The Kremlin Tightens Its Grip on the Internet

reporter writes "According to a report just published by "The Washington Post", the percentage of Russian adults having access to the Internet has risen from 8% in 2002 to 25% in 2007. This growth has attracted the attention of the Kremlin. Its allies are creating pro-Kremlin web sites and are purchasing web sites known for high-quality independent journalism. Pro-Kremlin bloggers have used their skills to bury news about anti-Kremlin demonstrations: at Russian news portals, web links to news about pro-Kremlin rallies consistently rank higher than web links to news about anti-Kremlin demonstrations. The most disturbing development is that the Kremlin intends to develop a Russian Internet which is separate from the global Internet. Russian officials are studying the techniques that the Chinese use to censor the Internet."

But we must be tolerant

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Of people's attempts to silence others. After all, if we weren't, we'd have to go after a hell of a lot of muslims urgently. And they do a lot more silencing than even the kremlin.

This will increase the brain drain

[cryfreedomlove]

This is short sighted on the part of Russia. Russia has a brain drain problem. Silicon Valley is awash in bright Russian immigrant software developers who love the opportunities and freedoms they are getting. This increased censorship and eroding of basic rights back home in Russia will only increase that trend and leave Russia holding the bag with the beaten down and uninspired population that will remain.

What CNN tells about anti-Bush demonstrations...

[barwasp]

nothing... CNN [cnn.com] thinks the following US news are enough:

* Entire school system shuts for superbug scrub
* Train kills 5-year-old boy
* Genarlow Wilson freed | 'We want him home' Video
* Indian tribes expel members
* Mobile home dwellers ride out fire, wait for help
* Fatal fetus theft leads to death sentence
* Mob considered whacking Guiliani Video
* Feds: Look out for shoe-bombers
* Commander loses job amid nuclear sub probe

...so in the US anti-bush news are just anti-patriotic / anti-american... the only difference between the Russian news control is that Putin started a bit earlier than Bush.


> Pro-Kremlin bloggers have used their skills to bury news about anti-Kremlin demonstrations:

ahhh, if some CNN wievers want to learn about recent anti-bush demonstrations, tune into BBC [bbc.co.uk].

It is not media freedom that's important...

[Anonymous Coward]

It is not media freedom that's important. Rather it is important how politically aware and educated the populace is. Speak to any Russian. They are aware of the limitations of their own system, who is in control, and who to excercise a strong case of cynicism over. Democracy can only exist under such circumstances. Conversely, speak to ordinary Americans. On average, the are the most ignorant brainwashed, and uninformed people that I have ever encountered. Press freedom is a part of that. Fox News / CNN are probably the foremost progaganda agencies on the face of this planet. People need education and the ability to think critically, and not 'just believe' like the members of a religious cult (eg. a 'creationist') do.
I wouldn't loose any sleep over the actions of Putin in Russia. Although some of his methods may not be the most democratic, he is actually benefiting the prosperity of the Russian people, unlike the current US dictatorship. I am tired of hearing the complaints of Americans about other countries, when the should show some introspection and look inwards at the rotten core of their own corrosive right wing alliance between military contractors, oil companies, corporations, and religious fundementalists.
The United States is one of the few countries that I know of where the state can now legally 'vanish' people to military tribunials and execution without any judicial accountability. Is Russia this bad? I think not.

Re:sadly enough, defense hawks are stroking boners

[jollyreaper]

I guess the tree is a metaphor for the internet in this case?

No, the tree I was talking about are our current enemies. Wasn't much we could do with Stalin, he was a paranoid bastard. But after the fall of communism, we should have engaged with the Russians, prevented what came to follow under Yeltsin. Now the average Russian citizen associates democracy with gangster capitalism and is sick of it. They're happy with a strongman like Putin. We helped bolster Saddam after we royally fucked up in Iran, we helped create Osama and the Mujahedeen when the Soviets were fucking around in Afghanistan, etc. And rather than deal with these problems then, we let them fester so that we can then justify a massive military response in the future. Look at what we're doing with Iran now. If we'd engaged with the moderates and reformers, we could have stirred the people against the hardliners. But we went in like dick-swinging jocks and now the hardliners have the support of the people, we're looking at expensive missile defense systems to protect against a threat they don't even have yet, and are talking about going into another war.

