Urban codes in the reflection of urban media reality

INTRODUCTION. The work is aimed at studying the mechanisms of constructing modern urban identity through the prism of the interaction of material and digital semiotic systems. The research is aimed at applying Lotman’s methodology to analyze the role of semiotic urban codes of Rostovon- Don in the formation of its media image in the digital age. A system tool (table) is proposed for analyzing the interaction of historical and modern urban codes in the media space.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. The semiotic approach of Yu.M. Lotman is applied, with the help of which the city is presented as a “dynamic semiosphere”, where conflict and hybridization of codes form new levels of representation of urban space. Using the materials of the urban media of Rostov-on-Don as an example, the article analyzes how historical and modern urban codes interact and transform in the media space today.
RESULTS OF THE STUDY. A systematic approach to identifying the specifics of historical and modern urban codes that shape the rethinking of urban identity is presented. The study showed that the semiosphere of the city is structured through the dialectical interaction of historical and modern codes, where the former (architectural monuments, traditional practices, linguistic markers) serve as stabilizing elements of the cultural landscape, and the latter (modern architectural complexes, digital communications, new economic models) act as dynamic factors of transformation.
CONCLUSION. The study demonstrated that media reality does not just reflect the city, but becomes an instrument of government, communities and individual users in the struggle for the meanings of the urban environment. The work contributes to the discussion on the transformation of urban semiotics in the context of digitalization and provides a methodological framework for analyzing similar processes in other post-Soviet cities.

1. Dubin R.Sh. Global and glocal urban codes as variety of cultural codes of modern major cities. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta kul’tury i iskusstv = Bulletin of the Moscow State University of Culture and Arts, 2022, no. 5 (109), pp. 15-22. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24412/1997-0803-2022-5109- 15-22, https://elibrary.ru/idakpf

2. Bourdieu P. The historical genesis of pure aesthetics. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie = New Literary Observer, 2003, no. 2, pp. 17-29. (In Russ.)

3. Robertson R. Glocalization: Time – Space and Homogeneity – Heterogeneity. Global Modernities, 1995, no. 2, pp. 25-44. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250563.n2

4. Lotman Yu.M. Semiosphere. Culture and Explosion. Inside the Thinking Worlds. Articles. Researches. Notes. St. Petersburg, 2000, 704 p. (In Russ.)

5. Eko U. Missing Structure. Introduction to Semiology. St. Petersburg, 1998, 432 p. (In Russ.)

6. Bart R. Empire of Signs. Moscow, Praksis Publ., 2004, 144 p. (In Russ.)

7. Fedoseeva N.I. Toponymic combinations in media texts and their impact on urban cultural identity. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii issledovatelei i prepodavatelei zhurnalistiki, reklamy i svyazei s obshchestvennost’yu «Kommunikatsiya v sovremennom mire»: v 2 t. = Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference of Researchers and Teachers of Journalism, Advertising and Public Relations “Communication in the Modern World”: in 2 vols. Voronezh, VGU Publ., 2025, vol. 1, pp. 44-46. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/cytnol

8. Mukha A.V., Fedoseeva N.I. the cultural code of Rostov-on-Don in the minds of the media audience. Neofilologiya = Neophilology, 2024, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 681-689. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20310/2587-6953-2024-10-3-681-689, https://elibrary.ru/nkewsa

9. Leontovich O.A. The all-seeing eye ofthe city from the perspective of urban communication studies. Science Journal of Volgograd State University. Linguistics, 2018, no. 4, pp. 206-213. https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2018.4.20, https://elibrary.ru/ytoanf

10. Leontovich O.A. The semiotic landscape of Volgograd in the context of urban communication studies. Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and Social Sciences, 2019, no. 12 (1), pp. 97-105. https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0382, https://elibrary.ru/yvnseh

11. Okunev I.Yu., Ostapenko G.I. Space perception in the program of capital cities semiotics. Chelovek: Obraz i sushchnost’. Gumanitarnye aspekty = Human Being: Image and Essence. Humanitarian Aspects, 2022, no. 1 (49), pp. 43-61. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31249/chel/2022.01.03, https://elibrary.ru/fvfeef

12. Yanushkevich I.F. Semiotics of social memory in urban space: the Case of Volgograd (Stalingrad). International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 2014, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 43-50. https://elibrary.ru/uzqhjh

13. Yanushkevich I.F. Social memory in the context of the city: the semiotic approach. Vestnik Pyatigorskogo gosudarstvennogo lingvisticheskogo universiteta = Bulletin of the Pyatigorsk State Linguistic University, 2011, no. 4, pp. 184-187. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/oxmpol

14. Abashev V.V. New city journalism in the design of the urban environment. Filologicheskii vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta = Philology Bulletin of Surgut State Pedagogical University, 2021, no. 4, pp. 119-130. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26105/PBSSPU.2021.8.4.001, https://elibrary.ru/sakbtu

15. Vlasova E.G. Historical past in reflection of urban-oriented network media: new methods of commemoration. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Rossiiskaya i zarubezhnaya filologiya = Perm University Herald. Russian and Foreign Philology, 2021, no. 4, pp. 129-137. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17072/2073-6681-2021-4-129-137, https://elibrary.ru/rrhosv

16. Korkonosenko S.G. Mediapolis: another dimension of the modern megalopolis. Labirint. Zhurnal sotsial’no-gumanitarnykh issledovanii = Labyrinth. Journal of Social and Humanitarian Studies, 2013, no. 1, pp. 15-28. https://www.elibrary.ru/pwnhnj