Putin’s Attempt To Silence Opposition By Banning Independent Media

On March 2nd, Russian authorities banned independent media outlets, allowing the Kremlin to control news surrounding the war in Ukraine. This action occurred following a request from the general prosecutor’s office to halt actions carried out by independent news organizations the same day that President Putin ordered troops to invade Ukraine. Shortly after, Putin signed a law against “fake news,” effectively blocking various independent news organizations. These include MediaZona, the Republic, Snob.ru and Agentstvo. Social media platforms, such as Instagram, have also been banned. As a result, government media companies have monopolized information in the country. In addition, journalists can face up to 15 years in prison if they report on Russian military operations. Over 150 journalists have been forced to flee the country so far. 

According to an interview given to Al Jazeera, Mediazona said it has been banned because they “cover honestly what is happening in Ukraine and call the invasion an invasion and the war a war.” The terms invasion, war, and attack have been characterized under false news by Putin. Russia residents are now limited to state-generated information, which negates any sort of invasion in Ukraine. Days before the independent media was blocked, the Moscow Times explained that the state-media is blaming Western nations for accelerating tensions in the region. It also argues that Ukraine is waging a war against its own people in the Donbas region. In analyzing the deeper causes of Russia’s media reform, it is important to note that an aggressive state depends on a unified and compliant internal population. Gregory Asmolov, a Russian-born professor at King’s College in London, expands on this during an interview with VOA News. He explains that “Russian Authorities have already lost the information battle outside of Russia. But internally, it is still a very sensitive matter. That’s why they need to control the narrative of the conflict.”

The Russian government’s drastic efforts to control information is a direct violation of free speech. Journalists, as well as Russian residents, have become victims of collateral damage in the war against Ukraine. That is, the providers and recipients of objective news have been denied distribution and access to unbiased information on Europe’s largest conflict this century. In connecting this event to historical examples of conflict, there exist similarities between the domination over media in Russia today and in Nazi Germany during WWII. For example, the “peoples’ receiver” was a widely distributed range of radio receivers that Hitler used to unite the public under a common goal based on a single stream of state-sponsored information. Thus, Russia’s independent media ban is not an isolated event, but rather a signal of an expansionist state. 

Although the attack on independent media has accelerated since the invasion of Ukraine, these outlets have faced pressure for two decades in Russia. The Kremlin has arrested journalists and forced media outlets to enact self-censorship since the end of the Cold War. However, a military step as large as the invasion of sovereign territory demands a proportionally large step in crushing internal opposition. At the same time, the globalization of digital technology provides some Russian residents access to illegal information through VPN (virtual private network) usage. These allow people to overcome digital blocks in order to view foreign websites. There has also been a spike in online messaging, which enables users to contact family and friends in other countries. Though this technology is positive for Russian residents facing a wave of propaganda, there is fear that Putin may cut off the country from the global web entirely and force a return to the short-wave radio. Russia would consequently experience a level of censorship unobserved since the Cold War. 

The ban on independent media outlets has future implications for Russia with respect to the greater image of human rights and global peace. On a national level, one may expect a resistance to the Russian government from its citizens, which will cause violence, crime, and polarization. Protesters and journalists wishing to expose Russia’s military efforts will continue to be persecuted, abused, and imprisoned. On a global level, it contributes to democratic backsliding, thus erasing progress toward freedom and peace for the entire world. 

Related