Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

Kremlin Seeks to Control Online Media

Posted by Zonk on Tue Apr 10, 2007 08:09 PM
from the oh-i'm-sure-there-will-be-no-jokes-with-this-one dept.
Censorship Politics
reporter writes "According to a disturbing report just published by Bloomberg, 'As the Kremlin gears up for the election of Putin's successor next March, Soviet-style controls are being extended to online news after a presidential decree last month set up a new agency to supervise both mass media and the Web.' However, unless the Kremlin pursues Chinese-style/Turkish-style blocking of the Internet-Protocol addresses of web sites like 'The Economist', even the Kremlin cannot control the online media. If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States."

Related Stories

[+] In Russia, 50% of News Must Be Happy 551 comments
Several readers sent us to the New York Times for disturbing news on Russia's vanishing press freedoms. The story tells of how one of the few remaining relatively independent radio outlets in Russia recently acquired new managers, reportedly loyal to Vladimir Putin. Quoting: "At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia's largest independent radio news network, the managers had startling news of their own: from now on, they said, at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.' In addition, opposition leaders could not be mentioned on the air and the United States was to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told by the new managers, who are allies of the Kremlin."
[+] Russian Journalists Quit Over Censorship 162 comments
A state-controlled broadcast center in Russia has just seen the result of censorship restrictions imposed by the Kremlin. In a rare show of protest a group of journalists all resigned stating that they could no longer work under the harsh restrictions imposed by the state. "Artyom Khan, one of the reporters who resigned, said restrictions were introduced when new management was imported last month from Channel One, the state television station that documents Mr Putin's every move."
[+] IT: US Prepares for Eventual Cyberwar 223 comments
The New York Times is reporting on preparations in the works by the US government to prep for a 'cyberwar'. Precautionary measures are being taken to guard against concerted attacks by politically-minded (or well-paid) hackers looking to cause havoc. Though they outline scenarios where mass damage is the desired outcome (such as remotely opening a dam's gates to flood cities), most expect such conflicts to be more subtle. Parts of the internet, for example, may be unreachable or unreliable for certain countries. Regardless, the article suggests we've already seen our first low-level cyberwar in Estonia: "The cyberattacks in Estonia were apparently sparked by tensions over the country's plan to remove Soviet-era war memorials. Estonian officials initially blamed Russia for the attacks, suggesting that its state-run computer networks blocked online access to banks and government offices. The Kremlin denied the accusations. And Estonian officials ultimately accepted the idea that perhaps this attack was the work of tech-savvy activists, or 'hactivists,' who have been mounting similar attacks against just about everyone for several years."
[+] Allofmp3 Shut Down, Again 291 comments
studguy1 writes to tell us TorrentFreak is reporting that the Russian government has shut down Allofmp3, the popular online music site. "AllOfMP3 has been a thorn in the side of the RIAA and the US government for years. Last year, U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab said that if Russia wants to join the WTO, they should shut down the pirate music website that is robbing US recording companies of sales."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Kremlin Seeks to Control Online Media 50 Comments More | Login /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login
Keybindings Beta
Q W E
A S D
Loading ... Please wait.
  • it takes a dictator to get anything done. Peter the Great, Stalin, and now Putin are part of a Russian tradition of autocracy.

    • Re:Like always in Russia (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Patrick Mannion (782290) <patrick.mannion@gmail . c om> on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:13PM (#18684365) Homepage Journal
      Well this is what happens when your President was once a KGB chief.
      [ Parent ]

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by happyemoticon (543015)
        You know, Bush Sr. used to be the head of the CIA.

          • Re:Like always in Russia (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Shihar (153932) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @09:37PM (#18684871)
            "Soviet style" is when you round up a few million people without trial and make them slaves in work camps in some place very cold and do this such that the vast majority of them die before there 'term' (if they even got one) is up.

            Take a fucking breather people. There are a lot of things to bitch about when it comes to the US and its direction. That said, the extreme hyperbole where you compare the Soviet Union justice system to the US makes you sound like an idiot not worth listening to.

