5 ms·

I don't get what any government has to do with it. Almost all information now is consumed via Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube. These are private companies th

I don't get what any government has to do with it. Almost all information now is consumed via Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube. These are private companies that has their own censorship rules and push their own agenda aggressively. Government has no control over this, even USA government as was seen recently when Facebook blocked links to NYT articles and Twitter was censoring Trump twits. All other countries (except for China that just blocks Google entirely) have to live with the fact that all information consumed by their citizens is controlled by private companies from USA. E.g. when I just started using YouTube, most of my recommendations in Russia were "opposition" channels (mostly by notorious A. Navalny - a daft populist). When I ignored one channel from YouTube recommendations, it offered me another channel with the same content. I had to explicitly ignore these channels for months before it stopped offering them to me. It still continue to offer me channels with more subtle and clever anti-Russian propaganda. Pro-Russian channels on YouTube are blocked regularly. Pro-Russian videos are blocked even more often or they are hidden from search results (e.g. when someone does a video about rampant rusophobia in a movie or a game). I've canceled my Facebook account because of this. My FB feed was always full of rusophobic articles and all accounts that are even mildly pro-Russian (I'm talking about accounts of Russian people living in Russia) are regularly blocked temporarily or permanently.

passerby1 6y ago
Interesting, your post is downvoted without any comments. Maybe it wouldn't harm to say what's wrong?
- anticodon 6y ago
  Well, my comment is against the against the grain (rusophobia is trendy in the contemporary world even among Russians). Also, it's a bit muddy. I said that government has nothing to do with censorship, but I contradict myself. Although censorship in the US is some kind of internal struggle between parties that is hard to understand for an outsider like me, but promotion of rusophobia in social networks and YouTube is probably endorsed by US government. I doubt that ordinary engineers and managers at Facebook really care so much about Russia to boost rusophobic articles in the feed.
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    The US wasn't in Ukraine to promote democracy. Maybe it was a reaction to Crimea, perhaps they wanted to hinder the pipeline between Germany and Russia, maybe they just wanted influence in another eastern European state, but I am certainly not surprised the conflict is escalating. We are regressing to cold war thinking and while I think Putin is a despot, I see the actions of the US very critically. Sad really, since we had a better political situation just 15 years ago.
    - anticodon 6y ago
      US/Europe staged a coup in Ukraine before Crimea. Actually, it wasn't even the first coup staged by US in Ukraine.
      - raxxorrax 6y ago
        True, and Crimea was a reaction to that. The EU or some member sates might have been involved here too, because EU association was the goal and it is convenient to blame everything on the US. The pipeline might have been the reason all along for energy independence from Russia. I wouldn't know on whom to be angry if I were someone from Ukraine, but I would certainly be angry. But people blaming Russian bots on Twitter can only be called low information voters in my opinion.
- vixen99 6y ago
  It would be more interesting if in general it was impossible to downvote (any comment) without providing a reason.
fps_doug 6y ago
Don't get the downvotes either. This is a somewhat valid point. I feel like many people, even here on HN really like to paint the world black and white in this regard. Everything bad we hear about Russia & China must undoubtedly be true, because it's reported by our press, and we have freedom of press, which means that our press never lies or has an agenda. At least when it comes to foreign affairs. So your Facebook feed must've undoubtedly told the unbiased truth about your country.
- anticodon 6y ago
  Is it sarcasm? A bit hard to get for me. There's an old and very easy way to create a distorted image by selectively publishing the news: just ignore all the positive news and publish only negative news. Many opposition channels and blogs in Russia exploit this technique. E.g. there're some anti-Russian blogs (quite many) that publish only vivid descriptions of the most cruel crimes that happened in Russia recently. When people read mostly these blogs they get an impression that everyday life in Russia is permeated by brutal crimes and there's no escape from villains if you step outside your apartment. They're also quite popular among Russian immigrants living in Europe and USA (my guess is that because they're promoted in Google/Facebook/YouTube search results), and they always tell me in private conversations: "How can you live in such a brutal place where people are killed for no reason every day?" They don't get that crime happens in every country every day, what is important is statistics: how effective is effort for fighting the crime, how big is percent of victims, etc (btw, also a rich field for statistics manipulation). But these blogs do not publish fake news - they can publish only true facts. There's enough true facts you can use to create a distorted image if you ignore all the other information.
