Russia Lawmakers Pass Bills That Could Block Social Media Sites (npr.org) 25
Russian lawmakers have approved a range of new measures that could further stifle dissent and allow tighter restrictions on online content -- including blocking websites like YouTube and Twitter. NPR reports: One bill would allow for the blocking of foreign websites that it says "discriminate" against Russian media. A second law would allow it to levy large fines against companies that don't take down content banned in the country. A third law would establish jail terms for those convicted of making slanderous comments online or in the media. A person found guilty of slander could face up to two years in jail and be fined up to 1 million rubles (about $13,300), Reuters reports. The bills were passed by Russia's lower house, the State Duma. If they become law, as expected, they would mean that Russia could block websites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter that label content produced by Russian state media outlets as being just that. Under the legislation, Russian authorities will be able to block or slow down such sites.
That's it... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Second. Everyone should do exactly what they did. Though to be honest, most countries are not big enough to do that. You need critical mass to afford such a move.
The law in question has a ladder of punishments which are invoked if a social media or media platform is found to specifically discriminate against Russian content and/or content of Russian origin. If you automatical
Re: (Score:2)
In addition to this law, they voted 4 more:
1. Re-criminalisation of Libel. Libel once upon a time in the Soviet block was a criminal statute. It became a civil one to match the Western view on this in the 1990es. It is now re-criminalised with possible jail terms. You can thank UberOppositonFuhrer Herr Navalny for this one too. He dumped some rancid sh*t
Can we do this in the US? (Score:3)
The goal of social media is brainwashing and control. [fandom.com]. It doesn't hurt that the episode includes a young Ashley Judd.
And the problem is ...? (Score:1)
nft
To be fair, a lot of social media is defamation (Score:2)
Considering that most political "discussions" on social media are two camps of low IQ fools reeeing at each other and using labels like grunts that say "ugggg no like dis ting," the Duma sorta has a point.
Re: (Score:1)
Can't allow the state to decide what we can or cannot discuss. Regardless of the content, we need bulletproof communications
The con artist must be drooling (Score:4, Insightful)
If only he had the kind of power to block anything truthful said about him on social media, or have his lies corrected [cnn.com].
This is one of many reasons the con artist has not said a single bad word about Russia or Putin over the past four years, even after Russia put a bounty on the heads of U.S. soldiers [militarytimes.com]. Once he's out of office (willing or unwillingly), he intends to get his payback for all the work he's done for Putin to undermine this country.
Re: (Score:2)
Current Occupant is worried shitless about what the new administration is going to discover, especially at the Pentagon.
Could Russia please pass a bill that... (Score:1)
... keeps Russians off our social media sites too? That would improve quality of life for everyone, and I think their government can even agree at this point.
Trollin', trollin', trollin' (Score:2)
Re:Trollin', trollin', trollin' (Score:4, Insightful)
A real Republican President would have done something about it.
There hasn't been a real republican president in decades. Alternately, one might argue that Trump is the most republican of presidents, given what the last few have been like.
Sounds a lot like Trump's ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... call to repeal 230.
Easier identification (Score:2)
good idea (Score:1)
Verification unwelcome (Score:2)
Why wouldn't Russia want everyone to know who produced the article? Online copyright is everything, these days. Complaining when Youtube verifies the source, implies they've got something to hide.
Re: (Score:2)
They could just have a strong emphasis on privacy. However, that does not align with many other things that happen there. And when circumstantial evidence piles up, it becomes rather compelling, making dismissing it as such a suspicious act.
It's just too much to give them the benefit of a doubt any more for anyone with a tenth of a brain left. So it's definitely a red flag.
And there's a lot of
Searching for Putin fans (Score:1)
A lot of money (Score:3)
Fuck. I got fined 1 MILLION rubles.
$13,300 USD .. umm nevermind.