I remembered: at the time of the closure of NTV in Russia, very few people protested actively, a few thousand at most. There were also a minority who simply disagreed with such behavior of the authorities. Part of the "liberal public" even supported the closure, sometimes with reservations.
I asked why? Approximately their claims to the channel then boiled down to the following: they lie a lot, distort, tendentiously and with disgusting aplomb they present information. They abuse their influence to the detriment of the people and the country. I agreed with many things: despite the fact that NTV remained the producer of the highest quality television product, I was also annoyed by many things in it. Especially some of the presenters, who knows what they think of themselves. There was also such a thing when journalists clearly shouldn't have divulged operational information so as not to harm people, but they did it, straight with pathos. I also caught them repeatedly on lies and twitching, because NTV itself almost stopped watching then, with the exception of some programs.
The defeat of NTV was not the first and not the last act of curtailing freedom of speech in the Russian Federation, but a turning point that made its strangulation irreversible - no doubt. It became clear to me even then. But I could not convince anyone who thought differently: they sincerely believed that even without sympathy for the authorities, the NTV team did not deserve support.
It goes without saying that the attitude of the "silent majority" to the closure of NTV without arguments was in the same range: "they close it right or wrong, but it's not a pity." Or even: "There they are and the road!" Which means: the people do not mind. That's all.
On the favorite rake of zealots of "purity of morals" and fighters "against all that is bad" is written: "There is no freedom without abuse, destroying the possibility of abuse - you destroy freedom!" But the font is too small, only for the meticulous, the rest do not read.
original here