Slashdot Mirror


In Russia, 50% of News Must Be Happy

Several readers sent us to the New York Times for disturbing news on Russia's vanishing press freedoms. The story tells of how one of the few remaining relatively independent radio outlets in Russia recently acquired new managers, reportedly loyal to Vladimir Putin. Quoting: "At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia's largest independent radio news network, the managers had startling news of their own: from now on, they said, at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be 'positive.' In addition, opposition leaders could not be mentioned on the air and the United States was to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told by the new managers, who are allies of the Kremlin."

8 of 551 comments (clear)

  1. A nice thing by CastrTroy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While I realize that censoring or controlling the news networks in any way is definitely a bad thing, I with that more news in North America showed positive information, whether then just all bad stuff. This is the reason that when I do watch the news, it's usually the morning news. They tend to put positive stories on, while still putting on the important stories so that we know what's going on in the world. I haven't watched evening news in years. It keeps getting worse and worse.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  2. Is this such a bad thing? by Illserve · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We in the western world (either the states, or the UK where I currently live) might be much better off if the media were reporting some good news once in a while. The culture of fear is increasingly pervasive and it's fueled, in part, by the media scare-wagon, which cannot help but tell us about a new thing that is going to kill us or ruin our lives every week.

    Enough is enough. Let's do the Putin thing.

  3. reporting standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the U.S., staions choose the news according to what they think will get us tuned in.
    In Russia, editors choose according to whether they will keep their job or not.

    Fortunately, in the west we have 100 cable news channels to choose from...In Russia their are 2 ..both with majority ownership by the Government or it's right arm, Gazprom (the largest oil company in the world...and majority owned by the Government)

  4. Re:tag: backintheussr by frogstar_robot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most of the Western USSR states became part of NATO. That is about a big a hint as I can think of that the USSR as we knew it isn't ever coming back. Getting back places like Poland, Romania, and a good chunka Germany mean risking nuclear war. There's other real estate on their frontiers that won't get our panties in nearly as much as a twist. As an added bonus, it'd give some of these islamist nutjobs another target to play with.

  5. Re:Um, Didn't you just commit treason? by QuickFox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In democratic countries, threats against the functionaries of democracy are seen as threats against democracy itself. This is because the functionaries should act according to their own convictions and the promises that they have made to their voters. If instead they are forced or swayed by threats, democracy is subverted.

    --
    Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
  6. Re:I might actually pay attention... by melikamp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Oh, come one. Just yesterday I tuned on to Fox just to catch a report about two cutest little kittens abandoned behind a dumpster and then rescued by some good people. I am not joking.

  7. The long road to democratic fee market by caseih · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One thing we always forget about Russia is that the jump from a communist system to a western-style democracy is far far greater than we think. While Russia has made great strides in the past, there is a long ways to go. Putin may or may not be the despot you think he is. Some of my Russian friends, while they don't like the man, understand some of why he rules the way he does.

    The biggest problem in Russia is that things like Agriculture have never bee privatized. Privatizing agriculture would seem to be a great idea to us in the west, but if Putin were to do it in Russia, it would destroy the country. Many industries have been privatized in Russia, with disastrous results. Basically the government divvied up the cooperatives and companies by distributing stock to citizens, hoping that citizens could take ownership and make a profit. What happened is that organized crime and other opportunists saw an ideal opportunity for a grab. They went around and offered citizens much less than the face value of the stock. Since the stock had no value to the average person, most people happily sold their stocks for pennies on the dollar. This has led to major problems with monopolies and even crime organizations. Remember, these people have never had any experience with a western-style economic system, let alone a democracy. They were just no match for the wits of the opportunists. Hence agriculture in Russia will not be privatized anytime soon. Can you imagine the massive land-grab?

    Anyway, this is the major reason why Putin is reluctant to allow Russians to experience this great thing we call Liberty. It's not that he wants to be a dictator or stalin, but that he recognizes Russia can't transform herself all at once. I think it will take at least 2 generations myself. Along the way, Putin has drawn the ire of the western world and many critics at home.

    I am not going to condone his actions. I just want to make sure we all understand the underlying situations and conditions that exist in Russia and the former republics of the Soviet Union. If they move to quickly to western-style economics and politics, chaos will ensue. Think 1930's mob rule in America, but only with 21st century technology, money, and power. It's a precarious situation, and very delicate. If Putin allows media too much power, and allowed them to print too many doom and gloom, down with the government stuff, not only will his government fall, but the entire country will fall into anarchy and mob rule. Is there another way? I'm sure there is. But let's make sure we have a full understanding before we spout off on this subject. Reacting prematurely is the very thing that leads to the fallacies that Bush used in justifying the Iraq war

  8. Re:Probably a Good Idea by I'll+Provide+The+War · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They may be true to some extent, but there is still positive news of substantial import that goes unreported.

    For example how often do we hear that the murder rate in the US is the lowest since 1966?
    Or that the robbery rate in the US is the lowest since 1968?
    Or that the rate of vehicle theft in the US is the lowest since 1968?
    Or that the rate of rape in the US is the lowest since 1977?

    It must not be reported very often since most Americans seem to believe that they are living in some kind of unprecedented Mad-Max dystopia that requires their children to be on lockdown 24/7.

    Stats from: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm