On July 28, 2006, President Vladimir Putin signed amendments to the Law on Fighting Extremist Activity. The new legislation, which allows imprisonment of up to three years for journalists, and the suspension or closure of their publications if convicted of extremism, went into effect on October 28, 2006. Amendments to Article 1 of the law broaden the definition of extremist activity to include "public slander directed toward figures fulfilling the state duties of the Russian Federation," as well as "interfering with the legal duties of organs of state authorities."

Such vague language allows public officials to interpret the law as they please and effectively target critics, CPJ sources said. "This measure is reminiscent of the kind of catchall laws that were used in Soviet times to control the media," CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon said. "Those in power can now label any journalist an 'extremist' and effectively stifle critical reporting." Press-release of Committee to Protect Journalists (USA), July 28, 2006 (for more information, go to [ LINK ]).

Legislators are not abandoning their attempts to change the rules by which the media work: The media may be relieved of responsibility for the content of campaign material, but at the same time they want to ban journalists from referring to the ethnicity of criminals and victims. The Public Chamber has conducted an expert analysis of the latest proposal and has sent the results to Boris Gryzlov, speaker of the lower chamber. He has not yet read the epistle but Izvestiya has already studied it.

As it is, the Law on the Media contains quite a few bans and extending the list of them is probably pointless. And, what is more, several deputies want to lift some of the restrictions. For example, Sergey Ivanov, a deputy from the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia faction, has submitted a draft law into the State Duma which would relieve the media of responsibility for the content of election campaign material.

"The media are afraid and refuses to run campaign material if this can become grounds for criminal or administrative charges," the draft law's author told Izvestiya. "As a result, candidates talk about the weather. Who needs these insipid conversations?"

But Ivanov is convinced that if campaign material contains information of an extremist nature, for example, then candidates themselves should take responsibility for it, rather than journalists. "Law enforcement agencies should arrest and call to account those who make extremist and xenophobic calls, but the media have nothing to do with it," Boris Reznik, deputy chairman of the Committee for Information Policy, agreed with Ivanov. (State Duma Does Not Want 'Insipid Discussions' On Eve of Elections: Deputies Are Trying To Amend Law on Media by Natalya Antipova, Izvestia daily, May 21, 2007)

References: According to Article 29 paragraph 5 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: "Freedom of Mass Media is guaranteed. Censorship is prohibited."

What is the official stand on freedom of media in Russia? The first deputy director of All-Russia State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company (VGTRK) and the general director of the Rossiya TV channel, Anton Zlatopolskiy, has said that the media of the holding company are not under political pressure as such. (TV chief says there is little if any political pressure on state media in Russia, Interfax news agency, 1 February, 2007)

On March 12, President Vladimir Putin signed a decree to consolidate two federal services: the Federal Service for Telecom Supervision (Rossvyaznadzor) and Federal Mass Media and Cultural Heritage Oversight Service (Rosokhrankultura). So, the government will have a new body - the Federal Service for Supervision of Mass Media, Telecommunication and for Cultural Heritage Protection - to supervise vehicles of data dissemination along with the content.

The purpose to attain is, "to improve efficiency of government's activities for cultural heritage protection" and "to eliminate interdepartmental contradictions and administrative barriers en route of IT advance in Russia and to ease the system of their control," said representatives of the government's news service.

But the informal explanation for closing ranks of the two services was a bit different. The new service will be very influential in media and telecom businesses and in political issues. In response to some technical and content claims, it may suspend activities related to all types of communication, including the printed and e-media and broadcasters. Moreover, the service will keep the personal data register of Russia's citizens. So, the matter at stake is actually creating a media mega-controller. (President creates "media mega-controller", Kommersant daily, 13 March, 2007)

Putin's order gives the new agency three months to determine how it will operate, leaving many questions unanswered. The decree does make clear, however, that the new agency is directly subordinate to the prime minister's government, not to the Ministry of Information Technology and Communications or the Ministry of Culture and Press, where the two agencies were previously housed. This decision clearly is political.

Raf Sahkirov, a former Izvestia editor dismissed for critical coverage of the 2004 Beslan school siege, said "This is an attempt to put everything under control, not only electronic media, but also personal data about people such as bloggers." In an environment where open information is increasingly more difficult to come by, the Internet provides Russians access to unofficial sources of information and a platform for open discussion. It also serves as a useful medium for organizing protest rallies. Participants in such rallies now post information about these activities on the Internet, leveraging this technology to share information with wider audiences. Bloggers, for example, posted pictures from the March 3 pre-election protest rally in St. Petersburg, enabling audiences a clear view of the rally, beyond the reach of filtered Kremlin-controlled media. These days such information almost never makes its way to state-managed news in the traditional broadcast or print media.

Even before the March 12 decree, the Russian authorities had begun exerting pressure on the Internet. In 2006, they issued a warning to Gazeta.ru, a leading independent news site financed by Leonid Nevzlin of Yukos, for publishing the Danish cartoons with caricatures of the prophet Mohammed. A second such warning would result in the publication's closing. Of particular concern is that the new agency will have access to personal data of Internet users. This resource could make it even easier for the authorities to crack down on individuals who make remarks critical of the authorities on heavily trafficked Web sites. ('Super agency' threatens Russian freedom by Robert Orttung and Christopher Walker, International Herald Tribune, March 23, 2007)

Pavel Gusev, chairman of the Public Chambers Communications, Information Polices and Freedom of Speech in Media Commission, says the government is trying to exert control over mass media, the Interfax new agency reported Thursday. This was the first official acknowledgment of what rights activists and journalists have been publicly concerned about in recent years. Independent mass media is under attack now, he said. Press is becoming increasingly state-controlled. Major state-oriented business is buying up mass media, which ultimately cuts the circulation of the media, according to Mr. Gusev. (Public Chamber Acknowledges Crackdown on Independent Media, Kommersant daily, March 29, 2007)

On Russian media in general, please see Russian Regional Report #9, November 7, 2006. See also Russia: Journalists Union Head Laments State Of Russian Media, an interview with the general secretary of the Russian Union of Journalists Igor Yakovenko." He speaks with RFE/RL correspondent Chloe Arnold. May 23, 2007 (RFE/RL) May 23, 2007 (RFE/RL) [ LINK ]. See also [ LINK ].

The government used its controlling ownership interest in all national television and radio stations, as well as the majority of influential regional ones, to restrict access to information about issues deemed sensitive. It severely restricted coverage by all media of events in Chechnya. There were indications that government pressure frequently led reporters to engage in self censorship.

Nonetheless, on most subjects, the public continued to have access to a broad spectrum of viewpoints in the print media and, for those with access, on the Internet. While the government generally respected citizens' rights to freedom of expression, it sometimes restricted this right with regard to issues such as the conduct of federal forces in Chechnya, discussions of religion, or controversial reforms in the social sector. Some regional and local authorities took advantage of the judicial system's procedural weaknesses to arrest persons for expressing views critical of the government. With some exceptions, judges appeared unwilling to challenge powerful federal and local officials who sought to prosecute journalists. These proceedings often resulted in stiff fines. However, new legislation gives the state an opportunity to label criticism of state officials "extremism".

On July 28, 2006, President Vladimir Putin signed amendments to the Law on Fighting Extremist Activity. The new legislation allows imprisonment of up to three years for journalists. Same measures apply to a person speaking at a rally. The law went into effect on October 28, 2006. Amendments to Article 1 of the law broaden the definition of extremist activity to include "public slander directed toward figures fulfilling the state duties of the Russian Federation," as well as "interfering with the legal duties of organs of state authorities." Such vague language allows public officials to interpret the law as they please and effectively target critics, CPJ sources said. "This measure is reminiscent of the kind of catchall laws that were used in Soviet times to control the media," CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon said. "Those in power can now label any journalist an 'extremist' and effectively stifle critical reporting."

Russian Constitution Article 29 says: "Everyone has the freedom of thought and speech". There are different tupes of freedom, namely freedom of speech and freedom of press. Freedom of speech is the citizen's right to be involved in the discussion of anything that matters to him/her. One of the citizen's ways to be heard is via the media. Freedom of press means the prohibition of the influence and pressure (censorship) from the state authotities on the media.

