1. See, e.g., Kreindler, Isabelle T. (ed.), Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Soviet National Languages. Their Past, Present and Future (Berlin, New York, Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter, 1985) (“Contributions to the Sociology of Language,” editor Joshua A. Fishman, vol. 40); Isabelle Kreindler (ed.), “The Changing Status of Russian in the Soviet Union,” International Journal of the Sociology of Knowledge, 33 (1982); and Roman Solchanyk, “Russian Language and Soviet Politics,” Soviet Studies, 34 (1) (1982), pp. 23–42.Google Scholar

2. Zdorenko, M., “Novyny v kozhdyi dim,” Molod' Ukrainy, 29 Oct. 1975, p.3. What preserving the status quo of 1975 meant for some parts of the Ukraine can be seen from the following figures given by Zdorenko: subscriptions in theGoogle Scholar

Donetsk oblast had already exceeded 200,000 copies for Pravda and reached 177,000 for Izvestia and 76,000 for Trud, whereas all the newspapers of the Ukrainian Republic ordered in Donetsk Oblast amounted to 73,000 copies. Also, in the western regions of Ukraine, the Russian-language press was distributed more widely than the Ukrainian-language press. In 1970, that is before the policy of restrictions had come into effect, in Lviv, 1,665,000 copies of Moscow (exclusively Russian-language) papers were printed daily from printing plates delivered by plane or transmitted by cable, as compared to 392,000 copies of local papers. Pravda printed 160,000 copies and Komsomol'skayapravda 140,000 copies. See Yablokov, M.N., Gazeta i rasstoyanie (Moscow, 1971), pp. 19, 122, quoted in Roman Szporluk, “West Ukraine and West Belorussia: Historical tradition, social communication, and linguistic assimilation,” Soviet Studies, vol. XXXI (1) (1979), p. 97.Google Scholar

3. For a history of Soiuzpechat' and its predecessors, see Frolov, B., “Tsentral'noe podpisnoe… K 30-letiiu so dnia obmzovaniia,” Rasprostranenie pechati 7, (1985), pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

4. “Vsesoyuznoe soveshchanie,” Rasprostranenie pechati. 9 (1976).Google Scholar

5. “Vsesoyuznoe sovbeshchanie,” p. 3.Google Scholar

6. Mangel'din, D., “Podpiska-77: izvlech' uroki iz proshlogodnei podpisnoi kampanii,” Rasprostranenie pechati 9 (1976). p. 2.Google Scholar

7. Solyanik, N., “Rabotat' kachestvennee, effektivee,” Rasprostranenie Pechati 5 (1976), pp. 10–11. Conforming to the new line, O.K. Mel'nyk, head of the Ukraine's Soyuzpechat; admitted in a newspaper interview that for the coming year (1977), the circulation of Ukrainian republic newspapers and magazines would remain on the level of 1976. See “Nash druh — drukovane slovo,” Molod' Ukrainy, 26 September 1976, p. 3.Google Scholar

8. “Instruktivnoe soveshchanie o provedenii podpiski na 1978,” Rasprostranenie pechati, 10 (1977), p. 23.Google Scholar

9. “Vazhnaya politicheskaya kampaniya,” Rasprostranenie pechati 9 (1978), p. 2.Google Scholar

10. Shuvaeva, M., “Doverie opravdaem!,” Rasprostranenie pechati 10 (1978), pp. 6–7.Google Scholar

11. “Vazhnaya politicheskaya kampaniya,” p. 2.Google Scholar

11. A See “ Recent Trends in Soviet Policy Towards Printed Media ”, Radio Liberty Research, Supplement 2/84, 7 November 1984.Google Scholar

12. Barashenkov, L.D., “K novym dostizheniam v trade,” Rasprostranenie pechati 5 (1919), p. 18.Google Scholar

13. Barashenkov, L.D., “Podpiska-80,” Rasprostranenie pechati 9 (1979), p. 2.Google Scholar

14. Kosivtsova, N., “Na pervom plane — voprosy uluchsheniya kachestva podpiski,” Rasprostranenie pechati 3 (1980), p. 22–23.Google Scholar

15. Barashenkov, L., “Uverennoi postupyu,” Rasprostranenie pechati 1 (1979), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

16. Oleinik, N., “S zadachei spravilis',” Rasprostranenie pechati, 11 (1978), pp. 12–14.Google Scholar

17. Korotchenko, L., “Iz opyta podpiski na 1981 g. v RSFST,” Rasprostranenie pechati 7 (1981), p. 24.Google Scholar

18. Ibid., 25. In fact, it should not exceed the level of the preceding year anywhere, not only outside the region of publication: here Korotchenko appears to have interpreted the rules too narrowly, without any basis in the official Moscow pronouncements for doing so.Google Scholar

19. Barashenkov, L., “Vstupaya v 1980 god,” Rasprostranenie pechati 12 (1979), p. 2. It is impossible to list here all the articles that tell of triumphs in subscriptions for “central” periodicals. Some examples are Rasprostranenie pechati 5 (1979), 7 (1979), 3 (1980), 1 (1982).Google Scholar

20. Kosivtsova, N., “Podpiska proshla organizovanno,” Rasprostranenie pechati 3 (1979), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

