sytuacji w środowisku dziennikarskim w latach 1953– 1955/1956, uwzgledniające odmienną perspektywe centrum i peryferii, na tle przemian politycznych i kulturalnych. W pierwszej fazie destalinizacji polityka prasowa PZPR byla rezultatem bardziej pragmatycznego kursu wyznaczonego przez ZSRR w krajach bloku po 1953 r. Gdy „odwilz” w Polsce nabrala wlasnej dynamiki, rozdźwiek w elicie PZPR i niespojna polityka sprzyjala poszerzaniu marginesu swobody prasy, zwlaszcza w stolicy. U progu 1956 r. cześc środowiska dziennikarzy, glownie mlodych, buntowala sie przeciwko modelowi prasy dyspozycyjnej, ograniczonej do roli narzedzia partyjnej propagandy. History of a two-front fight. The authorities – the press – journalists 1953–55/56 The main purpose of the article is to analyse the press policy conducted by the communist party and the relationship between the authorities and journalists in 1953– 55/56 against the background of political and cultural changes in Poland. The analysis is based on the broad research in archives and press releases as well as literature on the subject; the subject is presented both from the national and local perspective. In the first phase of changes after Stalin’s death the press policy of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PUWP) was a result of more pragmatic line set by the Soviet Union in the communist block after 1953. When, at the end of 1954, the Thaw in Poland found its own dynamic, a growing discrepancy in the Party’s elite and incoherent policy contributed to the expanding margin of freedom of journalists, especially in the capital city of Warsaw. The press policy of the PUWP was the fruit of difference of opinion between the Party’s leaders, the Political Bureau, and the Secretariat of the Central Committee. The Political Bureau was slamming the brakes. For the first time in April 1955, when in a letter to the central committees of voivodeships and districts they in fact reinterpreted the decisions of the post-Thaw Third Plenum of the Central Committee. For the second time, when at the end of 1955 they criticised the Trybuna Ludu (People’s Tribune) daily and Nowe Drogi (New Ways) monthly, and undertook a failed attempt to launch an ideological offensive. Jerzy Morawski, who was put in charge on behalf of the Central Committee Secretariat, represented this part of the Party’s elite who supported cautious changes and encouraged the press to criticize economic and social pathologies, regarding it as a necessary safety valve. An analysis of Morawski’s statements reveals that, in general, he supported the press in a role of critical observer. In January 1956 the Central Committee secretary explicitly distances himself from recent decisions of the Political Bureau on the Trybuna Ludu and presented himself as the advocate of liberalisation. Ambiguous signals from the centre of power fomented unrest and frustration of the journalist circles in Warsaw, who at the turn of 1956 in their large part rebelled against the model of press seen as a tool of party propaganda. On the other hand, however, signals sent from the centre exerted pressure and were resented by the central and local structures of the Stalinist party-state apparatus. Under these unstable circumstances the explosion was triggered by Moscow, where the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was beginning.","PeriodicalId":403899,"journal":{"name":"Polska 1944/45-1989. Studia i Materiały","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polska 1944/45-1989. Studia i Materiały","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/POLSKA.2018.