Putin Signs Law Forcing Foreign Social Media Giants To Open Russian Offices

President Vladimir Putin has signed a law that obliges foreign social media giants to open offices in Russia, a document published by the government on Thursday showed, the latest move by Moscow to exert greater control over Big Tech. From a report: The Russian authorities are keen to strengthen their control of the internet and to reduce their dependence on foreign companies and countries. In particular, they have objected in the past to political opponents of the Kremlin using foreign social media platforms to organise what they say are illegal protests and to publicise politically-tinged investigations into alleged corruption. Moscow has fined firms for failing to delete content it says is illegal, slowing down the speed of Twitter as punishment, and on Wednesday opened a new case against Alphabet subsidiary Google for breaching personal data legislation.

Good

[Vlijmen Fileer]

Other countries do the same. But somehow get less media attention for it

Re:

[tekram]

Please name a few, other than Turkey or India which currently have authoritarian governments that suppresses free speech.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Florida

China?

[Okian Warrior]

Please name a few, other than Turkey or India which currently have authoritarian governments that suppresses free speech.

How about China? Don't they use foreign social media to publicize politically-tinged investigations?

This seems like a completely reasonable way to reduce friction in forcing social media to comply with local laws.

If there's no local office you have to sue in international court or pass specific local laws and then argue with the company directly.

If doing business is contingent on having a branch office, then you can force the company to obey local aws directly by threatening to kick the branch office out.

Th

Re:

[JackieBrown]

If I had mod points, I'd give them all to you just for referencing Veridian Dynamics.

Re:

[Cederic]

Germany.
UK.
USA.

etc..

Re:

[fustakrakich]

And if they refuse to open offices, what can be done? Will they send out bounty hunters and hitmen? (Don't answer that. This is Russia. They just might. The US sends people out all over the world to kidnap people too) A national firewall can be circumvented if they try. I wish more people with their kind of money would fight back against the authoritarians, but that would be biting the hand that feeds..

Re:

[pacinpm]

It's not about views. Twitter/Facebook/etc rely on advertisers money. If you can't legally pay Facebook for ads in Russia (ads for Rusian products, in Russian, for Russian people) there is no business case for Twitter/Facebook/etc.
So you could technically view Facebook in Russia. It's just Facebook will get no money from those views.

Re:

[bill_mcgonigle]

> there is no business case for Twitter/Facebook/etc.

No points today, but totally 'Insightful'.

It would be funny in Facebook switched to background cryptomining in Russia instead of ads.

Re:

[Applehu Akbar]

Other countries do the same. But somehow get less media attention for it

I will support such a law for Russia as soon as it signs a criminal extradition treaty with the US.

Keep Russia out.

[jellomizer]

Russia has not been a good actor, where they have a habit of abusing social media.
If Russia doesn't want American Social Media, then let them block it, it just means less propaganda for us.

Re:Keep Russia out.

[Frank Burly]

I'm pretty sure they'll let their trolls continue to use it.

Re: Keep Russia out.

[VeryFluffyBunny]

Facebook sells its audience manipulation services to whomever pays. Facebook knowingly allowed 3rd parties to use Facebook's paid services on the Kremlin's behalf. It's the same in other countries with equally questionable regimes. All the Kremlin are doing here is recognising that fact & putting in a few mitigation measures to protect themselves from the very same services.

Re:

[NicknameUnavailable]

If Russia doesn't want American Social Media, then let them block it, it just means less propaganda for us.

LOL, "less propaganda" isn't happening, buddy. Multiple conflicting sources of propaganda makes for a freer society than a monopoly on it, if only because they spend too much time fighting one another with transient memes to be effective.

Re:

[NicknameUnavailable]

You think that extreme leaning information like propaganda from two contradictory sources somehow cancels each other out, it doesn't, it exhausts people and they give up looking for the truth and accept the falsehood most palatable to them.

It's still vastly better than having one-sided propaganda. People being exhausted and accepting whatever's most palatable means a bunch of people with a bunch of different beliefs, which in effect cancel out through their aggregated actions and voices. People being fed truth plus one-sided propaganda results in meeting in the middle, which is guaranteed to never be the truth.

Re:

[fazig]

That's as likely as introducing gun control equals disbanding your national military forces.
State backed institutions are going to get whatever the government thinks they need to complete their tasks.

The group that would mostly see consequences would be regular and innocent citizens themselves.

Take China as an example. Their firewall makes it difficult for their citizens to access information from the rest of the World if the CCP doesn't like it. But it doesn't stop CCP funded media outlets to spread

Re:

[Tarlus]

Facebook $ees it differently

So open an office.

[Wokan]

Good luck finding anyone willing to staff it. Hell, I'll bet they could go in with all the other "giants" and get a shared (empty) space.

Re:

[bobstreo]

Good luck finding anyone willing to staff it. Hell, I'll bet they could go in with all the other "giants" and get a shared (empty) space.