In November 2006, Public Chamber of Russia discussed regional lack of freedom of speech. Nikolay Svanidze, member of the RF Public Chamber, named specific regions in which the freedom-of-speech situation is really bad. These include Mariy El, Bashkortostan, and Saratov. The speech of Mikhail Fedotov, secretary of the Union of Journalists of Russia, was quite strong. The fact that the federal Media Act is not working is disturbing also. For example, few journalists avail themselves of their right to remove their signature from material that has been mutilated by an editor, few editors respect a journalist's right to refuse an editorial assignment, and so forth. ("Three Colors of Our Times: the Public Chamber Has Discussed the Regional News Media Situation" by Olga Kondreva, Rossiyskaya Gazeta daily, November 21, 2006)

References: Constitution of RF, 1993, Ch. 2; U.S. State Department's 2006 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, March 8, 2007, Section on Russia: [ LINK ];

Press-release of Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), July 28, 2006' for more information: [ LINK ].

The following story shows how it happens.

Ren TV, the last television channel with national reach whose news service was critical of the Kremlin was bought in summer 2005 by RTL, the pan-European broadcaster, and Severstal, the Russian steel group. RTL bought a 30 percent stake from Ren TV's founders, Irena and Dmitry Lesnevsky, while Severstal bought the remaining 70 percent from Unified Energy System (UES), the Russian electricity monopoly that decided to get rid of "noncore assets". Severstal, led by the 40-year-old billionaire Aleksei Mordashov, in turn sold 35 percent of REN-TV to Surgutneftegaz, a large Russian oil company headed by Vladimir Bogdanov, a Siberian billionaire. Some journalists and analysts say that UES sold a part of its stake in REN-TV under Kremlin pressure. They also speculate that Severstal bought it at the Kremlin's request to clear the airwaves of critical coverage of President Putin and the government before the parliamentary and presidential elections in 2007 and 2008. Moscow News, the outspoken weekly newspaper, was sold by Leonid Nevzlin, its owner, to a Ukrainian media group. Mr Nevzlin, resident in Israel and wanted on criminal charges in Russia, was a business partner of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the jailed Russian oligarch. Moscow News gradually reduced its zeal and became a milder critic of the regime.

Some general information on Russian media. Russias federal press agency has said that at the beginning of last year Russia had 66,931 registered mass media, including 52,641 printed periodicals.

The press agencys chief, Mikhail Seslavinsky, has remarked that approximately 45 percent of them spring to life only during election campaigns or are published from time to time. The regional press currently accounts for two-thirds of the readership, he said, and the regional versions of federal periodicals increase the likely audience to 80 percent. (Russian journalists celebrate professional holiday, Itar-Tass news agency, January 13, 2007)

References: In his annual report, the Russian Ombudsman for Human Rights stated in February 2006: The main mass media, and first of all the leading electronic media, accounting for 90 percent of the information segment of the country and forming public opinion, are under the very strict control of state organs.

Ombudsman for Human Rights: Doklad deyatel nosti upolnomochennogo po pravam cheloveka v Rossiiskoi Federatsii v 2005 g., Moscow 2006.

Peer Review Comments: It seems to me that the comment made by the lead social scientist fits exactly with the description for a score of 50. State ownership of existing media is not a barrier to forming a new print media entity.

According to the Governmental Decree #301, 17 June 2004, the Federal Service on Supervision of Observance of the Legislation in the Field of Mass Communications and Protection of Cultural Heritage deal with the licenses for the broadcasting organizations in Russia. The Federal Agency of Press and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation has the authority to register print mass media which is necessary to start their activity. Thus there is a licensing mechanism for broadcasting and another registration system for the printed press.

The appeals mechanism is hardly used. The appeals mechanism is directed at the observance of the licensing mechanism and registration system in the event a citizens' or organizations' rights to get the license or registration were violated.

References: Art. 61 of the Law on Mass Media.

References: [ LINK ]

References: Telekon consulting agency (Moscow); For detailed information on official dues: [ LINK ]; [ LINK ].

As part of the broader pattern, the state is paying more attention to international media, especially international broadcasting. The authorities have focused on the broadcasts of the U.S. government-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, whose radio programming provides an alternative news voice to listeners across the country. The Kremlin has undertaken an intimidation campaign against RFE/RL's partners -- Russian radio stations that rebroadcast Radio Liberty programs -- subjecting them to debilitating harassment.

In August, Bolshoye Radio, a Moscow radio station, announced that it would no longer carry the BBC's Russian-language broadcasts. Although technical violations were cited as the official reason for the station's decision to pull the BBC off the air, many condemned the act as censorship. (Democracy's Façade by Christopher Walker and Robert Orttung, The Moscow Times daily, October 5, 2007, available at [ LINK ])

See also [ LINK ].

References: Telekon consulting agency (Moscow); For detailed information on official dues: [ LINK ]; [ LINK ].

References: There is some information on how regional TV and radio media are dealing with this issue. See [ LINK ]; [ LINK ]; [ LINK ]; [ LINK ]. See also [ LINK ].

References: Not So Great Expectations by Alexei Pankin, the editor of Mediaprofi, a monthly magazine for regional media professionals, Moscow Times daily, March 20, 2007.

References: See here: [ LINK ] and [ LINK ].

ROMIR Monitoring public opinion research center says 7% of adult Russians use the Internet daily, 17 percent do so weekly and another 22 percent, monthly. The official data is significantly larger - Russian Information Technologies and Communication Minister Leonid Reiman said on December 18, 2006 Russia accounted for 25 million Internet users in 2006. The population of Russia is approx. 145 million people. Most likely, this number includes all users - at home, at work, at schools and universities, at Internet cafes - when one person can be counted at least twice, using Internet both at home and at work. It is confirmed by the fact that there are only 23 million personal computers in the country.

According to the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM), a Moscow-based research organization, around a quarter of the adult population -- 28 million people -- is regular Internet users. This data supports Reiman's statement but contradicts what other researchers claim. We can consider 15% as a realistic figure). The largest proportions of people who use the Internet frequently as a source of information live in Moscow and St. Petersburg -- 26 percent. In large and medium-sized cities the figure drops to 16 percent-18 percent, and in small cities and towns to 7 percent-10 percent. Of them 5 percent use the resources of the Worldwide Web daily, another 8 percent do so a few times a week, 6 percent a few times a month, and 4 percent occasionally. A majority of the Internet users -- 77 percent -- need it to solve problems related to work or school, while 44 percent of those surveyed go on the Internet to read the news and use electronic mail. One out of five turns to the Internet to socialize, watch movies, and listen to music. Eleven percent of Russian Internet users access online games.

The most active "Internetchik's" are well-off Russian citizens (with per capita income of more than 5,000 ruples or almost US$200 a month). They use electronic mail and news sites more often than others do, and also socialize and look for friends through the Internet. People of modest means use the Internet for downloading music and movies more often than others.

Considering the Internet as one of the channels for getting information, 44 percent of Russian citizens agree with the point of view that this is primarily a powerful resource for getting prompt and reliable information. At the same time, 27 percent of those surveyed take a more guarded attitude toward it, noting the actual absence of controls in the space of the Worldwide Web.

Internet in general should be considered an influential media especially because it is providing a forum for free discussion that has become a rarity on the main national television and radio networks.

Masha Lipman, a political expert at the Moscow Carnegie Center, says that web forums like Live Journal provide an arena for free debate that is no longer available in much of the conventional media.

"There is indeed a lot of free exchange on the Internet," Lipman says. "The question in Russia is not that there are no outlets where free expression is possible. The question is that the Kremlin has radically marginalized all outlets that pursue even reasonably independent editorial lines." Russians are the second-largest group of users of Live Journal, a popular U.S. blogger site. In Russia, the site currently has more than 1.1 million users and 67,500 interest groups. On September 5, 2007 alone, 1,600 new users joined Live Journal in Russia and almost 500,000 new comments were posted.

"Actually, I think the Internet is one of the reasons Russia is still not an authoritarian regime, because you cannot really shut down the Internet without very serious measures," says Yulia Latynina, a political commentator whose columns are frequently posted on Live Journal. Most Russians get their news and current affairs from three main television channels, all of which are controlled by the government or state-owned enterprises. A handful of independently owned television and radio stations and some of the national newspapers provide some alternative to the Kremlin's view of events.

Lipman says the way the government approaches sites like Live Journal is more sophisticated: "The Kremlin has lots of sites under its control, financed by businesses associated with the Kremlin or otherwise, which create an environment in which those more independent ones are easily dissolved," she says. "This dissolution, I think, is one thing that the Kremlin is using to counter or neutralize the potentially stirring effect."

And those Kremlin-backed websites, she says, are often difficult to spot. "It's not that they are necessarily loyal or produce bland propaganda, similar to what you see on television," Lipman says. "They may be critical themselves, but this will be criticism that the Kremlin itself sort of oversees."

So many independent thinkers escape to a virtual space free of vested interests where anonymity goes hand in hand with a worldwide reach -- personal online journals or blogs. Today's bloggers follow the tradition of the Soviet dissidents who found an outlet for their opinions in samizdat, the clandestine printing of anti-government material. Alongside debate on government policies, LJ blogs by Masha Gaidar and Ilya Yashin, both well-known leaders of youth liberal political movements, often advertise protests or debates. Unlike more intimate U.S. blogs, Russian cyber-journals often involve thousands of bloggers and focus on issues like politics or literature.

Statistics also indicates that the sites of political parties get from 20,000 to 50,000 visits every day. Political discussions in nowadays Russia unfold in Runet and especially in LJ. Many politicians have opened their web diaries there, since communications on the web stand in a marked contrast to boring official political speeches.

"The internet is getting more and more influential, although it still represents far from all sections of /Russian/ society but, rather, its more advanced part," Novye Izvestia writes quoting political scientist Dmitry Oreshkin.

More and more people are turning to blogs and Internet forums when seeking reliable information. According to Technorati, a site that tracks blog traffic, 2 million Russian blogs already exist online, and this year 260 new blogs are being added every hour - 6,000 every day - compared to 100 per hour in the autumn of 2006.

Former chess champion Garry Kasparov, one of the leaders of opposition coalition The Other Russia, says Putins high approval rating among the public is based on the level of ignorance that most Russians have about the way their country is governed, and that media censorship plays a key role in protecting the authorities.

"The fast-expanding Internet is dangerous for the authorities as it effectively spreads the word about the level of corruption in Russia, especially in the provinces", Kasparov told a news conference in April 2007.

Media professionals often describe democracy in modern Russia as "electronic" and "hypothetical," with the free exchange of opinion now restricted to the Internet, the last remaining censorship-free refuge in the country.

In spring 2007, with parliamentary December 2007 and Presidential March 2008 elections in mind, the government took some measures to regulate the Internet. On March 12, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree to combine two state bodies that control and license media sources in the country. The Federal Service for Telecom Supervision and the Federal Mass Media and Cultural Oversight Service have been merged to create a new agency responsible for licensing and censoring both mass media and electronic media.

Russian journalists immediately denounced this step as the authorities attempt to take control of the Internet in Russia. The new agency can give the Kremlin a right to lay its hands on one of the last strongholds of freedom of speech in the country, the Internet. This can eliminate the future generation of the Russian journalists, says Alexei Venediktov, head of Echo Moskvy radio. The main aim of the new structure is to monitor all media sources, including websites, and decide whether to grant licenses or not. The new agency will be able to revoke licenses and block access to any information source on the Internet.

The Russian authorities have been trying to find ways to control the Internet since 2000, when the first informational websites started to appear in the country. However, it is more challenging that shutting down a TV channel or a newspaper.

Vladimir Tarachev, a State Duma deputy and a member of the pro-Kremlin United Russia party, introduced a draft Law on the Internet in 2001. The draft sought to strengthen control of the federal organs of state power over the Russian part of the world-wide web." Ludmilla Narusova, head of the Federation Council Committee on Information Policy, supported the draft since, as she put it, Journalists and Internet providers that post their texts on different websites should be responsible for them (dni.ru, April 16, 2004).

However, they soon realized that it is difficult to effectively censor the Internet. Tarachaev's draft has been revised. In 2004 Mikhail Lesin, a former Russian media minister and a current Russian presidential media adviser, tried to push the draft to make it an official law, but his efforts failed due to public resistance.

In 2005, the authorities again declared that the Internet should be under government control. Leonid Reiman, minister of information technologies and communications, explained that Russia needs control over the Internet to protect users from violence, pornography, or destructive computer viruses, while Andrei Romanchenko, deputy media minister, announced that the government should protect society from harmful online content (vip.lenta.ru, July 4, 2005). Last fall, the Ministry of Interior Affairs as well as the Prosecutor-General's Office appealed to the Russian legislature to adopt a law that would allow officials to punish owners of websites in Russia for information they post. As new parliamentary and presidential elections are coming, there are more and more proposals to limit freedom of speech in the Internet," concluded Novye Izvestiya daily on October 26, 2006.

At the same time, the Duma started to work on a law that would give Internet publications the same status as the mass media. Putins decree to create a combined body to control both types of communications licenses and content parallels the Dumas efforts.

The main reason the Kremlin wants to control the Internet is not to eliminate pornography, but a fear of the popularity of the Internet among anti-Putin youth organizations. The Putin opposition uses the Internet for propaganda purposes, which makes the Kremlin quite nervous. With enough legal justifications to close websites still lacking, the authorities instead use hackers to crash the systems at opportune moments. In early March 2007, on the eve of the March of the Discontents in St. Petersburg, a street protest organized by the united anti-Putin front, hackers hired by the Federal Security Service spammed opposition sites with the information about the upcoming event.

Surely, those acts violate not only Russian laws, but international laws as well. That is why the Kremlin needs to legitimize its struggle against remnants of freedom of speech in the country. The authorities hope that the new law that Duma is preparing to adopt as well as the new combined agency to control mass media will help them to keep the opposition gagged and avoid mass street protests before the presidential election.

Boris Boyarskov was named head of the new agency on March 26. Boyarskov told RFE/RL's Russian Service on March 19 that Putin's decree was "the result of the work of the broadcasting commission headed by [First Deputy Prime Minister and presidential hopeful] Dmitry Medvedev." That intergovernmental commission was set up last year.

The merger has been interpreted largely as an attempt to control the Internet, the only sphere of media and communications that is currently free of regulation. But despite intense speculation that the authorities want to establish control over the Internet, the Ministry of Information Technology and Communications has maintained a hands-off policy to date.

Most observers have leapt to the conclusion that the Internet is the main target of the merger, as legislators have repeatedly called for more stringent control. However, Boyarskov's words seem to corroborate the opinion of a smaller number of experts, who consider that the primary issue Russian officials are currently concerned with is the transition from analogue to digital broadcasting, which has huge political and economic implications. Those experts consider the anticipated consequences of the merger for the Internet, and for Internet service providers (ISP) specifically, as essentially a side effect. As far as Internet regulation is concerned, it is expected that new rules may be introduced, increasing the responsibility of ISPs for content and making compulsory the registration of Internet media. The existing System for Operational-Investigative Activities (SORM2) currently requires security authorities to obtain a warrant prior to checking users' electronic traffic.

Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said Russia isn't restricting media freedom and that the new agency isn't aimed at policing the Web.

``If you watch TV, even federal TV channels, you'll hear lots of criticism of the government,' Peskov said in an interview. ``This new agency will be in charge of licensing. It's not about controlling the Internet.'

If one takes a closer look at the situation, however, the growing calls for restricting the freedom of speech in cyber space become immediately noticeable, writes the Novye Izvestia daily. In practical terms, this means possible closures of internet forums, as their hosts can be punished for statements of the participants, should their thoughts be described as extremist.

At the same time, the State Duma, the lower house of parliament is drafting a bill that will put internet material on a par with publications in the mass media. Once the bill is endorsed and signed into law, Runet will fall into the realm of provisions of the Criminal and Administrative Codes, and any critical remark against the authorities may be interpreted as an insult or libel then.

High-ranking public officials are for regulating the Internet. Internet sites in Russia should be censored to combat extremist material, a senior legal official says, the daily Kommersant reported on June 22, 2007.

"Changes need to be made to the current laws. As experience shows there is often room on the Internet for the spread of material of an extremist nature," Deputy Prosecutor General Ivan Sydoruk was quoted as saying by Kommersant.

"Therefore it is necessary to draft an effective control system so that material published there corresponds to legal requirements," he said at a law-enforcement meeting in the southern Russian city of Rostov on June 21, 2007, Kommersant said.

The federal prosecutor's office said Sydoruk was expressing his personal opinion and that no censorship law is being prepared, the daily said.

This is far from the first statement of the kind coming from a high-rank official of an organization supervising enforcement of law and order. Last October, Deputy Interior Minister Alexander Chekalin used struggle with extremism as a pretext for recommending the upper house of Russian parliament to make the owners of resources in the Russian segment of the Internet responsible for the contents of materials they publish.

Apart from that, the Interior Ministry submitted to the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, a number of proposals aimed at censorship in the Internet. Konstantin Machabeli, the director of the ministry's department for specialized technologies told Itar-Tass in October 2007 the ministry possesses a set of technological capabilities for blocking the websites that propagate extremist or terrorist information.

Last but not least, the director of Russia's Federal Security Service /FSB/, Nikolai Patrushev said at a meeting of the National Antiterrorist Committee June 5, 2007, that control over the Internet is essential.

"The level of radicalism and extremism in Russia is growing," he said. "At this moment, extremist organizations and groupings use actively about 5,000 Web sites."

As he took the floor in the upper house of parliament Friday, June 22, Patrushev proposed to discuss the issue at the international level. "It's impossible to liquidate criminal information in a separately taken country," he said, adding that the problem can be solved on the international plane only. "There should be a common approach so that no one would speak afterwards about overreacting or encroachments on the norms of democracy."

Patrushev indicated that an international conference will be held in the Far-Eastern city of Khabarovsk in September 2007 where officials and experts from 55 countries will discuss the problem.

The only attempt to bridle extremists in the Russian segment of the worldwide web was made last year when MP Pavel Krasheninnikov, the chairman of State Duma's committee for legislation proposed to make extremist calls in the Internet punishable by jail terms of up to five years, but the Duma refused to make relevant amendments to the Criminal Code. Novye Izvestia daily said in February 2007 that the National Antiterrorist Committee was drafting amendments to legislation to raise individual responsibility of Internet companies for proliferating terrorist and extremist materials.

All of this stands in a certain contrast to what President Vladimir Putin said in July 2006. He opposed the idea of restrictions on the freedom of speech in the Internet then. "I' m aware of opinions of some of our compatriots who believe a kind of order should be introduced there, but as for me, I think the fewer the restrictions, the better, in spite of all the negative moments. Society itself must decide on these things in the course of an open discussion," Putin said.

Exerts also claim that the efforts to put the Internet under total state control like in China are doomed to failure. In China, the government controls the only channel of access to the international web, while any respectable provider in Russia has several own channels of access. Introduction of control will require an overall change of laws, including the Constitution, and a re-division or, rather, toughening of the market of web services.

``When the Internet becomes more of a mass medium, then governments start getting worried, and they start treating it like the mass media,' said Esther Dyson, who helped establish the Internet's system of domain names and addresses, and has consulted extensively in Russia.

``You can't control the Internet, but you can control people,' she said in an interview. Oleg Panfilov, head of the Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations in Moscow, predicted in an interview that ``pressure on the media is going to worsen' as the presidential succession draws nearer.

References: Rossiyskaya Gazeta daily, October 11, 2006. Report by Yelena Yakovleva: "The Internet and the Person".

"Russians like the Internet, but doubt it will replace traditional mass media - poll", Interfax news agency, Nov 12, 2006.

"Some 25 million Russians use Internet services - Reiman", Itar-Tass news agency, December 18, 2006.

"All of Russia will have Internet and phone access", RIA Novosti economic commentator Mikhail Khmelev, March 24, 2007.

"Russia: Media Clampdown Sees Blogs Flourish", a report by Chloe Arnold, RFE/RL, September 10, 2007.

"Russians do in blogs what few can in media: argue", a report by Olesya Dmitracova, Reuters, December 18, 2006.

"Internet on March", report by Irina Petrakova and Andrey Stenin, Gazeta.ru, November 3, 2006. "KREMLIN TAKES MEASURES TO REGULATE THE INTERNET", report by Andrei Smirnov, Jamestown Foundation Eurasia Daily Monitor, March 22, 2007.

"Russia: Media Decree Targets Internet, Digital TV", report by Floriana Fossato, RFE/RL, March 28, 2007.

"Putin Tightens Internet Controls Before Presidential Election", by Henry Meyer, Bloomberg, April 10, 2007.

"Criminal Case Opened Against User Of Russian Internet Magazine", Itar-Tass news agency, April 13, 2007.

"Russia: Working the Net", report by Galina Stolyarova, a writer for The St. Petersburg Times, an English-language newspaper, for Transitions Online, www.tol.cz, 14 June 2007.

"Russia needs Internet censorship: official ", AFP, June 22, 2007.

"Russian Law Enforcers Advocate Internet Anti-terrorism Censorship", Itar-Tass news agency, June 22, 2007.

"Russia accused of crippling online media", report by Mansur Mirovalev, AP, July 22, 2007.

Peer Review Comments: Here is a good source about political content on the Web:

Robert Orttung, "Russian Blogs: Tool for Opposition and State," in Russian Analytical Digest, No. 28 (Oct. 2, 2007), 2-7 [ LINK ]

A report by the Moscow's Prosecutor's Office states that the check has been organized on the basis of Articles 144 and 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (with a view to the presence or absence of elements of a crime). "A legal assessment of statements will be made in the course of the check, and the Prosecutor's Office will adopt a procedural decision based on its results," the Prosecutor's Office report states.

However, the state agencies are not capable of much with regard to silencing extremists. Representatives of the Rosokhrankultura (Federal Service for Monitoring the Observance of Legislation in the Sphere of Mass Communication and Protection of the Cultural Heritage) in turn declared that they are unable to take any measures in respect of sites organizing the Russkiy Marsh. "We apply the measures provided for by law only in respect of those Internet resources that have been registered as mass media. All sites not registered as mass media are a sphere of activity for law enforcement organs and the Prosecutor's Office, which will take the necessary measures," Rosokhrankultura leader Boris Boyarskov told RIA Novosti on November 3, 2006.

Law enforcement agencies were more energetic. Staffers of the Russian Internal Affairs Ministry's K Administration were simultaneously conducting their own check of Internet resources. According to administration spokesperson Yelena Zubareva, the department's staffers are "taking measures to close them down." The police informs the providers that sites are propagandizing extremism and violence and must be closed down.

A whole slew of human rights campaigners voiced the opinion that the law enforcement organs have weighty grounds for checking the sites of the Russkiy Marsh -- an unsanctioned action that national-radicals are planning to hold 4 November in Moscow and other major cities of the Russian Federation. According to Moscow Human Rights Bureau Director Aleksandr Brod, two sites of the organizers of the Russkiy Marsh, for example, have posted information on the conditions for holding it. "These sites contain radical, nationalist materials and overt calls to kill and deport people of other nationalities. It is necessary to think about regulating such phenomena," Brod pointed out. According to him, at the time the first Right-Wing March was held in Moscow human rights campaigners demanded that the Prosecutor's Office institute criminal proceedings against the organizers of the march through the center of the capital. "But the Prosecutor's Office does not like such cases, which need a big intellectual evidential base, nothing was done, and it is a good thing that they have at least tackled an investigation now. Admittedly, this will hardly affect the holding of this latest march," Brod pointed out to Gazeta.ru.

Meanwhile, Web sites that test the boundaries of free speech are already coming under pressure. In December 2006, a court in the Siberian region of Khakassia shut down the Internet news site Novy Fokus for not registering as a media outlet. The site, known for its critical reporting, reopened in late March 2007 after it agreed to register and accept stricter supervision.

