RTSat, 18 May 2024 14:18 UTC
© Sputnik/Alexey MaishevChairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, Chairman of the Public Council Vyacheslav Volodin.
Brussels talks about free speech but doesn't uphold it, the chairman of Russia's lower house of parliament has said
Russia's State Duma chairman has accused the EU of censoring alternative opinions and curtailing freedom of speech, with the goal of deceiving citizens.Vyacheslav Volodin was commenting on Brussels' latest ban on Russian media outlets, which has sparked a warning of countermeasures from the Foreign Ministry in Moscow.
On Friday, the European Council announced it was suspending the broadcasting activities of four additional media organizations, claiming that they "spread and support" Russian propaganda.
The blacklist includes
RIA Novosti news agency, newspapers Izvestia and Rossiyskaya Gazeta, and the Czech-based portal Voice of Europe.Writing on Telegram on Saturday, Volodin described the move as showing the EU's desire "to close access to objective and reliable information" for residents of member states.
According to the lawmaker, "the policy of double standards has become an integral part of European structures" as they only "talk about freedom of speech, but do not tolerate it in reality".
Officials in Brussels have no arguments to convince EU citizens that they are right and as soon as they see any problems, they just block "any alternative point of view, destroy freedom of speech, and violate the right to freely disseminate and receive information," Volodin stressed.
"In fact, they introduce censorship with
the only purpose - to deceive their citizens and stay in power," he argued.
The Russian Foreign Ministry, commenting on Brussels' move, noted that Moscow has repeatedly warned the EU that "repressive measures" against Russian media will not go unanswered.
"Ignoring these warnings forces us to take countermeasures, which will follow inevitably," the ministry's spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova said on Friday.
According to the diplomat, Brussel's decision is proof "of the neglect by the EU and its member states for their international obligations in the field of ensuring media pluralism and another example of the degeneration of democratic societies" in the West.
Since the Ukraine conflict escalated into open hostilities in February 2022, the EU has barred several Russia-associated media outlets from engaging with audiences in member states. Even hosting content made by the targeted organizations is illegal in the bloc.
Moscow has also taken a harsh stance on Western media. Citing anti-Russian sentiment, misinformation and censorship,
the national media regulator has barred access to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and the websites of the BBC, Deutsche Welle, along with other media outlets.
Comment:
1) For more on this story, see
EU to sanction more Russian-language news outlets For insight into how western agencies worked in Russia, consider:
On the leash of the US State Department and MI6: how western military-intelligence structures finance and arm the Russian opposition to foment chaos and terror in the country2) When the article writes:
"In fact, they introduce censorship with the only purpose - to deceive their citizens and stay in power,"
Couldn't the above be said of media elsewhere? Sure, but what is the degree of lying, distortion and manipulation? Here again the opinions will differ, but either way, there is probably no other remedy than for the readers to try and piece together what is, based on what can be accessed.. Using different search engines can help, as can looking into media, also from other countries that are (still) not sanctioned. If there is a language issue, translation tools often work reasonably well.
2) The European Council has for Russia this
page, where one can find their Russia related sanctioned media. They include:
Izvestia, Katehon, New Eastern Outlook, NTV/NTV Mir, Oriental Review, Pervyi Kanal, REN TV, RIA Novosti, Russia Today and subsidiaries, Rossiya RTR / RTR Planeta, Rossiya 24 / Russia 24, Rossiya 1, Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Spas TV Channel, Sputnik and subsidiaries, Tsargrad TV Channel, TV Centre International, Voice of Europe.
3)
For media blocked in Russia, there is this Wiki. Most have been banned due to how they reported the conflict in Ukraine. Testing the pages on this test
site, dedicated to VPN reviews, reveals the blocking is effective. Unfortunately, I could not find a similar testing site for the EU. Maybe that is actually a good thing, as there appears to be some variation.
