Russia Wants To Ban Social Media Sites Discriminating Against Russian News Outlets (zdnet.com) 34
The Russian government is working on a new law to block foreign social media sites inside Russia's territory as repercussions for "discriminating" against Russian news outlets operating abroad. From a report: Sites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are specifically mentioned in "explanatory notes" (Word document) accompanying the new draft bill, submitted last week for debate in the Russian Duma (state parliament). Russian lawmakers say that since April 2020, state authorities had received complaints from editors of Russian news sites that had their social media accounts censored on the aforementioned sites. "Media outlets such as Russia Today, RIA Novosti, Crimea 24 were censored. In total, about 20 acts of discrimination were recorded," Russian lawmakers said. The acts of discrimination referenced in the draft bill's notes refers to rules introduced at Twitter and Facebook this year, and at YouTube in 2018. The three sites have been showing special labels on the profiles of state-affiliated news agencies and have been reducing their visibility on their sites by removing their content from recommendation algorithms.
Re:Take aim at foot, pull trigger (Score:4, Interesting)
What you see is not the intended target of this legislation. The purpose is to ensure that Russian citizens do not have their minds 'polluted' by memes that go against the Russia and especially Putin supporting messages being pumped out by Russian media.
Re:Take aim at foot, pull trigger (Score:5, Insightful)
The purpose is to strangle of competing foreign media to promote local media. They will tighten the screws and keep tightening them, in a idle, indifferent and bureaucratic way. The offence once committed will never be forgiven, the why has been stated and the end conclusion defined, they will eventually be banned. There will be a series of long drawn out and disruptive bureaucratic penalties along the way, as they are slowly but surely effectively ground out of existence in Russia. You will likely find a lot of countries join in, US tech corporations became entirely too political in their management and no longer can be trusted in the least and their influence must be terminated with prejudice.
The interesting thing, not for what that did anywhere else in the worlds politics but what governments from all over the world saw them do in US politics, put the hackles up many a politician, only way to be safe, nuke them from orbit, in a business sense. Ever legal agency on the planet will be making them a focal point for as many investigations as possible.
That shot was already fired in 2016, 'um', what they did in 2020, was to shoot the other foot and shove both stumps in their own mouth. In would visibly be insane to allow the tech corporation to continue to function in the political manner they have. They have breached many electoral crimes by provided free advertising to the politicians they buy and censoring the politicians they can not buy with free advertising. Electoral agencies simply can not let that slide, that cost and cost impact, how much it costs to counter, should be seen as investment into owning those politicians, buying them with free campaign support. Custodial sentences should be handed out as a real warning.
Re: (Score:2)
if you are going to parrot Fox right wingnut conspiracy theories, you can at least cite them properly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So in your view, anyone trying to stop American propaganda and push their own propaganda is bad, and most importantly you don't think your news outlets are pushing propaganda and their own political narratives and biases. So you are a typical brainwashed American.
I made no comment about "American propaganda", Putin wants his message to be seen in Russia, he wants to shut off those that weaken it - no matter where from. BTW: I am a Brit, our media has its biases too.
Russian "News Outlet" (Score:2)
Forget the quote
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet Putinstan, social media shares you!
Re: (Score:1)
It's pronounced "Jiiihna!"
Ads/Trade--Transparent Branding (Score:3, Interesting)
Were competition greater, sales executives would not need to hide behind algorithms to assure sponsors of greater returns and branding strategies. Secret sauces are snake oil in an artificially static marketplace.
But I am no suggesting breaking up these MySpace to be titans: I merely suggest Channels. International channels perhaps designated by a little flag in the corner of a screen that are a trivial convention to content management-- it was one of YouTube's first changes.
So, only for illustration: Russia.
Russia has experienced a near diaspora over the last generation-- I refuse to believe if a Russian channel/section of any platform going were transparently identified, the same references to habits or values that western companies seek to shield from a captured audience that could be potentially alienated will not result in a finer segmentation of potential ad spaces.
Not entirely correct. (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Banning is the last resort.
