{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03715395823215153, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008742107819329771, 'mean_word_length': 5.142431021625653, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
“Media Man” in the Context of Developing Technologies of the Screen Documentary

Under the conditions of mediatization as the most important factor shaping modernity along with globalization, individualization and commercialization, an individual receives the nomination of a ”media man” on and acquires new functions in the development of media civilization. The ”media man” acts as a new kind of not only “the product” and “the consumer”, but also “the producer” and “the translator” of works of screen culture, including screen documentaries. General scientific and special scientific methods of research are used for writing the article. The article presents the results of systematization, understanding and analysis of the theoretical and historical scientific literature on mediatization and documentary films, as well as empirical observations of the practice of the Russian documentary. Prospects of the development of the documentary technologies in the changing conditions, including – within a new type of screen documentary – interactive and collaborative documentary cinema – idoc are outlined.


Introduction
The time we live in is called "the age of media and mediatization". This means that today there is an integration of media in various spheres of life. A. Gureeva writes that mediatization has recently become a theoretical basis for considering the interaction of media, society and culture [2]. Along with globalization, individualization and commercialization, mediatization is considered the most important factor shaping modernity.
Media play an important role in all social changes, reflect a single picture of the world and rethink cultural values, transform the surrounding space and create the modern society.
According to N. Kirillova, '"The media is not just a means to transmit information, it is a whole environment in which cultural codes are produced, aestheticized and broadcast" [6,22]. She also added that "the inclusion of the media in everyday reality is so great that many social processes can no longer be considered without a medial component, which confirms the status of the modern society as mediatized" [2,[203][204].
Therefore, the individual these days is often called a "media man", because everything that happens actively affects his psychological state and social practices. V. Mansurova states that the concept of "media man" is interpreted in the range from a simple and ordinary representation to a completely scientific "as a nomination of a new anthropological variety of the consumer and the creator of mass information" [8,9]. In the past era there were such concepts as a "natural man" by John Locke, a "public man" by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, "Homo Economicus", described by the political economists of the nineteenth century, a "social man", discovered by the French sociologists of the twentieth century. The "media man" is connected with the media culture, defined as a special culture of the information society.
However, there is a "screen culture", the value of which in the life of the modern society is extremely high. According to N. Kirillova, "It is the screen (including the computer display), absorbing the audiovisual-shaped capabilities of cinema (and then television and video), complementing and transforming them, that is becoming the material carrier of a new type of culture in all its forms: information, art and scientific" [7, 109]. The screen culture carries a new type of communication in the form of free access to the information space. The screen culture particularly influences the individual, and therefore, the analysis of human interaction of the media era with the technologies of screen documentaries is highly relevant nowadays.

Methods
The article is based on the theoretical positions formulated in the works of a number of scientists, as well as on the findings of our own research. General scientific and special scientific methods were used: analysis, synthesis, analogy, comparison, juxtaposition, description, and systematization, which made it possible to clarify some theoretical

Discussion
According to the scholar A. Flier, every individual has traditionally been in relation to the culture simultaneously in several forms, which are observed in his relations with the culture screen. First, the individual is a "product" of culture, introduced into its norms and values, trained in "technologies of activity and ethics of interaction with other people in the process of his inculturation and socialization..." [15,128]. The individual is formed as a person, "socially and culturally adequate to the society" [15,128]. The screen language, the most accessible and visible for the mass audience, not only forms the Perestroika of the late 1980-ies, partly resonating with the "thaw" of the 1960s, created new characters, whose fates were increasingly "highlighting the era". Documentary filmmaking was even more drawn to historical thinking and the connection of journalistic intent with artistic screen embodiment. At that time the task was about the degree of the author's invasion of human life to solve certain problems, about the dialectic of fact and concept and the boundaries of the aesthetic deformation of reality.
Thus, A. Solntseva writes about the cinema of the mid-1990s, "New" documentary cinema changed optics, opening the world to the characters who were of interest to no one before, and to the people who were not famous and not even "typical" [14]. Back in the 1960s, it should be mentioned that our art came to a different understanding of the typical than ever before. It was taken not as the most common, but as expressing the characteristic, essential in life, which is best manifested in a particular and individual. S.
Muratov also defends the idea of uniqueness of a person on the documentary screen, "Neither character, nor personality, nor mission can be reduced to typological formulas and be disclosed through the concept of social role" [9,267]. Moreover, he believes that "the mystery of personality" can be solved only in the co-creation of the author with the personality. And today, "heroes are increasingly becoming a kind of co-authors of the picture, getting involved in the process of creation" [9,269].
The film directed by Eugene Grigoriev with the iconic name Lyokha-online (2001) presents a 16-year-old boy living with his parents, who moved to a remote Ural village "to save the soul". But even there he is a product of media culture, as he dreams about the Internet. Although the cherished dream has not yet come true, some interactive connection between the character and the world still arises, because the boy communicates with the audience, looking at them from the screen, as on Skype, "eye to eye". and Canada. As for the participation of "media man", now he is not just a spectator, interpreter or "evaluator" of traditional films. In interactive documentaries, the "media man" participates in the deployment of the narrative and determines how the story is told. Through the interface, the user physically interacts with the media objects of the content, as well as controls the navigation, laying its own route through the history [3,303]. Thus, the "media man" becomes a participant of the internal dialogue with the audience, a content producer and a broadcaster in the process of joint (collaborative) creativity.

Results
Apparently, the prospects for the development of screen documentaries are great and varied, as all four embodiments of the modern "media man" are shown: a product, a consumer, an independent manufacturer and a translator of screen products. The "visual" man of M. McLuhan, who aspired to distant goals and encyclopedic programs, has been replaced today by the "electronic man", which is characterized by the immediate involvement in communication and direct dialogue. Now person (in the film and on the television) is called "knowledgeable" and co-presenter, co-author, commenter, and informant, as S. Protodyakonov writes [13,74]. All this is combined "with different activities, with interpersonal interaction, with the self-determination of individuals, whose opinions, assessments and tastes can change" [10,115]. Today there is a dynamically