            I am not happy with the direction that the US is headed in many regards, but people need to screw their heads back on and get some perspective. The US is not Soviet Russia. Hell, it isn't even close to the Russian Federation or China. The US is still very much a liberal place to live, and in many regards far more liberal in some areas then Europe. The US has a long way to fall before it reaches the level of Russian Federation (much less the Soviet Union).
            [ Parent ]

            • Re:Like always in Russia (Score:5, Insightful)

              by AaronLawrence (600990) * on Tuesday April 10 2007, @10:18PM (#18685083)
              Slaves in work camps? You're thinking of Stalin times, 1930's to 50's. After Stalin died things got a LOT better - there were no mass killings for one.
              I don't think the US realises how radically the USSR changed during the time it existed. It was messy and dangerous but somewhat functional under Lenin; brutal under Stalin; Kruschev denounced Stalin and changed direction radically; then it gradually relaxed until there was not the heart to continue forcing it to exist.
              Discussing the Soviet Union as if it has always been that same entity from WW2 is pointless.
              [ Parent ]

            • Re:Like always in Russia (Score:4, Insightful)

              by bytesex (112972) on Wednesday April 11 2007, @12:03AM (#18685501) Homepage
              It's called 'proportional judgement' and it's applied all the time: in Saudi you're not allowed to bring in a bible - should 'christian countries' disallow a quran ? Of course not. 'We' are expected to be 'better' than that. Palestinians kill people and Israelis kill people, yet we judge Israelis more harshly for it. We expect them to 'better', 'apply higher standards', 'be more careful'. The Russians implement laws that limit freedom and so does the US - not in the same way, and yet they're being compared. Why is that ? Because we expect the US to be 'better', 'more protected', 'less easily brought astray'. Anyone who has ever been in a debate must have encountered proportional judgement at some point. Haven't you ?
              [ Parent ]

    • Re:Like always in Russia (Score:4, Insightful)

      by some damn guy (564195) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @09:12PM (#18684733)
      He is not an autocrat. George Bush looked into his eyes and he saw it for himself, a method far more powerful and revealing than any mere logical argument.

      Plus if this were true, would we have spent six years pissing off the entire world chasing two-bit terrorists while the government of the nation with the worlds most dangerous nuclear arsenal consolidated power and grew ever more despotic, violent and belligerent?

      So do be silly, Russia is a de-mocracy now, that means the problem is solved, friend.
      [ Parent ]

  • Finally..... (Score:3, Funny)

    by edwardpickman (965122) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:16PM (#18684389)
    the Russians are doing something Bush can get behind and support.
  • a country.

    sooner or later mobsters will show their true face and "weed out" competition.

    pity on any fools who think russia is a western, modern nation.
    • More like when your president is a former head of KGB.
      [ Parent ]

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ScrewMaster (602015)
      Of course Russia is a modern Western nation, modeled directly upon the United Sta ... oh wait. I forgot. We're not so modern anymore.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Jerf (17166)
        Yes. The carnage since the Bush Administration began murdering all of its loudest critics has simply devastated the academic and journalistic communities. Why, there's hardly anybody left alive at NPR, and Berkeley is a ghost town! And San Francisco might

    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      by loftwyr (36717)
      In capitalist America, media controls government!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by daigu (111684)
      You mean western, modern nations are not run by the mafia? "The mafia is a kind of organized crime being active not only in several illegal fields, but also tending to exercise sovereignty functions - normally belonging to public authorities - over a speci

      • You mean western, modern nations are not run by the mafia? "The mafia is a kind of organized crime being active not only in several illegal fields, but also tending to exercise sovereignty functions - normally belonging to public authorities - over a speci

  • Russian internet brigades (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:20PM (#18684417)
    Maybe the Russian administration can't control the online media, but that sure doesn't stop them from trying.

    I suspect their government-sponsored trolls are also active on Wikipedia, where, besides pushing Russian propaganda, they try to suppress any mention of this phenomenon. Recently, an article on this subject (titled "Internet trolls squads") was voted into deletion, and now the resurrected article (titled "Internet brigades") has again been nominated for deletion by a number of persistent Russian editors.

    Read more about the phenomenon here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_brigades [wikipedia.org]

    See the discussion on deleting that article here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_fo r_deletion/Internet_brigades_(2nd_nomination) [wikipedia.org]
    • So they are less elegant than our own Psyops. But I'm fairly sure every Government has a information control program of one sort or another.

  • It's Okay (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Guuge (719028)
    Bush declared that Putin has a good soul, so there's obviously nothing to be worried about.

  • Relax, Putin's got a beautiful soul (Score:5, Insightful)

    by straponego (521991) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:23PM (#18684435)
    You can trust Putin, just as you trust his kindred spirit-- his soul-mate-- our own dear leader. I don't see why you're all so cynical.