4) From the same source, there was recently an article that shows how the EU can react to measures that might reveal their own efforts to influence a non EU country, without there even being limitations to what is published:
19 May, 2024 00:54
Georgian president vetoes controversial 'foreign agents' bill
The proposed legislation was slammed by the EU and sparked protests and clashes in Tbilisi
Georgian President Salome Zourabichvili has vetoed the government's divisive "foreign agents" bill, arguing that, if signed into law, it would undermine the country's aspiration to join the EU.
The Transparency of Foreign Influence Act, which sparked weeks of street protests and clashes with police in the capital Tbilisi, was passed by Georgia's parliament on Tuesday.
The legislation would require NGOs, media outlets, and individuals receiving more than 20% of their funding from abroad, to register as entities "promoting the interests of a foreign power" and disclose their donors. Failure to comply would be punishable by a fine of up to $9,500.
The critics have labeled the bill "a Russian law," comparing it to legislation that was passed in 2012 in Russia and has since been significantly expanded. They argue that, if passed into law, the bill would be used to crack down on the opposition.
In a video address posted on X (formerly Twitter) on Saturday, Zourabichvili said the bill contradicts the Georgian constitution and "all European standards," serving as "an obstacle to our European path."
"This veto is legally sound and will be delivered to the parliament today," she continued, arguing that "this law is not subject to any changes or improvements, making it an easy veto."
The presidential veto is seen as largely symbolic, as parliament is controlled by the ruling Georgian Dream party, which is expected to overrule it.
The bill, which has been widely criticized by US and EU officials, was first announced in March 2023, but the government was forced to back down after large-scale protests erupted in the capital.
The riots occurred again last month when the government said it would proceed with the legislation despite pressure from the opposition.
The White House has threatened Georgian officials with sanctions for "undermining the democracy," while the EU said Tbilisi could lose its candidacy status that was granted in December. Brussels is also reportedly considering a reversal of the visa liberalization for Georgians.
"The adoption of this law negatively impacts Georgia's progress on the EU path. The choice on the way forward is in Georgia's hands," the EU's top diplomat Josep Borrell said this week.
Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze has previously defended the bill, arguing that it is needed to ensure more transparency, and does not violate EU standards. He invited protesters on Friday to delegate representatives who would join a public discussion with him on the matter.
When the EU raises such a noise about a legislation, that does not even prohibit any media, just asks them to register if they receive a lot of funding from external actors, then one is justified in wondering if the EU and NATO could be successful expanding into Georgia, strategically located on the border with Russia, if they did not have a propaganda arm working the public opinion. See also
Georgia accuses NATO countries of trying to orchestrate coup.
Comment:
1) For more on this story, see EU to sanction more Russian-language news outlets For insight into how western agencies worked in Russia, consider: On the leash of the US State Department and MI6: how western military-intelligence structures finance and arm the Russian opposition to foment chaos and terror in the country
2) When the article writes: Couldn't the above be said of media elsewhere? Sure, but what is the degree of lying, distortion and manipulation? Here again the opinions will differ, but either way, there is probably no other remedy than for the readers to try and piece together what is, based on what can be accessed.. Using different search engines can help, as can looking into media, also from other countries that are (still) not sanctioned. If there is a language issue, translation tools often work reasonably well.
2) The European Council has for Russia this page, where one can find their Russia related sanctioned media. They include: 3) For media blocked in Russia, there is this Wiki. Most have been banned due to how they reported the conflict in Ukraine. Testing the pages on this test site, dedicated to VPN reviews, reveals the blocking is effective. Unfortunately, I could not find a similar testing site for the EU. Maybe that is actually a good thing, as there appears to be some variation.
4) From the same source, there was recently an article that shows how the EU can react to measures that might reveal their own efforts to influence a non EU country, without there even being limitations to what is published: When the EU raises such a noise about a legislation, that does not even prohibit any media, just asks them to register if they receive a lot of funding from external actors, then one is justified in wondering if the EU and NATO could be successful expanding into Georgia, strategically located on the border with Russia, if they did not have a propaganda arm working the public opinion. See also Georgia accuses NATO countries of trying to orchestrate coup.