They could always hire a bunch of "homeless" people off the street, and have them staff the offices.

Re:

[Salgak1]

Good luck finding anyone willing to staff it. Hell, I'll bet they could go in with all the other "giants" and get a shared (empty) space.

They could always hire a bunch of "homeless" people off the street, and have them staff the offices.

. . .and still have an increased level of professionalism ??? (evil grin)

Re:

[EvilSS]

Nah, hire a bunch of Putin's buddies and their families. Give then zero control, they just show up and sit in an office (if they want to), and collect a pay check. That way when they come for them, well, won't that be awkward?

Re:

[GlennC]

Nah, hire a bunch of Putin's buddies and their families. Give then zero control, they just show up and sit in an office (if they want to), and collect a pay check.

I'm guessing this is what Putin intended.

That way when they come for them, well, won't that be awkward?

They won't face any direct consequences for whatever the home office does.

Re:

[syberspot]

New version of gunboat diplomacy?

Re:So open an office.

[Snotnose]

Good luck finding anyone willing to staff it.

Edward Snowden is probably available.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[Frank Burly]

It is just as accurate to say "it says," and doing so highlights the identity of the arbitor.

Re:

[chadenright]

If Russia passes a law says that I, a private American citizen, must go to Moscow and give Putin a blowjob, I am going to ignore it, as is my right. If it is a requirement to do business there, I will simply not do business there.

That's the right thing to do. Anyone who does otherwise has no right to complain about Putin's dictates or how Putin's dick tastes.

why not pass a law to make poverty illegal?

[Micah NC]

This whole mentality of "I don't like this, there should be a law against" needs to die.

Re:

[fahrbot-bot]

This whole mentality of "I don't like this, there should be a law against" needs to die.

Ya, but Putin's go-to move is to simply have people jailed, tortured and killed, so passing a law people can violate gives him a "legal" pretext to do all that.

Re:

[Micah NC]

Yeah. He is saying, "I don't like this (things he mentioned and things he didn't".

Censors & Commies Love Banning Speech

[Seven Spirals]

The trouble is that it's a bitch to enforce. They wanna have someone locally they can scoop up and torture.

Re:

[Chris Mattern]

That's coming. Look for laws that require the Russian government to have some say in who the people in the office are. Right now, it's just getting hostages.

Re:

[Chris Mattern]

Yep, minute I read this article, the first thing that ran across my mind was, "Putin wants potential hostages."

Re:

[mjwx]

The trouble is that it's a bitch to enforce. They wanna have someone locally they can scoop up and torture.

This is more about favourable jobs for the oligarch's children. One's where they don't have to do anything but turn up for a few hours and snort coke.

I know assassination is a bad word for some folks

[theshowmecanuck]

But really, can't someone just do this guy in? He's killed dozens if not hundreds or more journalists. He's used and/or facilitated use of weapons of mass destruction in several conflicts (nerve gas in Chechnya and Syria for example), used nerve agents for assassinations in other countries, kills or tries to kill political opponents, annexes parts of neighbouring countries like Georgia and Ukraine (pretty much a Hitler move), and has brought the world back into a Cold War. These are things that in the past

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

you're a bigoted idiot if you think hypocritical leaders in the west are any better (bombing civilians? check. extraterritorial prosecution? check. ally with dictators who parrot your geopolitical goals like saudi arabia? check.) were you calling for trump assassination as well when he was in power?

Re:

[alexgieg]

But really, can't someone just do this guy in?

If they US hasn't done that yet, it's almost certainly because they believe his next in line would be worse. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if this is a similar case to the one with Hitler back in the day, when the US reasoned that removing him from power might lead to someone actually competent, such as one of his generals, getting into it and beginning to give rational orders for a change.

For all of his bombastic rhetoric, shows of megalomania, and petty assassinations of anyone daring to remark on how

Yes

[fulldecent]

This law is directly in the interest of the Russian federal government. And I expect more laws like this will pass in other countries.

In places where this law may be seen in a negative light as "control of media" such as USA, I expect other actions to effectively implement this anyway. Such as how Trump and Biden effectively banned China from operating TikTok in the US.

<small>When something is banned by law, often it just stops. When something is "effectively banned", there is just some huge cost atta

I do not see this as good.

[KumaThaBear]

We already have accusations of "Russian Hackers" I think it would just make it easier to throw blame at the Russian gov, and if all of it is true, make it was easier for them to compromise those social media platforms.

What must the office do?

[PPH]

Lease a space and put a plaque on the door with the name of one of Putin's minions as the local office general manager. It's not Facebook's problem if this person never shows up for work.

Just don't give them roofs or windows

[Kwirl]

Those seem to suffer from a lot of innocent structural failures over there. also, hire a taster and get a bulletproof hairpiece

3rd grader responds to Putin's law...

[freeze128]

"Make me."