    "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue... I was able to get a sense of his soul... He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship," Mr Bush said.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1392791.stm [bbc.co.uk]

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) (613870)
      Ah yes...the infallible Bush gut instinct at work again.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        You know, I strongly suspect that goat entrails are more reliable at divining truth than Bush's entrails.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Nimey (114278)
          I'm willing to set up an experiment to see whether that's true.

  • Moving... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shmlco (594907) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:26PM (#18684451) Homepage
    "If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States." ...and then what? Putting it outside Russia means that blocking it's IP is probably easier to do, not harder. Then again, if I was doing it I'd let it run... and see who drops in.

    • Re:Moving... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ScrewMaster (602015) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:41PM (#18684553)
      What would probably happen is that Putin would keep the site up ... and pull the plug on the site operators.
      [ Parent ]

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Social Engineering 2.0: Fuck it, just have people shot.

  • Joking aside... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheGreatHegemon (956058) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:27PM (#18684457)
    This is worrying. I personally feel Russia has been taking steps back as far as civil liberty goes, really I feel that the whole WORLD has been taking steps back.

    The internet is being reigned in now - this was possibly the last great refuge for free speech...

    Rather worrying.

  • Turkey not so bad (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:29PM (#18684481)
    I was just in Turkey and was able to visit every website I wanted which included newsites that were critical of AKP and other political parties and leaders in Turkey. Also, more importantly, porn sites can be reached without any problems.

    If you insult the founder of Turkey -- whose dead and thus not running for election -- then you get into trouble. Usually insulting the current PM - Erdogan - may get you sued by Erdogan but not likely your website is going to be blocked.

    China and Turkey are quite different in their levels of censorship. Critical political commentary is very common in the media in Turkey. This is an election year in Turkey too and I don't think you'll see any censorship of political opinion.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by The Bungi (221687)
      If you insult the founder of Turkey -- whose dead and thus not running for election -- then you get into trouble.

      Yeah well, so it's not "so good" after all, right?

      Freedom of expression is not a relative concept. You either have it or you don't.

    • Re:Turkey not so bad (Score:4)

      by krbvroc1 (725200) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @10:21PM (#18685097)
      Oh yeah, how many websites on the Armenian genocide can you bring up in Turkey? Journalists have gone to prison or been murdered for reporting on the Aemenian genocide of 1915 which Turkey denies. Its considered an 'insult to Turkishness' which will bring the wrath of the government upon you. Were you able to reach those?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_301_(Turkish_ penal_code) [wikipedia.org]
      [ Parent ]

  • Yes (Score:2)

    by MikeRT (947531)
    And then they'll end up in a very unfortunate accident like that former KGB officer in Britain and his buddy in Maryland... Putin has such a way of dealing with his critics...
  • I wonder how long it will be before the revolts.... Turkey, China, Russia and the US to some extent, I wonder how long it will take till we can say:

    In Soviet Russia, Internet censors you

  • When will the 'Man' learn? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by haluness (219661) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @08:46PM (#18684585)
    We're in the 21st century. We've got the Internet, everybody (ok, most) is aware of blogs and the relocatability of information sources.

    So when will institutions learn that times have changed?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by istartedi (132515)

      "The man" doesn't learn. Not in the traditional sense. The man can only be usurped. Then there's a new man, and the cycle repeats. This usurping doesn't necessarily have to be violent. Every shift in power in Congress or the Presidency is a mild form

    • So when will institutions learn that times have changed?

      The lesson is that there is no longer one Internet. There are multiple internets, filtered to suit the needs of national leaders. They've proven that they can control their own tidy filtered inter

  • Since we just LOVE soviet russia jokes... (Score:3, Funny)

    by GFree (853379) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @10:44PM (#18685217)
    In Russia Soviet, Dyslexia for cure found.

  • enemies (Score:3, Insightful)

    by zoftie (195518) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @11:16PM (#18685329) Homepage
    ... " If Putin pulled the plug on an anti-Putin web site inside Russia, the anti-Putin web site could simply be migrated offshore to a server in, say, the United States." ...

