Posted 11 мая 2022,, 10:35

Published 11 мая 2022,, 10:35

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

It will be impossible to forget: why the ban on mentioning those who left Russia in the media is bad?

11 мая 2022, 10:35
It is impossible to consign to oblivion the "traitors to the Motherland" at the current level of development of information technologies.

Ivan Zubov

The actual return of the realities of 1937 was again talked about in social networks after the Senator of the Federation Council from the Republic of Crimea Sergey Tsekov told RIA Novosti that he was thinking about the possibility of developing a bill prohibiting the media from mentioning the names of artists who left Russia. Tsekov noted that "these are anti-Russian people, their names must be forgotten forever."

However, another senator, Andrei Klishas, in response to this proposal, reassured the public that there would be no laws prohibiting mentioning in the media the names of people who left the country in recent months in Russia:

“It is impossible to deprive a person of citizenship for his political position, for leaving the country and not returning, for some wrong behavior, if he is a citizen by birth, it is impossible against his will. (…) Now there are proposals to change the law on foreign agents. But constantly changing the law in an area that is just emerging, where legal relations have not yet fully developed, is a road to nowhere..."

Analysts of the popular Nevminkult channel write about this:

“Where did this idea come from? Maybe it's a multiplayer. First they launched a rumor to probe the opinion. From all sides, he was overgrown with comments by Vyacheslav Volodin, Dmitry Peskov, Ramzan Kadyrov and others. Then, when Sergei Tsekov announced that he would develop an appropriate bill, they believed in it, considered the ban on mentioning people who left the country in the media a fait accompli. However, this is how the basis for an unequivocal refutation was formed, which was made by another senator, the head of the committee on constitutional legislation and state building, Andrei Klishas. So it sounded louder..."

In general, analysts believe that this idea, although patriotic, is historically and strategically not thought out at all:

“If you follow this logic, it turns out that the contribution of Galkin and Khamatova to the destruction of sacred bonds is worse than Hitler, who can just be mentioned. It's bullshit, right? This is first.

Secondly, if such people are consigned to oblivion, then their negative actions towards Russia will also be forgotten. But in the Western media and social networks, their popularity will increase dramatically. Yes, and publications banned in our country will broadcast the same without any problems. And access to them is not limited at all - almost everyone already has a VPN in their phone. So the format of Soviet dissidence will not work. It makes no sense to produce sacral victims of the regime for the amusement of the Western media machine.

Thirdly, it will deprive them of the chance to return when they grow up or when everything settles down. A by-product of the activities of many, not even patriots, benefits the country. This applies to businessmen, cultural figures, IT specialists.

Fourth, the already great tension in society will only grow. Everyone will rightfully be afraid of the “excesses”, because of which a banal vacation abroad can lead to an eternal media ban..."