Anticompromat.ru, which wrote about Putin's pre-presidential business interests, had to find a U.S. Web server after a Russian service provider pulled the plug March 28, saying it had been warned by officials to stop hosting the site.

In 2006, the authorities shut down a Web site called Kursiv in the city of Ivanovo, northeast of Moscow that lampooned Putin as a ``phallic symbol of Russia' for his drive to boost the birthrate.

Criminal cases opened against Russian users of internet under most variegated pretexts become increasingly frequent. The first such case was opened in early April against a user of internet magazine. Savva Terentyev, a man from the city of Syktyvkar in the northeast of Russia is heading for a prospect of four years in jail after leaving an unflattering remark in about policemen. Interior officials considered his words to be insulting speech and instituted a criminal case. He is charged with "inciting hatred or animosity and humiliating human dignity."

Anton Nossik, an acclaimed figure in the Russian segment of the internet and the head of blog services at SUP company, sizes up the Terentyev story as a new attempt to impose censorship on the web. "Quite understandably, those people don't like the idea of a free uncontrolled expression of one's thoughts," he told Echo of Moscow.

This is Russia's first criminal case instituted for a comment in a cyber digest but far from the first case where an internet user evoked rancor in the police or among government officials, and the ways, in which people are persecuted for what they say on the web differ notably, writes the Moscow-based Kommersant daily.

In February 2006, the user of the Altai news agency Bankfax's website, Igor Shkarpet, loaded into the forum some quotations from the Argentine newspaper Clarin that contained curses against Moslems. The prosecutors opened a case citing punishment for "fanning ethnic, racial or religious strife" and the Russian watchdog agency for protection of cultural values, Rosokhrankultura, made a demand to close the news agency. The court rejected its lawsuit in June, however, and closed the case against Shkarpet "due to the absence of formal elements of a crime." Following a petition by Vladimir region's governor Nikolai Vinogradov, the regional

department of the Interior instituted a case against the news analyst of the Vladimirsky Krai newspaper, Dmitry Tashlykov. The man voiced his suspicions in the kovrov.ru forum that Vinogradov was planning a murder of the Kovrov City mayor, Irina Tabatskaya. His case was taken to court January 30, 2007.

Ruslan Linkov, head of the liberal organization Democratic Russia and also a LiveJournal blogger, said Internet spies on the lookout. Linkov knows that his blog, which he uses to publicize reported cases of abuse of human rights as well as to share personal stories, is being closely monitored by law enforcement.

"The police or security agents call me every now and then to express their indignation at my opinions, or the stories that I tell," he said. "Sometimes they ask me to clarify a fact or detail about the cases of human rights abuses I am describing.

"My colleagues who work on websites representing the liberal opposition have also noticed the massive presence of spies and provocateurs in their blogs," he said. "And during telephone conversations the police and security agents make no secret of their interest. At the same time, nationalist websites flourish and do not seem to get in trouble."

Executives of Moscow-based Internet provider companies told Kommersant that the FSB may inquire about the sites visited by one or another person suspected of extremist activity. Prosecutors often invoke Article 282 of Russia Criminal Code on 'fanning ethnic strife' against the authors of extremist utterances at blogs and in Internet forums.

In Novosibirsk, Internet providers obeyed the demands of the regional Prosecutor's Office and blocked the users' access to websites run by Chechen separatists.

Opposition organizations claim the authorities are waging a combat against their Internet resources with the aid of hackers. For instance, Marina Litvinovich, an assistant to former world chess champion Garri Kasparov, who leads the United Civil Front now, said the largest Russian providers impede the users' access to websites informing on the schedules of the Marches of Dissenters in Moscow and St Petersburg. However, the providers vehemently denied the information.

Taiga.info news portal said a district prosecutor's office in Novosibirsk told the Academ.org provider in June 2007 to restrict access to a number of sites that were classified as extremist ones. The provider operates the Internet in the famous Siberian Academy Town. Executives of the company discerned a political underpinning in the motion and linked it to the upcoming presidential and parliamentary election. They fear that if the precedent proves successful, the authorities will get an opportunity then to blacklist the opposition's web resources as extremist ones and thus to impose censorship in the Internet.

Opposition parties and independent media say murky forces have committed vast resources to hacking and crippling their Web sites in attacks similar to those that hit tech-savvy Estonia as the Baltic nation sparred with Russia over a Soviet war memorial.

While they offer no proof, the groups all point the finger at the Kremlin, calling the electronic siege an attempt to stifle Russia's last source of free, unfiltered information.

The victims, who range from liberal democrats to ultranationalists, contend that their hacker adversaries hope to harass the opposition with the approach of parliamentary elections in December and presidential elections next March.

Reliance on the Web also makes the opposition vulnerable to hackers.

The outlawed National Bolshevik Party says its Web sites were repeatedly hacked between February and April, as the nationalist group used the Internet to marshal "Dissenters' Marches" in Moscow, St. Petersburg and elsewhere.

The attacks were sophisticated as well as massive, said Alexei Sochnev, who is in charge of the National Bolsheviks' online network.

Mainstream media have also come under electronic assault, especially when they carry information likely to draw the attention of the government.

Kommersant's Web editor, Pavel Chernikov, said the major daily newspaper's site was attacked in early May. He called it retaliation for publishing a transcript of the interrogation of Boris Berezovsky a self-exiled oligarch who lives in London by Russian investigators.

On the same morning, the Web site of Ekho Moskvy, a liberal Moscow radio station where criticism of Kremlin policies can often be heard, was brought down by a DDoS attack.

Mr. Panfilov of the Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations said Russian opposition Web sites will find themselves under increasing pressure as election season heats up.

"There will be purges of online publications, shutdowns or takeovers of the last independent media outlets and strong pressure on Web users," he said.

References: Rossiyskaya Gazeta daily, October 11, 2006. Report by Yelena Yakovleva: "The Internet and the Person".

"Russians like the Internet, but doubt it will replace traditional mass media - poll", Interfax news agency, Nov 12, 2006.

"Some 25 million Russians use Internet services - Reiman", Itar-Tass news agency, December 18, 2006.

"All of Russia will have Internet and phone access", RIA Novosti economic commentator Mikhail Khmelev, March 24, 2007.

"Russia: Media Clampdown Sees Blogs Flourish", a report by Chloe Arnold, RFE/RL, September 10, 2007.

"Russians do in blogs what few can in media: argue", a report by Olesya Dmitracova, Reuters, December 18, 2006.

"Internet on March", report by Irina Petrakova and Andrey Stenin, Gazeta.ru, November 3, 2006. "KREMLIN TAKES MEASURES TO REGULATE THE INTERNET", report by Andrei Smirnov, Jamestown Foundation Eurasia Daily Monitor, March 22, 2007.

"Russia: Media Decree Targets Internet, Digital TV", report by Floriana Fossato, RFE/RL, March 28, 2007.

"Putin Tightens Internet Controls Before Presidential Election", by Henry Meyer, Bloomberg, April 10, 2007.

"Criminal Case Opened Against User Of Russian Internet Magazine", Itar-Tass news agency, April 13, 2007.

"Russia: Working the Net", report by Galina Stolyarova, a writer for The St. Petersburg Times, an English-language newspaper, for Transitions Online, www.tol.cz, 14 June 2007.

"Russia needs Internet censorship: official ", AFP, June 22, 2007.

"Russian Law Enforcers Advocate Internet Anti-terrorism Censorship", Itar-Tass news agency, June 22, 2007.

"Russia accused of crippling online media", report by Mansur Mirovalev, AP, July 22, 2007.

According to the Law on Mass Media, there are specific grounds for the canceling a mass media company activity: "No provision shall be made for the use of mass media for purposes of committing criminally indictable deeds, divulging information containing a state secret or any other law-protective secret, the performance of extremist activities, and also for the spreading of broadcasts propagandizing pornography or the cult of violence and cruelty." As the "extremism" has the wide interpretation including "Public slander directed towards figures fulfilling the state duties of the Russian Federation or has duties which have the connection with their execution and the fact of slander is established in the court decision," mass media companies can be closed after the three warnings according to these points. For instance, in 2006 39 warnings were issued to mass media companies concerning extremism:

[ LINK ], and 3 warning during the first six months of 2007 ([ LINK ]).

