Precedent: do digital TV providers block Rain TV channel “for lack of likes” and “at the request of outraged penguins”?
Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues. We all remember the “Law on arbitrary blocking”, which allows, by order of the investigation, sometimes blocking sites because of one comment.
Those who thought then what would be more fun turned out to be right: a precedent is being created when the content creator is blocked for distributing, according to the provider, “undesirable content” even without any legal basis.
By the way, I apologize in advance for some errors in the text. I decided not to delete them, but only to cross them out from the point of view of history only - but they do not carry any meaning. So - blots (well, you know what I mean).
On January 26, 2014, a TV-show on the Amateurs devoted to some aspects of the blockade of Leningrad during the Great Patriotic War appeared on the following question:
(the question appeared in this interpretation on the 9th minute on the air, and on the website tvrain.ru ).
At the same time, the moderator, Vitaly Dymarsky, clarified that this wording did not belong to the TV channel, but to the writer Viktor Astafyev.
After 10-15 minutes, this survey was removed from the tvrain.ru website, and the editor’s explanation appeared on the TV channel’s twitter (the editor- in-chief tweeted, the official twitter tvrain made a repost) that this was a mistake for which the TV channel apologizes .
And here it began ...
Already on the 27th, the State Duma of the Russian Federation abruptlyalmost said, threw condemn "attempts to rehabilitate Nazism" (according to the deputy from United Russia Irina Yarovaya)
On January 28, 2014, the President of the Cable TV Association of Russia, Yuri Pripachkin, came up with the initiative to turn off the TV channel Rain in the packages of digital TV broadcasting :
Well, that is, how would it turn out that to replace the 5 point, of Article 29 of the second chapter of the Constitution of the Russian Federation? Boldly
')
In addition to the instant tweet from the editor-in-chief, apologies for the situation brought:
On January 27, editor Mikhail Zygar ' in his blog - I must say that the apologies turned out quite strange, and more was said about the "political order"
January 28, 2014 - moderator Mikhail Kozyrev in the Online program . In addition, Vladimir Pozner spoke on this topic, calling it inadmissible. Also, in the continuation of this program , viewers spoke on the phone (wrote about paid access, but the video works without money).
January 29, 2014 - General Director Natalya Sindeeva in an interview on lenta.ru
But…
At the moment, the TV channel Rain has been blocked without any court and investigation by the following cable television providers (most of them are also Internet to the House):
Rostelecom
Online
Home ru
Acado
As well as satellite broadcaster NTV-PLUS
To be honest, I myself am extremely indignant at the similar wording in the Survey. The same Vladimir Pozner explained why this definition is unacceptable on the example of Kiev is much better than I could have. Yes, for me a similar idea is complete nonsense.
Personally, I would make for such presenters eat on the air on a bar of soap, and the producer - would send to the end of the contract to rake manure.
But I am worried about another situation:
in fact, cable TV providers synchronously simply turn off broadcasting, despite all previously concluded legal agreements. Despite the Constitution and the law.
At the same time, the vast majority of these operators also provide access to the Internet.
Thus, in my opinion, a precedent is created: a group of large players, contrary to the law and their obligations, cease access to information on the basis of "their own morality" and "outraged letters of extreme residents of the North (well, for example, Penguins)."
At least nowhere has been published a list of subscribers who expressed their displeasure and the requirement to exclude the TV channel from the list of the package, or even the number of people who addressed this question.
At the same time, Natalya Sindeeva, the general director of the TV channel, in an interview with Lenta.ru names several other reasons:
Just met "old friends" and decided to bring their ownconcepts of morality.
More precisely, they probably decided to "resolve the issue", hiding behind morality and, in general, just indignation.
Why, for example, then tomorrow Beeline would not block the official sites of Rostelecom and Akado? After all, according to the statement of Yuri Pritachkin, this would be quite reasonable - after all, surely due to the fact that a person has a choice, he can refuse the services of his provider?
Well, dissatisfied, apparently, it is proposed to hang around for years in court ...
Update: judging by the information of the channel itself, broadcasting in cable networks is starting to return.
Update 2: Thanks to the kind HabrasHites, I can again edit this text, and add information about changes in the situation. Thanks you!
Update 3: According to incoming data, "fluctuations in the broadcast" Rain are moving into a stage of termination of broadcasting. For a number of sources, Rostelecom has stopped broadcasting.
Update 4: 01/31/2014 Beeline stopped broadcasting the channel "Rain". . Now you can see "Rain" only on satellite Tricolor TV and Continent, as well as on the website tvrain.ru but only for a paid subscription.
Update 5: Tricolor and Continent-TV have stopped broadcasting on the channel "Rain". In principle, we can say that this channel is one step away from closing.
Those who thought then what would be more fun turned out to be right: a precedent is being created when the content creator is blocked for distributing, according to the provider, “undesirable content” even without any legal basis.
By the way, I apologize in advance for some errors in the text. I decided not to delete them, but only to cross them out from the point of view of history only - but they do not carry any meaning. So - blots (well, you know what I mean).
Essence of the question
On January 26, 2014, a TV-show on the Amateurs devoted to some aspects of the blockade of Leningrad during the Great Patriotic War appeared on the following question:
Was it necessary to surrender Leningrad to save hundreds of thousands of lives?
(the question appeared in this interpretation on the 9th minute on the air, and on the website tvrain.ru ).
At the same time, the moderator, Vitaly Dymarsky, clarified that this wording did not belong to the TV channel, but to the writer Viktor Astafyev.