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Oparte o obszerne kwerendy archiwalne, prasowe i literature przedmiotu studium polityki prasowej partii komunistycznej i sytuacji w środowisku dziennikarskim w latach 1953– 1955/1956, uwzgledniające odmienną perspektywe centrum i peryferii, na tle przemian politycznych i kulturalnych. W pierwszej fazie destalinizacji polityka prasowa PZPR byla rezultatem bardziej pragmatycznego kursu wyznaczonego przez ZSRR w krajach bloku po 1953 r. Gdy „odwilz” w Polsce nabrala wlasnej dynamiki, rozdźwiek w elicie PZPR i niespojna polityka sprzyjala poszerzaniu marginesu swobody prasy, zwlaszcza w stolicy. U progu 1956 r. cześc środowiska dziennikarzy, glownie mlodych, buntowala sie przeciwko modelowi prasy dyspozycyjnej, ograniczonej do roli narzedzia partyjnej propagandy. History of a two-front fight. The authorities – the press – journalists 1953–55/56 The main purpose of the article is to analyse the press policy conducted by the communist party and the relationship between the authorities and journalists in 1953– 55/56 against the background of political and cultural changes in Poland. The analysis is based on the broad research in archives and press releases as well as literature on the subject; the subject is presented both from the national and local perspective. In the first phase of changes after Stalin’s death the press policy of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PUWP) was a result of more pragmatic line set by the Soviet Union in the communist block after 1953. When, at the end of 1954, the Thaw in Poland found its own dynamic, a growing discrepancy in the Party’s elite and incoherent policy contributed to the expanding margin of freedom of journalists, especially in the capital city of Warsaw. The press policy of the PUWP was the fruit of difference of opinion between the Party’s leaders, the Political Bureau, and the Secretariat of the Central Committee. The Political Bureau was slamming the brakes. For the first time in April 1955, when in a letter to the central committees of voivodeships and districts they in fact reinterpreted the decisions of the post-Thaw Third Plenum of the Central Committee. For the second time, when at the end of 1955 they criticised the Trybuna Ludu (People’s Tribune) daily and Nowe Drogi (New Ways) monthly, and undertook a failed attempt to launch an ideological offensive. Jerzy Morawski, who was put in charge on behalf of the Central Committee Secretariat, represented this part of the Party’s elite who supported cautious changes and encouraged the press to criticize economic and social pathologies, regarding it as a necessary safety valve. An analysis of Morawski’s statements reveals that, in general, he supported the press in a role of critical observer. In January 1956 the Central Committee secretary explicitly distances himself from recent decisions of the Political Bureau on the Trybuna Ludu and presented himself as the advocate of liberalisation. Ambiguous signals from the centre of power fomented unrest and frustration of the journalist circles in Warsaw, who at the turn of 1956 in their large part rebelled against the model of press seen as a tool of party propaganda. On the other hand, however, signals sent from the centre exerted pressure and were resented by the central and local structures of the Stalinist party-state apparatus. Under these unstable circumstances the explosion was triggered by Moscow, where the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was beginning.
在1953-1955/1956年期间,我们对建筑、政治和文学方面的研究,以及对政治和文化方面的研究进行了深入探讨。PZPR 通过对 ZSRR 在 1953 年前的发展过程中取得的务实性成果进行分析,对其政治性进行了评估。在波兰,"odwilz "一词的含义是 "动力"、"PZPR "和 "政治"。在 1956 年初的一次会议上,在党内宣传活动中,他提出了 "两线作战的历史"。双线作战的历史。1953-55/56 年当局--新闻界--记者 文章的主要目的是以波兰的政治和文化变革为背景,分析 1953-55/56 年共产党实施的新闻政策以及当局与记者之间的关系。分析基于对档案、新闻稿以及相关文献的广泛研究,并从国家和地方两个角度进行了阐述。在斯大林逝世后变革的第一阶段,波兰统一工人党(PUWP)的新闻政策是 1953 年后苏联在共产主义阵营中制定的更加务实路线的结果。1954 年底,波兰的解冻运动找到了自己的动力,党内精英之间的分歧越来越大,政策不连贯,导致记者的自由空间不断扩大,尤其是在首都华沙。波兰统一工人党的新闻政策是党的领导人、政治局和中央委员会秘书处之间意见分歧的结果。政治局正在踩刹车。第一次是在 1955 年 4 月,他们在给各省和各区中央委员会的一封信中事实上重新解释了解冻后的中央委员会第三次全会的决定。第二次是在 1955 年底,他们批判了《人民论坛报》(Trybuna Ludu)日报和《新途径》(Nowe Drogi)月刊,并试图发起意识形态攻势,但以失败告终。代表中央委员会秘书处负责此事的耶日-莫拉夫斯基(Jerzy Morawski)是党内精英的代表,他支持谨慎的变革,鼓励新闻界批评经济和社会病态,将其视为必要的安全阀。对莫拉维斯基言论的分析表明,他总体上支持新闻界扮演批评观察员的角色。1956 年 1 月,中央委员会书记明确表示与政治局最近关于特里布纳-卢杜的决定保持距离,并以自由化的倡导者自居。来自权力中心的模棱两可的信号激起了华沙新闻界的不安和挫败感,在 1956 年之交,他们中的大部分人反抗了被视为党的宣传工具的新闻模式。但另一方面,从中央发出的信号也对斯大林党国机器的中央和地方机构造成了压力和反感。在这种不稳定的情况下,莫斯科引发了爆炸,苏共第二十次代表大会正在莫斯科召开。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信