References: Press-release of Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), July 28, 2006 for more information: //www.ifex.org/en/content/view/full/76025/.

References: There are many stories on inner and internal censorship available at International Freedom of Expression Network website at www.ifex.org. See, for example, 7 Radio Journalists Quit Jobs in Protest by Svetlana Osadchuk, The Moscow Times daily, May 21, 2007. See also [ LINK ].

Very strict censorship has been introduced in one of the biggest news resources on the Russian radio airwaves. All reporters from Russian News Service have left the company to protest editorial policies which they describe as censorship. Russian News Service, a subsidiary of the Russian Media Group holding, makes news for three major radio stations with total audience of about 8 million people. Artem Khan, a correspondent from Russian News Service, said on May 17, 2007 he and all his colleagues have walked out because of censorship and pressure from the companys new executives who took office in April.

The change of leadership at RSN, which occurred in mid April, resembled a special operation. It took less than 24 hours to radically change the entire policy of the Russian Media Group's (RMG's) information sub-department, which prepares the news not only for its own frequency of 107.00 FM but also for all the holding company's radio stations. A single day, 10 April, saw a change of leadership at Ren-TV, RSN, and Radio Rossii. Sergey Arkhipov, a former RMG shareholder, left for a state radio station, and Radio Rossii's managers were moved sideways to lead Ren-TV, while a landing force from Channel One turned up at RSN. Mikhail Baklanov was dismissed from the post of general director at RSN, which he headed for 12 years from the moment it was founded. On the same day the radio station's collective of journalists were acquainted with their new bosses -- Aleksandr Shkolnik, member of the Public Chamber and director of children's programs at Channel One, who became the general director, and Channel One news anchor Vsevolod Neroznak, who became chief editor.

A current employee at RSN told Gazeta.ru that Shkolnik and Neroznak read out the new rules of information policy at the meeting. "Our newsmakers are the first persons in United Russia and members of the Public Chamber. If we talk of defenders of human rights, they are the official defenders of human rights -- Vladimir Lukin and Ella Pamfilova."

"We were told that our listeners are well-to-do people who need something positive, people with an interest in fashionable cuff links and neckties," the RSN employee told Gazeta.ru.

Later Neroznak met separately with correspondents and, so one of the participants in that meeting said, read out a so-called "blacklist" from a piece of paper -- a list of people prohibited on air. "As for Kasyanov, Kasparov, and Ryzhkov, we do not mention them, and if some events involving them take place, for now we will use the phrase 'liberal radicals,'" Neroznak explained to the correspondents. "America is our enemy," the chief editor added another thesis for understanding. In a few days listeners to the radio stations belonging to RMG noticed that direct broadcasts had vanished from the news. At the radio station itself all programs and materials are now proofread in advance by the chief editor before going on air. ("Russian Brainwashing Service" by Aleksey Levchenko, Gazeta.ru, April 18, 2007) and Russian News Service Goes Off Air, Kommersant daily, May 18, 2007

At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russias 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.

How would they know what constituted positive news? When we talk of death, violence or poverty, for example, this is not positive, said one editor at the station who did not want to be identified for fear of retribution. If the stock market is up, that is positive. The weather can also be positive.

The tactic of the new anti-free media campaign has been to impose state ownership on media companies and replace editors with those who are supporters of Mr. Putin ¬ or offer a generally more upbeat report on developments in Russia these days. (50% Good News Is the Bad News in Russian Radio by Andrew E. Kramer, New York Times, April 22, 2007)

See also Russian journalists charge censorship, Reuters, April 18, 2007

The director-general of the Russian News Service (RSN), Aleksandr Shkolnik, denied claims of censorship at the RSN. (Russian radio service manager denies censorship claims, Interfax news agency, 18 May, 2007)

Vsevolod Neroznak, the services editor in chief, denied details of the resigning journalists allegations, saying that there was no formula for positive news, but that positive news was part of the networks new philosophy. Our country is growing, our economy is developing, and there is a lot of positive news, he said. I cannot see any problem with this. He also said that there was no blacklist of sources but that the network would not cover extremist items. Asked what constituted an extremist item, he said, There are Russian laws, and everything is written there. (Eviction Notice Is Latest Russian Move Against Journalists by C. J. Chivers, New York Times daily, May 19, 2007)

See also Russia: State Cracks Down On Media Ahead Of Journalists' Congress by Chloe Arnold, RFE/RL, May 23, 2007.

References: Glasnost Defense Foundation President Alexei Simonov; International Freedom of Exchange network Web site.

How so-called stop lists are used on TV, see here: [ LINK ].

There are various ways to apply censorship to artists. For example, in May 2007, Russian customs officials have refused to ship six works of art, including two that poke fun at President Vladimir Putin, to a German art gallery for an exhibition, saying they could spark a dispute. (See more about it here: Customs Blocks Satirical Art From Being Sent to Germany, Reuters, May 23, 2007).

See also First Blacklist of Literature is Released, The Moscow Times daily, July 17, 2007.

See also here: [ LINK ] and [ LINK ] How its implemented, see [ LINK ].

References: According to the Art. 10 of Law on Mass Media, "the application for the registration of a mass medium shall indicate information about the founder (co-founders) provided for by the present Law...".

References: According to the Art. 10 of Law on Mass Media, "the application for the registration of a mass medium shall indicate information about the founder (co-founders) provided for by the present Law...".

Comparing Russian TV in 1990s and at present, Yelena Zelinskaya, president of Media Union and member of the Public Chamber said it had fully changed its function, i.e. in 1990s "it was, along with other media, a component of political life. It played an active people, influenced [the public] to the extent it could and in some way sometimes even showed the direction, etc. At least its function was, I would say, of greater participation in the political life of the country. But today the function of the TV has totally shifted to the side of the entertainment component." (Russian Ekho Moskvy radio's "Kitchen of Andrey Cherkizov" programme, hosted by Andrey Cherkizov, broadcast at 1808 gmt on 5 November)

Oleg Panfilov, the head of the Moscow-based Journalism in Extreme Situations, called Russian media the "empire of lies."

"From a position of a freedom of speech, the situation in the Russian mass media can be estimated as catastrophic," he said. "Television is the core with more than 90 percent of the population depending on it as their main source of information. But now in Russia all five national TV channels are used by the state for propagation, for distribution of an official position."

Panfilov said that there is next to no opportunity for Russians to receive independent news.

"Only a small part of the population can search for independent sources of information through the Internet, or by the old Soviet tradition to listen to programs of foreign radio stations in Russian." (Russian Media Called 'Empire of Lies' by Alexandra Poolos, ABCNews.com, Jan. 10, 2007)

An interesting opinion on current situation with media in Russia compared to the 1990-s by journalist Anatoli Baranov is here: [ LINK ].

Oleg Panfilov, director of the Moscow-based Centre for Journalism in Extreme Situations: Censorship is banned under the constitution, but it exists in the form of self-censorship by editors and proprietors fearful of laws that mean they can easily find themselves in court if their organizations produce reports that offend the Kremlin. (Press freedom: To understand these outrages, you need a Russian history lesson, The Independent daily (UK), March 12, 2007)

Independent news reporting on themes like corruption, poverty, public health and the wars in Chechnya flourished after the Soviet Unions collapse but has sharply declined under President Vladimir V. Putin. Critics of the Kremlin say that opposition views are now at risk of disappearing from the public discourse.

Russia Today, a state-run global television channel, was created in 2005 to promote pro-Kremlin views in formats that resemble modern news broadcasts.

A few news Web sites, a shrinking pool of independent newspapers, all with limited circulations, and a sole radio station, Ekho Moskvy, are almost the only remaining outlets for independent news and public dissent.

