Slashdot Mirror


New "Iron Curtain" for Russian Internet

Dionysius, God of Wine and Leaf, points out a story about the Russian government's interest in expanding anti-extremism laws to include the blocking of websites and ISPs. The laws would match those already in use for the country's print media. Russian internet users may soon be forced to deal with the same issues facing Chinese citizens. Quoting: "An official at the Russian prosecutor's general office, Vyacheslav Sizov, told the Russian-language newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta that any web site that is determined to host what he terms 'extremist material' would be blocked from being accessible from within the Russian Federation. Given the Putin government's history with the media, 'extremist material' may be very broadly interpreted as any content unfriendly to the interests of the Russian government."

16 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. Been done before by phpmysqldev · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is quite a disturbing trend in so called 'industrialized' countries (although Russia's industrialized status could be questioned). The lack of outside information and abundance government propaganda is why N. Korea is so scary. Many of the people there that have no access to outside information actually whole heartedly believe what the government tells them, and why wouldn't they, it's all they've ever known. All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few.

    1. Re:Been done before by blahplusplus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few."

      Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics.

    2. Re:Been done before by phpmysqldev · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sounds like America. Despite all the hoopla about freedom and whatnot in america, there is substantial indoctrination i.e. any mention of helping others gets you labelled a 'socialist' or a 'commie'. IMHO America is probably one of THE most indoctrinated societies in the world at the moment. You can't have a discussion about much with a large percentage of people about certain topics. Agreed, but the difference is in America the information is available, most people just don't care to find it on their own. In the case of Russia, you more than likely have people that want outside information and now won't be able to get it.
    3. Re:Been done before by mrbluze · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All it takes is one new generation to grow up behind these 'iron curtains' and the governments have effectively indoctrinated an entire country with the ideals of a select few. All it takes is one generation to grow up exposed to the US media machine and we have a country effectively devoid of any of its original culture. The sword has two edges.
      --
      Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    4. Re:Been done before by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Agreed, but the difference is in America the information is available, most people just don't care to find it on their own.

      The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population, but it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

      I think if I lived in a place with that rate of imprisonment, I'd be keeping my head down and avoiding controversy too.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    5. Re:Been done before by Neoprofin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If we're all so indoctrinated and there is no freedom why do I have to sift through so many overblown posts about the American media to find any posts actually discussing this new iron curtain?

    6. Re:Been done before by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow.. Do you actually believe that? Maybe you were indoctrinated into the lack of perspective groups of people. It isn't if you want to help, it is when you want to take something from me against my will/wishes in order to do your good that gets you labeled as a commie and socialist. And quite frankly, that would by definition be communist/socialist.

      I know Bashing America at every change is fun and profitable, but you could at least get the story straight first. I mean with all the valid reasons to Bash America, you have to go and basically make something up.

    7. Re:Been done before by mrogers · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The way I see it, the more criminals in prison, the less there are on the streets.

      That would make sense if you could simply divide the population into criminals and non-criminals. Unfortunately it's not that simple - people move between the two categories. So when judging whether a particular method of punishment works, we need to ask three questions:

      1) Does it keep criminals off the streets?
      2) Does it dissuade non-criminals from becoming criminals?
      3) Does it persuade criminals to become non-criminals?

      Prison does well on the first test, and fairly well on the second (although the worst offenders don't respond to deterrents). But it fails the third test: criminals released from prison in the UK have a higher reoffending rate than those given community sentences. That's why judges are reluctant to impose a prison sentence for a first offence: once you've gone to prison, you're likely to keep going back.

    8. Re:Been done before by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1) Does it keep criminals off the streets?
      2) Does it dissuade non-criminals from becoming criminals?
      3) Does it persuade criminals to become non-criminals?

      You forgot the most important one:

      0. Should they even be considered a criminal in the first place ?

    9. Re:Been done before by dimeglio · · Score: 3, Insightful

      0. Should they even be considered a criminal in the first place ? Some wise person whose name eludes me once said - paraphrasing:
      "Do governments create legislation as a way to increase control on it's population or to actually maintain social peace?"