I'm just saying that a strong national defense is not just about guns and bombs, it's about diplomacy. Like the doctors say, the best medicine is prevention. Eat right and exercise, you've already won the battle. If the doc is cracking your chest open for a quadruple bypass, you could call that a shooting war and it's a sign you already lost. (complicated metaphor, I know.) But like Big Pharma and Medicine, the defense industry isn't about prevention or curing the disease, they're about making money off of treating the symptoms. The hospital is just as happy you had a heart attack, more moolah for them.

Yes, we will

[andersh]

Wrong, Europe is not under the bear. In fact what you don't seem to realize is that Europe's relationship with Russia is more complex. As for energy policy one European country, Norway, is the world's third largest exporter of oil and gas. In the south North-African countries are just beginning to supply Europe. But we are keeping tabs on how Russia behaves, not giving into their tantrum politics (Ukraine). EU-Russia relationship [europa.eu] And Europe is doing plenty to encourage development of democratic institutions and free press in Russia. But fighting a tyrant like Putin, his friends and KGB troops is not exactly easy. I don't see a massive US campaign helping the oppressed Russian journalists?! At least in Europe we are aiding the democratic Russian forces in the European Court of Justice [europa.eu]. Oh, and where's your comment on US censorship?

Re:Hardly so simple

[Anonymous Coward]

the left wing is allowed to spout its own opinions

Except on Fox News, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, the New York Times and the Washington Post ... which I think was the original posters point. The only media outlet that regularly features actual left wing commentary (and not moderate, which is what most Americans call "left") is PBS and it is under the constant threat of losing its funding by... you guessed it, the right wing.

from bad days to better days

[sanman2]

I'm not Russian, I'm Asian, but from my point of view, a lot of the criticism against the Kremlin comes from pro-NATO Cold War biases. ie. Everything that NATO countries do is right, and everything Putin & Co do is wrong.

As somebody who doesn't want to see the world return to its pre-ColdWar state of European hegemony, I'll say that I'm glad that Russians are fostering a robust sense of nationalism, because historically they've been ruled over by outsiders and foreign-imposed govts. Even if you look at the Bolshevik Revolution that brought Russia under communist rule, it was backed by Western European powers trying to undermine the Czar. That drunken Boris Yeltsin was likewise a Manchurian Candidate who used to give away all kinds of concessions on international treaties, while using his control over the media to suppress the opposition, but he wasn't criticized because the West was benefitting from his undemocratic rule. Those aren't good precedents, and I think the Russians need to develop some natural immunity against foreign manipulation.

While some in the West cry for "more democracy in Russia," one can also note how there was a cry to "bring democracy to Iraq" -- and look what that caused. Similarly, while some will cry that Russia "must share oil" with the world, there was the similar "liberate vital oil supplies from Saddam's tyranny."

It's good to see the Russians regaining their natural strength after having it sapped by carpetbaggers from abroad. It's their country, and I like the fact that Russians can produce politicians who are willing to stand up for their nation, even if it comes to going nose-to-nose with Westerners who think the world is their oyster.

Re:from bad days to better days

[sanman2]

I see you're the typical snooty European / White supremacist who thinks that other parts of the world historically lack individualism and diversity. MacCaulay famously coined the phrase "White Man's Burden" whereby he felt that Europeans had an historic responsibility to civilize the non-Europeans and save them from their own inferior mentality. This was of course the argument used to advance colonial conquest of the non-European world.

Calling for individualism should not be done as a pretext, like the call to "bring democracy to Iraq". Such calls are usually made with ulterior motives that don't have the target country's best interests at heart.

No thank you, I'm not interested in accepting your "offer that can't be refused." I don't see that the European colonials possess some kind of moral highground -- on the contrary, I see them as having an ugly historical reputation that they're not even willing to own up to.

The Cold War seems increasingly like it was a temporary interruption of a wider era -- the Colonial Era, in which Europeans dominated the planet, and pitted various ethnic groups against each other for Europe's exclusive gain.

Europe has a glaring conflict of interest in calling for changes in Russia, which will invariably increase the likelihood of European domination of Russia. I don't think that non-Europeans should have to bow to Europeans, on penalty of being called "anti-individualist", "anti-democratic", or whatever other trumped up charge is to be coined in the moment.

Europeans have just told me that Al Gore is some great founder of environmentalism (which he apparently invented right after the internet).
I say Europeans are trying to influence the outcome of the US elections by giving the Nobel Prize to a Democrat and former rival to Bush Jr.

Again, I sense gamesmanship and ruthlessness from a continent with the most ambitions relative to its meager resources. There's a lot of sophistry being used, but the dubious credibility and suspicious methods are obvious.