  - fps_doug 6y ago
    Yes, that was sarcasm, sorry if that wasn't clear enough.
- StreamBright 6y ago
  They do and with the help of moderators.
- 6y ago
cryptica 6y ago
The government does have control over this. They could easily introduce a law which forbids platforms from censoring any legal content. They choose not to do this.
StreamBright 6y ago
Essentially the US replicated what the USSR had as state censorship but with private corporations and it is impacting international communication not only US. The best part is that some people think it is for the greater good. When you would like to talk about it you are getting downvoted. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
planetree 6y ago
Perhaps this gives a clue as to why: https://about.fb.com/news/2018/05/announcing-new-election-partnership-with-the-atlantic-council/ https://about.fb.com/news/2018/05/announcing-new-election-pa... Facebook uses an Atlanticist thinktank as an honest broker to censor information.
ordu 6y ago
I do not know why Google blocks pro-russian sources, but I know why I'd blocked them, if I could. They are not "pro-russian", they are all "pro-Putin". Any "pro-russian" source that is not "pro-Putin" will become "anti-russian" in a short time, because of activity of other "pro-russian" sources. They just forcibly stick "anti-russian" label on such a source, and here we are. Putin do all he could, to draw an equality sign between "Russia" and "Putin". And it works. Now no media needs to do nothing, "anti-russian" label sicks to any "anti-Putin" media all by itself. I know this, because I'm russian, I'm anti-Putin, and I tried to find a "pro-russian" and "anti-putin" source. I tried and failed. There is not such thing. When a media use any material to promote it's propaganda ideas, doesn't bother with truth, use any dirty trick to mock opponents, it should be blocked. But if Google blocked such dirty media, then what is to remain? Only "anti-Putin" media, which is all marked as "anti-russian". I repeat: I do not know, why Google blocked "pro-putin" media, maybe due to reasons I described above, maybe because of order from a masonic lodge or from USA government. But the result is the same: all that is not blocked is "anti-russian".
- anticodon 6y ago
  There's one clear sign that you can find on any Russian anti-Putin and/or pro-liberal blog or channel: that Russian people are lazy, stupid, alcoholics and drug addicts, that Russians never invented anything (all the technology at all times was stolen from Europe and USA), Russia never won any war (including WWII that was "won" exclusively by USA), etc. They go even as far as to declare Russian language "stupid and barbaric and ugly" (Gasan Gusejnov). Not touching any other reason for now, for me it's a clear sign that all opposition is rusophobic and/or paid by the CIA/MI-6. Why would a sane person call his nation "stupid alcoholics using barbaric language"?..
  - ordu 6y ago
    > There's one clear sign that you can find on any Russian anti-Putin and/or pro-liberal blog or channel[...] > Why would a sane person call his nation "stupid alcoholics using barbaric language"?.. Oh, yeah. Lets label any anti-Putin person as insane. What are you trying to do? Are you trying to get ban from `dang`, so you could then talk about bloody censorship on HN? "HackerNews is a branch of CIA/MI-6", isn't it?
3633737446 6y ago
As others have pointed out to varying degrees, everything you highlighted happens at the discretion of the government. Doing nothing does not imply a lack of engagement it simply means that the government sees no reason to act.
duckmysick 6y ago
Which NYT articles were blocked on Facebook?
- anticodon 6y ago
  At least an "questionably sourced article that made incriminating claims about Joe Biden and his son Hunter".
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    Which is quite of importance if they are true (It looks like that to be honest, but the involvement of family matters should not have happened). It is highly relevant to developments in Europe and the relationship to Russia. It is silly that Trump was accused of what Biden is probably guilty of. That is a point where you loose me even if there are understandable objections to Trump. He didn't start shit like that at least.
  - Miraste 6y ago
    That was the New York Post, not the Times.
SilentBan 6y ago
Its not russophobia but the truth. On the other hand the pro-russian channels are propaganda as they spread fake news(that Russia is good/right).
- anticodon 6y ago
  Most opposition channels also spread blatant and obvious lies. Just a recent example: Navalny posted a link to the video that says that crime rate in today's Russia is comparable to the crime rate in Russia in 90s. It's an obvious lie to everyone who lived in Russia in 90s. Also, about a year ago Navalny published a video that said that education in US universities is free for everyone (if you don't have money to pay, some rich businessman will pay for your education). There're tons of examples, usually ignored by the people watching his bullshit. They probably don't even know that most of his lies were debunked because YouTube, Twitter, Facebook will never show them any contradictory articles for two reasons: information bubble and manual censorship.

passerby1 6y ago

Interesting, your post is downvoted without any comments. Maybe it wouldn't harm to say what's wrong?