      Getting a $100-$200 ticket for burning a red light(which can kill) vs a $750 fine per song for downloading "illegal" MP3s (which doesn't kill anyone) seems rather unfair.
      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
  2. Democracy did win right? by kidsizedcoffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The stories about Putin and his hot gymnast girlfriend got a paper's license revoked. I imagine the internet rules would be as even handed.

  3. I don't know how yet, but... by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I think that it is time for the Internet (read anonymous) to start striking back at those world leaders that wish to silence information.

    Yes, I'm American and I think the Bush Administration is one of the likely targets of such an effort.

    We have the Internet, it is free, information flows around the globe. For all the faults that might bring it has been hailed as an equalizer and liberator of peoples all over the globe. Freedom of information is the basis of the good inside an OLPC.

    FTFA:

    Print (and television) media in Russia is already under either official or unofficial government control, leaving the Internet as the last frontier free of government scrutiny. "It is difficult to find anyone who is not against extremism but it depends on how the law is used," Center of Journalism in Extreme Situations director Oleg Panfilov told the AFP in response to the news. Panfilov noted that the government has used the law "selectively" in the past, but that it's still worrisome when the government tries to expand the law into new areas. Yes, we are all against extremism and extremists, but very few of us agree on what exactly those are. Such subjective terms should never be allowed to be enacted as laws. By allowed, I mean that free peoples should protest such laws, even if they are not in the country where it is enacted.

    In times past it was said that Monarchy's that do not hang together will 'hang' separately. I think that time has not changed this at all, and many of the so called republics are merely facades for the ruling classes to hide behind.

    Wow, that sounded a bit socialist or something, but I truly think that the Internet has the power to change things for the better. If the Russian people are unable to, perhaps we outside of Russia should make our voices known and heard.

    Does anyone have any ideas?
    1. Re:I don't know how yet, but... by Shihar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I am pretty sure that a bunch of ornery 16 year old American kids are going to kick over the Russian political system to the cheers of the Russian people. Right.

      I have a better idea. How about we just realize that people need to sort their own shit out? The best you can possibly do is elect a government that realizes that it isn't going to beat another nation into submission with rhetoric. If the west wants to do anything for the poor huddled masses of all the oppressed people around the world, it should happily and merrily jump in to help fledgling democracies, reward leaders who bring about democratic change, make some vague attempt to hold a little moral high ground, and serve as example and rewarder.

      Tongue lashing Putin is a waste of breath. Words are worth their weight in gold. The best thing to do is give Russia a pat on the head, a hug, and a wad of cash when they do right, and wait for a less drunk and incompetent Yeltsin to appear to bring Russia back to something closer to a democracy.

  4. Re:Sounds like America? by FoolsGold · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so, hence they are effectively indoctrinated regardless of having access to this information. They either don't care, or wouldn't believe it in the first place.

    By being able to obtain the will of the people without having to close-off outside info, you've achieved much more than just simple censorship. It's much worse. It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all.

  5. Re:Sounds like America? by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Conceptually, the strategy of having a vocal "mainstream media" that labels anyone outside of a narrow political range as a "crazy extremist" can be even more powerful as an indoctrination tool than an "iron curtain". In the USSR, everyone knew that the news was all government propaganda. In the USA today, most people believe in the "free press".

    --
    -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  6. Re:Sounds like America? by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ah, but what you fail to realize is that even if Americans are able to get outside info, a lot of them have no desire to DO so, hence they are effectively indoctrinated regardless of having access to this information. They either don't care, or wouldn't believe it in the first place.

    By being able to obtain the will of the people without having to close-off outside info, you've achieved much more than just simple censorship. It's much worse. It's willful ignorance, and THAT'S the scariest of all. Trotsky, I believe, is credited with saying that any society is only three meals away from revolution.

    I think the converse is also true - provided a society as a whole is happy that it has the next three meals coming, it will continue in its own status quo and is safe from revolution. It follows that most people will not seek out challenge the status quo.

    I'll tell you which societies will change first - regardless of how indoctrinated they are. It'll be in those areas where peoples' wages barely cover buying food already. The worldwide increase in food costs will hit them first, and hardest. I wouldn't be too surprised to see another round of communist governments get in, subsidising staples like rice but letting everything else in the country go to hell.

    Interestingly, the list of countries affected will very likely include at least a few places where it's possible to get decent Internet access but wages are very low - just the kind of place that things get outsourced to. Hmmm.