2. Prior to that are fines and bandwidth throttling both of which are much more effective.
3. It was not the banning or labelling of RT, Russia 24 or any of the other sites mentioned in the post which brought it. Some terminal dumbf*ck listened to clueless idiots from the whorehouse on our payroll usually referred to as "opposition" (it is not, they have real one, these are just the idiots we pimp). They delisted and tried to ban Solovyev's show. No amount of discrimination against Russian state media could bring the level of fury across the full political spectrum there which resulted from this because:
3.1. While vehemently nationalistic and quite biased, he ALWAYS invites alternative points of view and you can see Polish, American and even Ukrainian representation regularly on his show. Further to this, you can even see our ambassadors and high ranked embassy officials on it. It's ratings in the post-USSR space are such that you do not decline an invite as it gives you a platform which nothing else can provide. He always gave us the option to answer (compare that to how often you see the Russian ambassador on any of our news talk shows).
3.2. He is the head of the journalist union. You really do not want to f*ck with the guy who will mobilise the opposition against you. Whichever dumbf*ck in Langley and/or Albert Embankment authorized it, needs to be sacked.
In any case, the deed is done. The end result will be that we will lose all of our means to promote whatever interesting biases and delusions (such as Navalny being an uberoppositionfuhrer) we want to promote there. They also get to protectionist protect the move of their content to VK and Yandex killing any market share which Google and Co have clawed from them over the last decade.
Dumb. Dumber. Dumberer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While vehemently nationalistic and quite biased, he ALWAYS invites alternative points of view and you can see Polish, American and even Ukrainian representation regularly on his show. ...
Dumb. Dumber. Dumberer.
Only a complete moron would find that substantive. In fact, I already asked somebody who looked like you and he agreed you're an idiot. Makes sense, right?
The end result will be that we will lose all of our means to promote whatever interesting biases and delusions ([stumping for Puti-Put redaced]) we want to promote there.
So you're saying they're stabbing themselves in the face, because it becomes harder for you to be a useful idiot?
No, it doesn't make it any harder, you're stumping for Putin on American sites, so you're still just as useful, and just as much of an idiot.
Re:Wow. Imitation... (Score:4, Interesting)
other way around, trumps a newbie at this authoritarian leader game.
And even for a newbie he is not very good at it either. If Trump was a competent authoritarian he would have organised his fanatically loyal followers into a strictly regimented national patriot militia, complete with a presidential guard made up of proud boys and klan members and then used this force to 'convince' various states he lost in this election to appoint faithless electors hand picked by him. That's what a competent Authoritarian would have done. Without Stephen Bannon Trump has no vision beyond tax breaks for the rich and taking a wrecking ball to anything Obama did. Bannon was the architect of Trump's successful exploitation of grievance politics, not Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you watched public speeches from Putin and compared them to those from Trump?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Think about where Putin comes from -- the Soviet Union. During the Cold War they mastered the propaganda machinery that is effective in dealing with these things.
Standard methods would not be denial, like Trump does, but to deflect from the issue being discussed by employing appeal to hypocrisy, a tu quoque, or more commonly known as the whataboutism in this context.
The appeal to hypocrisy does not refute, but it deflects by depicting the ones who mad
Re: (Score:1)
Stalin had a simpler plan. Kill the doubter.
Fair's fair (Score:2, Insightful)
In Soviet Russia ... (Score:3, Funny)
The next war (Score:3)
will not be fought on land or sea, nor in space, nor by cyber espionage. It will be fought on the battleground of social media.
Re: (Score:2)
Occupied territory (Score:2, Interesting)
At least one of them, Crimea 24, seems to be based in the occupied Ukrainian territory of Crimea. [usmission.gov]. That businesses operating in occupied foreign territories face sanctions can't be that surprising, that Russia continues to fuel war in the area and even shot down a Dutch civilian airplane [bbc.com] doesn't make that bit easier.
It's a start. (Score:2)
Now let's take the next step and put the entire country and it's state sponsored hacking operations behind a new Digital Iron Curtain. Do China too, while you're at it, and that'll cut off North Korean hackers.
Foreign media is where you get the best news (Score:3)
If you want News on America Turn to BBC or Aljazeera. (Not their American counterparts) Because much of what they are reporting isn't tied to some Party Loyalty or attempt to keep a particular type of American Demographics hooked on their station.
If you are from the UK. I expect you have a lot of Anxiety around Brixit and Johnson. But for us Americans, while we may have an opinion on it, we don't have the same level of Anxiety around it, and are able process the events much more objectively. Because it is your problem, not ours.