Posted 17 февраля 11:02
Published 17 февраля 11:02
Modified 17 февраля 11:30
Updated 17 февраля 11:30
As you know, the speaker of the Federation Council, Valentina Matvienko, again distinguished herself on the prohibition front, suggesting that telegram channels with hostile information against Russia should be labeled, approximately, as foreign agents. In addition, she said that the Federation Council will propose to Roskomnadzor to publish a list of channels behind which "our enemies are hiding.". All this, according to experts, may end with another attempt to block the telegram on the territory of Russia, since in fact it is a foreign messenger.
what will they put into the concept of "hostility", and the second – "and who are the judges?".
Media manager Dmitry Sviridov, however, reassures the public:
"A version appeared in the closed admin channels that this could be a signal to Durov (the owner of the messenger, approx.ed) and a new plan to rein in, or block. We now recall the results of the last "crusade" with a smile, banter and trolling. I can say with confidence that there are no signals in Valentina Ivanovna's proposal.
On the other hand, it is obvious to everyone among media experts that Telegram will be tried to rein in in the foreseeable future. In fact, today, this is the only platform in Russia with a loyal attitude to a different opinion, and this does not suit many, and even hinders.
But they won't try to block it anymore, because it contradicts the unspoken agreements..."
The expert of the Dvugav channel, not without sarcasm, notes:
"Some initiatives of our deputies cause consternation. There is legislation regulating the activities of foreign agents. Use it for your health. But no. In a loyal frenzy, the deputy's soul, hungry for PR, does not think about a detailed study of the issue and other boring details. The main thing is to be creative, but others will still figure it out.
So it is with the "marking from Valentina". Why Telegram? Why not Tik-tok, YouTube, Zen and other blog-makers? And most importantly - how? Should I put stickers on monitors?"
Oleg Ivanov, the head of the Center for the Settlement of Social Conflicts, agrees with him:
"On the one hand, theoretically it can be done by analogy with the marking of groups or posts in social networks. On the other hand, who will evaluate and analyze the information on these channels and pages? Officials, independent experts? How in general is it possible to separate objective and sound criticism, necessary criticism, without which civil society cannot fully function and it is impossible to exercise civil control over the activities of the authorities, from the so-called "hostile" content that Matvienko is talking about?"
"Valentina Matvienko's proposal would be very good and timely if it were feasible. The fact that the enemy uses telegram channels to influence Russian public opinion is obvious. But it is less obvious how and who should monitor the telegram space in real time and, most importantly, how to influence those channels whose owners are unknown and who are abroad. So Matvienko's proposal is from the category of good wishes."
Political scientist Maxim Zharov is sure that the ban will only harm the situation:
"The authorities have lost control over the telegram community and with the help of primitive stuffing about the allegedly upcoming labeling of all "wrong" authors by foreign agents, they are trying to bring down a critical attitude towards their actions.
The problem of "integration" of the key nodes of the Russian political telegram with the enemy does exist, but it arose because of the wrong actions in the telegram of the government itself, and not because there were too many critics of its actions. Therefore, the labeling of "wrong" channels by Roskomnadzor will only lead to the fact that there will be even more of these channels and it will become even more difficult to counteract them with the help of political technologies. This is evidenced by the experience of labeling by foreign agents of all "wrong" opposition media operating from abroad..."
And lawyer Grigory Sarbayev reasonably notes the corruption capacity of Matvienko's initiative::
"The Komsomol experience is not going anywhere, of course. Even despite his inglorious demise, the ticket to life given to him makes him try to use the same patterns. Although, admittedly, the undertaking is notable: you can create a separate body, recruit staff, allocate funding, provide a state order for software development...
I advise you, however, to recall Stirlitz: people invented the radio in order to listen to it, especially since a significant part of the authors of these channels, as well as foreign agents, were generated by the authorities and quite recently sat tight on state budget financing."