EESTI TELEVISIOONI RASKUSTEST SOOME TV “KATMISEL”
THE FIGHTING OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY AGAINST “BOURGEOIS TELEVISION”

Summary/Abstract: In the 1950s the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had a monopoly on information, which was subverted by several radio stations on the other side of the Iron Curtain. Since the second half of the 1960s the government of the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic faced even a more serious problem: the signals of Finnish “bourgeois television” were broadcasted into Soviet Estonia. The Communist Party tried to struggle against bourgeois “ideological diversion” by implementing technical means, for example hindering shops from selling audio blocks. These were essential devices that enabled watching Finnish television. In addition, mass media was used to “reveal” conspiracies of the West’s hostile propaganda machine. The Estonian Communist Party (EKP) used public opinion polls to monitor enemy’s “propaganda action” and its consequences. The polls showed that Finnish television programmes were richer in content and catchier compared to the Estonian National Television Channel (ETV). Also, the information shown on Finnish television was immediate and objective; therefore, it was more interesting and reliable than the information provided by ETV. However, it seemed that the Estonian Communist Party found a solution how to avoid increasing the number of the people watching Finnish television channels as well as winning back the Estonian audience from the “capitalist television” – by “covering” bourgeois television. It was decided that ETV would broadcast more exciting, informative, and topical programmes. Despite the great effort’s, Estonians continued watching Finnish television until the collapse of the Soviet Union. In the present article archival materials were studied to find out the reasons why it was difficult, even impossible for ETV to “cover” Finnish television during the period 1968–1988. The research results showed that “covering” Finnish television would have been much more effective if there had not been some serious problems, e.g. ignoring the audience, insufficient working conditions of the ill-equipped ETV, workforce problems, lack of information among journalists, and ideological–political constraints.

• Details
• Contents