21. Ivanova, N., “Samyi detskii zhurnal,” Rasprostranenie pechati 6 (1981), p. 38.Google Scholar

22. See Rasprostranenie pechati, 9 (1978), 10 (1978), 3 (1979), 5 (1979), and 9 (1979).Google Scholar

23. Magel'din, D., “Vazhneishaya politicheskaya zadacha,” Rasprostranenie pechati 9 (1982), pp. 1–3. This is a bit puzzling because, according to an official source, all republican periodicals could be subscribed to from any address to be delivered to any other address in the USSR, as long as they were included in the central catalog (see Spravochnik po uslugam svyazi, 3rd revised edition, Moscow, Svyaz', 1977, p. 96). Magel'din's statement therefore means one of two things: either the rules of 1977 were tacitly changed and then restored in 1982-83, or the latter rule applies also to those republican periodicals that were not included in the “central catalog.” On republican periodicals, the Spravochnik was quite clear: they could not be sent outside the area in which they were published. It cited the example of Vechernaya Moskva, which could be subscribed to only by “residents of the capital” (Ibid.). It should be stressed, however, that beginning in the mid-1950s major periodicals of the Union republics and of the ASSRs have been available by subscription throughout the USSR. In 1971, for instance, 111,000 copies of Ukrainian newspapers and some 700,000 copies of Ukrainian journals were being received by subscribers outside Ukraine but in the USSR. (See Rasprostranenie pechati 12 (1972), p. 10.)Google Scholar

24. In Rasprostranenie pechati 2 (1980), p. 11, the complaint was voiced that the last such general catalog of union — and autonomous — republican periodicals had been issued in 1965. Barashenkov replied (Rasprostranenie pechati, No. 6, 1980, p. 19) that no new catalog was planned for the foreseeable future. (This type of catalog should not be confused with the single all-Union catalog that contains basic data about periodicals such as name, frequency, price, etc.)Google Scholar

25. Krolik, I., “Internationalism v deistvii,” Rasprostranenie pechati 12 (1982), p. 15. On the question of supplying ethnic newspapers to servicemen and students belonging to Muslim nationalities, see RL 335/82, “Non-Russian Periodical Press to Be Available on Subscription throughout the Soviet Union,” 19 August 1982.Google Scholar

26. Barashenkov, L., “Podpiska-1985,” Rasprostranenie pechati, 9, 1984, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

27. Barashenkov, L., “Za dal'neishee sovershenstvovanie raboty Soyuzpechati,” Rasprostranenie pechati 6 (1984), p. 2. It is difficult to understand what A. Sal'nikov and V. Karpov have in mind when they say that “as is well-known, at the present time subscription for newspapers and a considerable part of magazines is accepted without restrictions,” unless they tacitly assume that only Russian newspapers qualify as newspapers. See their article, “Obozrimye perspektivy Soyuzpechati,” Rasprostranenie pechati 8 (1984), p. 22.Google Scholar

28. “Podpiska-86,” Rasprostranenie pechati 9 (1985), p. 2.Google Scholar

29. Malakhova, L., “Dobivat'sia bol'shego,” Rasprostranenie pechati 7 (1985), p. 13.Google Scholar

30. Fedotov, V., “Tirazhi i podpischiki,” Pravda, 11 February 1986, p. 2.Google Scholar

31. See Schmemann, Serge, “In Gorbachev's Soviet, Lively Debate,” The New York Times (National edition), 22 February 1986, for a discussion on how the Soviet press has become more lively and informative in recent times. Fedotov (note 30) says that the trade-union paper Trud appears in a daily pressrun of 18.53 million copies (which makes it by far the most popular newspaper not only in the USSR but presumably in the world). (In 1980, Trud printed 12.25 million copies.)Google Scholar

32. The present writer has raised such issues in the earlier version of this study.Google Scholar

33. According to The Ukrainian Herald Vol. 7-8 Ethnocide of Ukrainians in the USSR. Spring 1974, Baltimore: Smoloskyp Publishers, 1976) p. 134, at that time the Politburo of the Ukrainian CP decided to reduce gradually the number of scholarly journals published in Ukrainian.Google Scholar

34. Letopis periodicheskikh i prodolzhaiushchikhsia izdanii 1976-1980. Chast' I. Zhurnaly (Moscow: 1985).Google Scholar

35. Letopis … N ovye, pereimenovannye i prekrashchennye izdaniem zhurnaly i gazety, 1 aprelia 1982-31 marta 1983 (Moscow, 1983). (The 1985 figures as published in the issues of the paper.)Google Scholar

36. See Letopis … 1976-1980, and Letopis … 1971-1975.Google Scholar

37. Sytnyk, O., “Hazeta kyian i dlia kyian,” Zhurnalist Ukrainy 1 (1986), p. 36.Google Scholar

38. “Znaiomtesia: zhurnal ’Kyiv‘,” Literaturna Ukraina, 21 October 1982, and “U spiltsi pys'mennykiv Ukrainy,” Literaturna Ukraina 28 October 1982. Also, in Belorussia, a concession was made to the cultural intelligentsia in 1983, when a journal devoted to the arts was founded under the name of Mastatstva Belarusi (see Litaratura i mastatstva,, 21 January 1983, p. 4).Google Scholar