Foreign radio material has been restricted or blocked from most frequencies across the country. (Eviction Notice Is Latest Russian Move Against Journalists by C. J. Chivers, New York Times daily, May 19, 2007)

New media magnates, most notably Alisher Usmanov, Arkadiy Gaydamak, Oleg Deripaska, Yuriy Kovalchuk, Grigoriy Berezkin, and Konstantin Remchukov, are buying up media and announcing plans to create media empires. Most are clearly pro-government and eager to curry favor with President Vladimir Putin. But while some (Gaydamak) already have made their media pro-government, others (Usmanov and Deripaska) have appeared to leave the editorial policy of their media alone, at least for the time being. However, with parliamentary and presidential elections coming in 2007 and 2008, they may exercise greater control over their media's political line when pressed by the Kremlin.

During 2006 and 2007, oligarchs who built their fortunes in metals, banking, and energy took over a large number of newspapers, magazines, TV channels, and websites and created media holding companies. Usmanov bought the daily Kommersant, the magazine Sekret Firmy, the website Gazeta.ru, and television channel 7TV and announced creation of a multimedia company.

Gaydamak bought the business paper Biznes and created a multimedia company modeled on Bloomberg business news. Deripaska bought part ownership of the business weekly Ekspert and developed his RAINKO media company. Kovalchuk's Peterburg TV was expanded to a national channel and renamed Pyatyy Kanal, and his Abros media holding bought control of RenTV in December 2006. Berezkin set up a media holding company in 2006 and bought Komsomolskaya Pravda, the country's most read daily. Remchukov in early 2007 took over personal control of his Nezavisimaya Gazeta and began using it to express his own views. (Analysis: Pro-Kremlin Russian Businessmen Building New Media Empires, OSC [US Open Source Center], May 3, 2007)

In April 2007, Surgutneftegaz oil and natural gas company has sold a 75% stake in Media-Invest that holds 35% in REN TV, widely considered the most independent of Russia's national television channels, to Kovalchuks Rossiya, a Kremlin-connected bank.

National Association of Telebroadcasters President Eduard Sagalayev said previously REN TV has been the last national television network that has pursued an independent information policy, as much as was possible in today's conditions. (Kremlin-friendly bank takes over last independent TV channel, RIA Novosti news agency, April 13, 2007)

In spring 2007, TV-Tsentr's (Moscow TV channel) political news show, "Fighters Club," also faced restrictions and was ultimately shut down for failing to follow Kremlin guidelines. According to the show's host, Aleksei Navalny, deputy presidential administration head Vladislav Surkov and Aleksei Chesnakov, who heads of the presidential administration's information department, cleared participants and topics for the show in advance.

When Navalny deviated from the approved guidelines, the show was taken off the air. Navalny also revealed that he was warned about existence of so-called "blacklists" of people the Kremlin did not want on the air.

Sergei Markov, director of the Institute of Political Studies, which is closely linked to the Kremlin, defended the Kremlin's policies toward the media. "In these conditions in Russia, with our weak and fragile political parties," he said, "television is a nuclear weapon. And now people say it would be good if different people could use this weapon. But that is threatening. True, [television management] does not want to have problems, so they have gotten rid of all politics from television, leaving only entertainment." (Russia: Pressure Mounting On Opposition, Media by Victor Yasmann, RFE/RL, April 24, 2007)

Some diversity of perspective exists in print media at the national level, which are privately owned. Ownership of regional print media is less diverse and often concentrated in the hands of local authorities. Private owners of media outlets are generally billionaire business magnates or large companies like the state-controlled energy conglomerate Gazprom, which holds majority stakes in the newspaper Izvestia and radio station Ekho Moskvy. However, the law requires little transparency in media ownership, and media watchdogs expressed concern in 2006 that companies like Gazprom would purchase additional newspapers, such as Komsomolskaya Pravda, and tighten the establishments grip on the media ahead of the 2008 presidential election. The government continued to disadvantage private media by allocating subsidies to state-controlled outlets and controlling the means of production and distribution. (Freedom of the Press 2007, report on Russia by Freedom House, May 1, 2007)

Boris Reznik (United Russia), deputy chairman of the Duma Committee for Information Policy, is thoroughly skeptical about these conclusions. "That's a rough estimate," he told us. "Sure, we do have certain problems. Media outlets in Russia need better economic independence. The VAT rate should be cut, and so on... Anyway, I don't think that newspapers and radio broadcasters fear speaking their mind."

According to Reznik, whatever censorship may exist in Russian journalism is strictly self-imposed. "It's easier for journalists this way," the lawmaker said. "They are trying to appease the authorities all on their own. Nobody is telling them to."

Mikhail Fedotov, Secretary of the Russian Journalists Union, blames all these negative evaluations on the authorities' reluctance to set up the legislative and economic conditions necessary for independence of the media. "We have great laws that defend journalists and their rights, but they are enforced and honored only in the capital," Fedotov said. "Regional authorities never miss a single chance - or petty excuse - to do away with an independent media outlet. Besides, it is regional authorities themselves that usually finance local newspapers and TV networks."

According to Fedotov, Russia last climbed to the first top dozen countries on freedom of the media lists in the 1990s, together with the Czech Republic and Estonia, when the majority of media outlets were truly independent. (Non-Free Media Day by Olga Pavlikova, Gazeta daily, May 3, 2007)

Vice President of the Media Union and deputy head of the Public Chamber's commission for freedom of speech Yelena Zelinskaya has blasted the evaluation of the state of freedom of speech in Russia made by the U.S. Committee to Protect Journalists and called the report biased. "I would not like to make any comments here because one gets the impression that they are making all their evaluations at the emotional level and we question their professionalism," she told Interfax on May 2, commenting on a report by the committee issued ahead of World Press Freedom Day marked on May 3.

"The question arises as to how often those behind the report have actually visited the Gambia or Congo to have a true idea of developments there and compare them with us?" Zelinskaya said. (Russian Expert Questions Freedom House Evaluation Of Russia, Interfax news agency, May 2, 2007)

Commenting on the troubled condition of Russia's news media, former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev observed: "The one thing I can say is that it's pointless today to watch television [in Russia]." (CIS: Behind An 'Information Curtain' by Christopher Walker, RFE/RL, May 2, 2007)

A story of the thrice-weekly Novaya Gazeta - a lonely independent voice of Russian printed media: Russian newspaper quite a story itself by David Holley, Los Angeles Times, May 21, 2007. What was the response from Russian authorities accused of prosecuting the national media? On May 3, 2007 Public Chamber and All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM) announced on a future cooperation on a study aimed at evaluating freedom of expression throughout Russia. Yelena Zelenskaya, Mediasoyuz Vice President and deputy chairperson of a Public Chamber commission, claims that the working group to be established for the purpose of evaluating freedom of expression will take into account every relevant factor in every region.

The working group will embark on its mission in May. It expects to complete the task before the term of office of current Public Chamber member ends - that is, by the end of the year. "We are not aiming to refute or support foreign researchers and their conclusions," Zelenskaya explained. "I'm convinced that they are doing their job to the best of their ability, but they are foreigners, and - let's face it - they don't really care about what is happening here."

The purpose of this move was discussed on the Russian Ekho Moskvy radio programme "Lukavaya Tsifra" (Tricky Figures) broadcast on 8 May and presented by Antonina Samsonova and Masha Mayers. The guests were Director of the Public Research Foundation Igor Yakovenko and head of VTsIOM Leontiy Byzov.

Yakovenko agreed that although there could be disagreements over research methods used by Freedom House, on the whole their assessment of Russia as a country without free media is correct. "Russia has state monopoly on television; practically all television channels are under state control; hardly anybody can argue with this. I mean public-political channels. We witness journalism being squeezed out of the media and substituted by propaganda. Speaking about nationwide channels, on the whole journalists have left them and have been replaced by propagandists like [Gleb] Pavlovskiy, [Mikhail] Leontyev and so on," he said.

Byzov said the Freedom House report is rather subjective. He also noted that, unlike Freedom House experts and other "respectable organizations", Russian society does not see the lack of freedom of speech as an urgent problem. "We have carried out an opinion poll," he said. "Just over 20 per cent of Russian agreed that freedom of speech is restricted in Russia. Over 45 per cent disagreed and the rest did not know."