After 10-15 minutes, this survey was removed from the tvrain.ru website, and the editor’s explanation appeared on the TV channel’s twitter (the editor- in-chief tweeted, the official twitter tvrain made a repost) that this was a mistake for which the TV channel apologizes .
And here it began ...
State Duma
Already on the 27th, the State Duma of the Russian Federation abruptly
Cable Operators Association
On January 28, 2014, the President of the Cable TV Association of Russia, Yuri Pripachkin, came up with the initiative to turn off the TV channel Rain in the packages of digital TV broadcasting :
I had a desire, as an operator, to take and turn off such information, taking upon myself certain functions of censoring
Well, that is, how would it turn out that to replace the 5 point, of Article 29 of the second chapter of the Constitution of the Russian Federation? Boldly
Guaranteed freedom of the media. Censorship is prohibited.
')
Rain
In addition to the instant tweet from the editor-in-chief, apologies for the situation brought:
On January 27, editor Mikhail Zygar ' in his blog - I must say that the apologies turned out quite strange, and more was said about the "political order"
January 28, 2014 - moderator Mikhail Kozyrev in the Online program . In addition, Vladimir Pozner spoke on this topic, calling it inadmissible. Also, in the continuation of this program , viewers spoke on the phone (wrote about paid access, but the video works without money).
January 29, 2014 - General Director Natalya Sindeeva in an interview on lenta.ru
But…
Lock
At the moment, the TV channel Rain has been blocked without any court and investigation by the following cable television providers (most of them are also Internet to the House):
Rostelecom
Online
Home ru
Acado
As well as satellite broadcaster NTV-PLUS
In fact
To be honest, I myself am extremely indignant at the similar wording in the Survey. The same Vladimir Pozner explained why this definition is unacceptable on the example of Kiev is much better than I could have. Yes, for me a similar idea is complete nonsense.
Vladimir Pozner:
As I see it, the wording was, to put it mildly, ill-conceived. It is hardly necessary to ask such questions when the people who have gone through this blockade are still alive, whose parents have died, who are proud that they have stood it all. It was unusually ill-conceived. I am surprised that such a writer as Yerofeyev, a thin man, could even ask such a question. It was unprofessional from the point of view of television, in my opinion. In general, all that I say is, of course, "in my opinion." There was an error, and it is very a pity, because you were substituted. I treat very well to RAIN. This, in my opinion, the channel, which still tries to be honest and objective, which is not easy, and therefore has many enemies. And, of course, we must think that this is so, and not in any other way. And this survey, and this question just gave your opponents very good reasons to say all that they say. I am personally very sorry, but, on the other hand, as Moliere said: “You wanted this, Georges Dandin, you get it.” Maybe next time you will be more careful and smarter.
...
And, say, if I had the honor to be in your program, I would, of course, ask, but what about the surrender of Kiev? We all remember what happened after that, that is, about saving a thousand lives. Babiy Yar, we remember or do not remember when they passed Kiev? The person who asks such a question (I have the impression) that he does not know the story at all. He does not understand how the Nazis treated the Slavs. I'm not talking about the Jews, this is a separate question ...
Personally, I would make for such presenters eat on the air on a bar of soap, and the producer - would send to the end of the contract to rake manure.
But I am worried about another situation:
in fact, cable TV providers synchronously simply turn off broadcasting, despite all previously concluded legal agreements. Despite the Constitution and the law.
At the same time, the vast majority of these operators also provide access to the Internet.
Thus, in my opinion, a precedent is created: a group of large players, contrary to the law and their obligations, cease access to information on the basis of "their own morality" and "outraged letters of extreme residents of the North (well, for example, Penguins)."
At least nowhere has been published a list of subscribers who expressed their displeasure and the requirement to exclude the TV channel from the list of the package, or even the number of people who addressed this question.
At the same time, Natalya Sindeeva, the general director of the TV channel, in an interview with Lenta.ru names several other reasons:
The operators, who announced disconnection from their networks of the channel “Rain”, said that they were ordered to do this under any reason. About this on the air of "Rain" told the general director of the TV channel Natalia Sindeeva. She stressed that the operators are ready to talk about the order only in confidence.
According to Sindeeva, the question of disconnecting the TV channel lies exclusively in the political, and not in the legal plane. She added that the active actions against “Rain” began after the story about giving high-ranking officials in the program “And so on.”
Turns out that
- No “inaccurate” investigators or representatives of the prosecutor's office are needed.
- No linguistic expertise needed.
- Do not need a court decision
- Not even a hint of violation of the law.
Just met "old friends" and decided to bring their own
More precisely, they probably decided to "resolve the issue", hiding behind morality and, in general, just indignation.
Why, for example, then tomorrow Beeline would not block the official sites of Rostelecom and Akado? After all, according to the statement of Yuri Pritachkin, this would be quite reasonable - after all, surely due to the fact that a person has a choice, he can refuse the services of his provider?
Well, dissatisfied, apparently, it is proposed to hang around for years in court ...
Update: judging by the information of the channel itself, broadcasting in cable networks is starting to return.
Update 2: Thanks to the kind HabrasHites, I can again edit this text, and add information about changes in the situation. Thanks you!
Update 3: According to incoming data, "fluctuations in the broadcast" Rain are moving into a stage of termination of broadcasting. For a number of sources, Rostelecom has stopped broadcasting.
Update 4: 01/31/2014 Beeline stopped broadcasting the channel "Rain". . Now you can see "Rain" only on satellite Tricolor TV and Continent, as well as on the website tvrain.ru but only for a paid subscription.
Update 5: Tricolor and Continent-TV have stopped broadcasting on the channel "Rain". In principle, we can say that this channel is one step away from closing.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/210790/
All Articles