    Then it becomes enemy, imperialist propaganda and immediately discarded as such. To have legitimacy sites must be located within the country.
    2c

  • Parent Article: (-1, Troll) (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ezh (707373) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @11:33PM (#18685391)
    Bloomberg, just stop trolling with your articles. All the online press that Russians actually bother reading is already licensed by the Ministry of Press, TV Broadcast and Mass Media of the Russian Federation: Same goes for the most popular blog services: None of these businesses is going to risk their investments. The irony is that it is exactly the same in the U.S. as well - big companies just support one of the two candidates and nobody cares about the smaller ones. So Bloomberg and the rest, stop scaring your people while attempting to control them. And you, /. - take note. Cheers!

  • Only some channels need to be controlled (Score:3, Insightful)

    by orzetto (545509) on Wednesday April 11 2007, @12:32AM (#18685619)

    However, unless the Kremlin pursues Chinese-style/Turkish-style blocking of the Internet-Protocol addresses of web sites like 'The Economist', even the Kremlin cannot control the online media.

    Now, if a sizeable chunk of the Russian electorate had Internet connectivity and could read English, that would be a problem. Why is everybody assuming every Russian can read English? How many of us can read Russian?

    The main point being, in a "nominal" democracy you need to control only 50%+1 of the electorate. Information channels that are available to only a tiny fraction of the population are irrelevant to censorship. In Italy (not as badly censored as Russia... yet) you can find bunches of books denouncing Berlusconi [wikipedia.org]'s mafia acquaintances, corruption, and the suspicious sources of his wealth in his own bookstores: that's because few Italians read books (or newspapers for that sake). Try say anything even alluding in that direction on television, and you get fired [rsf.org] so fast your ass leaves skid marks through the parking lot. It has not even gotten much better now that Berlusconi is in opposition because he still retains his private power.

  • pure irony (Score:4, Insightful)

    by circletimessquare (444983) <circletimessquare.gmail@com> on Wednesday April 11 2007, @12:44AM (#18685671) Homepage
    notice all of the subject change comments in this thread to criticism of the usa/ bush. right over the head of anyone who makes such a comment or mods such a comment up is that... drum roll please... THEY CAN MAKE THAT COMMENT IN THE USA WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS

    the issue here is that criticism of putin/ the russian government within russia is being censored. everyone get that? has the meaning of that observation sunk into your head yet? really?

    now go ahead and bash the usa, criticize bush all you want, and mod such comments up... in this thread... about russian censorship

    !?

    you're absolutely free to do so. get it yet?

    fashionable anti-americanism is no replacement for a functional brain. if in the context of commenting on russian censorship you still think it is somehow useful to bash the usa, all you are doing is making yourself look like a fool. you are just demonstrating your own lack of an elementary school level skillset at compare and contrast. it's amazing how prejudice blinds

    now don't get me wrong, the usa does plenty of wrong in this world (and plenty right... how's that thunderbolt of moderation strike you?), but to criticize a country with much better freedoms than russia (i said much better, not perfect, do you understand that difference?), in a thread about russian censorship, is just pure idiocy on the part of anyone who does so. all you do is make yourself look like a moron

    really, you're a moron if you think bashing the usa in this thread is useful, insightful, interesting, whatever. 100% unadulterated low iq cretin = you

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by shutdown -p now (807394)
      To be fair, I can criticize Putin here in Russia just fine as well. In private speech and on the 'Net, certainly. It's when the criticism gets to mass media the government starts acting. No jail times and the like, it might just happen that e.g. the place

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ScrewMaster (602015)
      Or, to paraphrase Lewis Black, "it'd be better if he just came to your house and pissed on your foot."

    • Re:almost as bad as... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Shihar (153932) on Tuesday April 10 2007, @09:42PM (#18684907)
      You think that's bad, wait until the US gets full control over the DNS root.

      OMFG, that will be terrible! I bet the US will SHUT DOWN SLASHDOT. Now excuse me while I go look at prego-nazi-porn in one window while writing about how much of a TERRORIST GWB is.

      Yeah, I am sure the US getting the keys to DNS root will be a whole hell of a lot worse then the Russian Federation clamping on the last vestiges of free media in the Russian state. Everyone knows that the US eats more babies the North Korea, China, and Russia... COMBINED.
      [ Parent ]

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Shihar (153932)
          When the US (or any other) government has full control of communications, democracy can very easily be circumvented.

          The government already has full control over communications, it just doesn't exercise that control. The US government could merrily call up
Check for more

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2008 SourceForge, Inc.