Byzov said that trust in the media is growing in Russia, currently standing at over 50 percent. "Of course, this concerns first of all major nationwide television channels, which provide over 80 per cent of information, especially political information. Moreover, people welcome state control over the media. Asked what they want, people say the state must influence the media even more. Many support censorship, not political but rather moral. In fact, it comes out that people admit: yes, the state controls the media and restricts its freedom but they see more positive than negative in this situation," he said.

Yakovenko argued that television is not longer just part of the media, it has turned into "a tool for mass propaganda and manipulation". (Russian radio discusses Moscow's response to Freedom House report, BBC Monitoring, source: Ekho Moskvy radio, Moscow, in Russian 1908 gmt 8 May 07)

Vsevolod Bogdanov, chairman of the Union of Russian Journalists, complained that only 3-5 per cent of journalism in the country remained free and more or less independent. "Right now, it is mainly propaganda," he summed up. (Moscow congress debates crimes against journalists by Madina Shavlokhova, Gazeta daily, 29 May, 2007)

According to a statement by the Public Chamber's press service received on July 19 by Interfax, the working group is expected to include representatives from the Glasnost Defence Foundation, the All-Russia Centre for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), MediaSoyuz, the alliance of heads of regional mass media, the Russian Union of Journalists, and the Guild of Press Publishers. Other interested organizations may be invited to join this list.

The Public Chamber's press service also said that on the request of the "public activists", VTsIOM had prepared its own proposal for the meeting as to how the index of freedom of speech and the press would be calculated, but that "the concept presented was imperfect and required serious amendment".

In particular, the large-scale public opinion polls proposed by VTsIOM were pointless, said the president of the Glasnost Defense Foundation Aleksey Simonov.

"In order to assess freedom of speech, for example in the press, it is useless to research the readership's opinion. In the Stalin era, 90 per cent of people surveyed would have said that the press was free - people simply believed it," said Simonov.

Rather than analyzing the opinions of Russians, the Glasnost Defense Foundation has suggested researching the content of the domestic media. "Not long ago, we carried out content analysis of television broadcasts in the regions, and it turned out that 85 per cent of information was devoted to the authorities, compared to only 20 percent devoted to society," said Simonov. For his part, the secretary of the Union of Journalists and author of the current law on the media Mikhail Fedotov said that there was a "risk that the average man on the street doesn't correctly understand the term free speech." "If you ask someone: Are our mass media free? they will say yes, thinking of our tabloid press and scandalous programs on television," he explained. (NGOs invited to help design index of freedom of speech in Russia, Interfax news agency, 19 July, 2007)

Will the working group do better than foreign researchers? Time will tell. A comparison of its conclusions with assessments made by the Russian Union of Journalists (RUJ) and the Glasnost Defense Foundation will be particularly revealing. Alexei Simonov and Boris Timoshenko, the heads of the Glasnost Defense Foundation, released the Glasnost Maps on May 2. Both organizations studied the media freedom situation in Russia's regions between September 2006 and March 2007.

Using different colors, the map of Russia shows that only 21 regions are relatively free, while 43 are relatively un-free. Seventeen remain un-free. The color green was chosen to depict free provinces, but the color appears nowhere on the map of Russia.

The state of affairs changed in 15 regions - for the better in seven and for the worse in eight. The list of relatively non-free regions now includes the capital and the Moscow region even though both were better off six months ago. Two incidents (the murders of two journalists and biased coverage of the Dissenter March) had their thoroughly negative effect on the rating of Moscow and the Moscow region.

According to the RUJ, the Ryazan and Belgorod regions stand out as "freedom isles" against the general background of non-free regions. Simonov and Timoshenko, however, disagree and regard these particular regions as relatively non-free. "As usual, the situation is problematic in Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, and Kemerovo," Timoshenko said.

The RUJ and Glasnost Defense Foundation based their conclusions on a questionnaire survey. The list of questions this time was more extensive than in the past. Experts say that existence of independent printing houses is an important factor. Consider Krasnoyarsk, for instance, where all printing companies were closed down and sealed on the eve of the recent election. Accreditation for journalists at official events and functions is a grave problem in many regions. The authorities never hesitate to deny information to independent media outlets. Timoshenko and Simonov referred to an incident in Cherepovets where absolutely all journalists were once asked to vacate the premises of the local legislature.

The map charted by the Glasnost Defense Foundation lacks data on five regions, and the RUJ map lacks data on 50 regions. Timoshenko maintains that local journalist unions refused to cooperate for fear of incurring the wrath of the regional authorities.

Mikhail Fedotov, RUJ secretary and a co-author of the law on the media, said that freedom of expression still exists in Russia, but "its territory is constantly shrinking." He added: "The blame for that rests with the authorities, the business community, and journalists themselves." (The Freedom Index by Anastasia Novikova, Gazeta daily, May 4-6, 2007)

Map of Glasnost: : [ LINK ] 8 [ LINK ]; [ LINK ]; [ LINK ]

Paula Schriefer from Freedom House said at the hearing on "Freedom of the Media in the OSCE Region" organized in August 2007 by the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki Commission), said that Russia's three leading television channels are entirely subject to government censorship: "But their broadcasts are so professional - and so colorful and glamorous compared to the Soviet era - that most viewers are absolutely convinced that what they see and hear is true." (Only Iraq Is More Dangerous by Mariam Magomedova, Novye Izvestia daily, August 6, 2007)

"No one is claiming that things are heavenlike in Russia," says Gleb Pavlovsky, a Kremlin adviser. "We have never lived in an absolutely free country, but we have never had as much press freedom as we have today." (In Russia, 'space for journalism is narrow' by Fred Weir, Christian Science Monitor, May 24, 2007)

One girl from Nizhny Novgorod said Russia cannot be democratic because Russians are like children - they need a strong leader, who can use the belt on them if necessary. A boy from the nationwide Nashi youth movement adds that he does not agree that freedom of choice and free speech have got more restricted under Vladimir Putin. "Personally, I don't feel it," he tells me. "Yes, we use tough measures to crack down on disorder. But that's just the Russian way of doing things." (Fighting for free speech in Russia by Bridget Kendall, BBC, May 30, 2007)

See also East: 'New Kind Of Press Censorship' In CIS, Heather Maher interviewed Freedom Houses director of studies, Christoper Walker , RFE/RL, June 25, 2007

However, across the country, even in small, remote towns, local journalists are addressing issues that national television channels stopped covering long ago, and which appear rarely in the national press. Moreover, readers seem to admire this stance, suggesting that those who produce information and those who consume it can still choose to support a free press.

In October 2006 in Berdsk, the main owner of the newspaper initially pulled an article about Galina Zyryanova, an elderly woman who was severely beaten by the deputy police chief, because the deputy was his friend. The paper published the story two months later -- without the owner's consent -- alongside an editorial that explained the delay and apologized for the editors' "faint-heartedness." Two weeks later, the editorial team quit and started its own publication, which has received good feedback from readers and has seen its circulation steadily increase. Conflicts with owners and the mass exodus of editorial staff are not the only way for hard-hitting stories to make it onto the front page. Articles similar to those that caused so much trouble for the journalists at Berdsky Kuryer appear regularly in other regional publications, whose owners actually encourage their reporters and editors to pursue thoughtful, unbiased reporting on important and often controversial issues.

The story of Private Andrei Sychyov, whose legs and genitals had to be amputated after a brutal hazing incident at the Chelyabinsk Armor Academy 2005 New Year's Eve, first appeared in Vecherny Krasnoturinsk, Sychyov's hometown paper. It wasn't covered by national and international media until two weeks later.

Newspapers that display remarkable courage and integrity are far more numerous than generally believed, but they are nevertheless far too few for a country of this size. Today, local media outlets face many challenges. They have to compete with state-sponsored publications, which receive funding from various levels of the government and distort the market -- not to mention money from local tycoons and corporate media outlets. In the run-up to the parliamentary election in 2007 and the presidential vote in 2008, big money is expected to be injected into the media market.

As the election cycle approaches, nervousness and uncertainty have taken root among regional journalists. Not known for their openness, government officials are becoming even more obstructive, denying independent media access to information with increasing frequency. Given the low quality of regional journalism on the whole, many ambitious, small independent media outlets al