anticodon 6y ago
Well, my comment is against the against the grain (rusophobia is trendy in the contemporary world even among Russians). Also, it's a bit muddy. I said that government has nothing to do with censorship, but I contradict myself. Although censorship in the US is some kind of internal struggle between parties that is hard to understand for an outsider like me, but promotion of rusophobia in social networks and YouTube is probably endorsed by US government. I doubt that ordinary engineers and managers at Facebook really care so much about Russia to boost rusophobic articles in the feed.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  The US wasn't in Ukraine to promote democracy. Maybe it was a reaction to Crimea, perhaps they wanted to hinder the pipeline between Germany and Russia, maybe they just wanted influence in another eastern European state, but I am certainly not surprised the conflict is escalating. We are regressing to cold war thinking and while I think Putin is a despot, I see the actions of the US very critically. Sad really, since we had a better political situation just 15 years ago.
  - anticodon 6y ago
    US/Europe staged a coup in Ukraine before Crimea. Actually, it wasn't even the first coup staged by US in Ukraine.
    - raxxorrax 6y ago
      True, and Crimea was a reaction to that. The EU or some member sates might have been involved here too, because EU association was the goal and it is convenient to blame everything on the US. The pipeline might have been the reason all along for energy independence from Russia. I wouldn't know on whom to be angry if I were someone from Ukraine, but I would certainly be angry. But people blaming Russian bots on Twitter can only be called low information voters in my opinion.
vixen99 6y ago
It would be more interesting if in general it was impossible to downvote (any comment) without providing a reason.

fps_doug 6y ago

Don't get the downvotes either. This is a somewhat valid point. I feel like many people, even here on HN really like to paint the world black and white in this regard. Everything bad we hear about Russia & China must undoubtedly be true, because it's reported by our press, and we have freedom of press, which means that our press never lies or has an agenda. At least when it comes to foreign affairs. So your Facebook feed must've undoubtedly told the unbiased truth about your country.

anticodon 6y ago
Is it sarcasm? A bit hard to get for me. There's an old and very easy way to create a distorted image by selectively publishing the news: just ignore all the positive news and publish only negative news. Many opposition channels and blogs in Russia exploit this technique. E.g. there're some anti-Russian blogs (quite many) that publish only vivid descriptions of the most cruel crimes that happened in Russia recently. When people read mostly these blogs they get an impression that everyday life in Russia is permeated by brutal crimes and there's no escape from villains if you step outside your apartment. They're also quite popular among Russian immigrants living in Europe and USA (my guess is that because they're promoted in Google/Facebook/YouTube search results), and they always tell me in private conversations: "How can you live in such a brutal place where people are killed for no reason every day?" They don't get that crime happens in every country every day, what is important is statistics: how effective is effort for fighting the crime, how big is percent of victims, etc (btw, also a rich field for statistics manipulation). But these blogs do not publish fake news - they can publish only true facts. There's enough true facts you can use to create a distorted image if you ignore all the other information.
- fps_doug 6y ago
  Yes, that was sarcasm, sorry if that wasn't clear enough.
StreamBright 6y ago
They do and with the help of moderators.
6y ago

cryptica 6y ago

The government does have control over this. They could easily introduce a law which forbids platforms from censoring any legal content. They choose not to do this.

StreamBright 6y ago

Essentially the US replicated what the USSR had as state censorship but with private corporations and it is impacting international communication not only US. The best part is that some people think it is for the greater good. When you would like to talk about it you are getting downvoted. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

planetree 6y ago

Perhaps this gives a clue as to why: https://about.fb.com/news/2018/05/announcing-new-election-partnership-with-the-atlantic-council/ https://about.fb.com/news/2018/05/announcing-new-election-pa... Facebook uses an Atlanticist thinktank as an honest broker to censor information.

ordu 6y ago

I do not know why Google blocks pro-russian sources, but I know why I'd blocked them, if I could. They are not "pro-russian", they are all "pro-Putin". Any "pro-russian" source that is not "pro-Putin" will become "anti-russian" in a short time, because of activity of other "pro-russian" sources. They just forcibly stick "anti-russian" label on such a source, and here we are. Putin do all he could, to draw an equality sign between "Russia" and "Putin". And it works. Now no media needs to do nothing, "anti-russian" label sicks to any "anti-Putin" media all by itself. I know this, because I'm russian, I'm anti-Putin, and I tried to find a "pro-russian" and "anti-putin" source. I tried and failed. There is not such thing. When a media use any material to promote it's propaganda ideas, doesn't bother with truth, use any dirty trick to mock opponents, it should be blocked. But if Google blocked such dirty media, then what is to remain? Only "anti-Putin" media, which is all marked as "anti-russian". I repeat: I do not know, why Google blocked "pro-putin" media, maybe due to reasons I described above, maybe because of order from a masonic lodge or from USA government. But the result is the same: all that is not blocked is "anti-russian".

anticodon 6y ago
There's one clear sign that you can find on any Russian anti-Putin and/or pro-liberal blog or channel: that Russian people are lazy, stupid, alcoholics and drug addicts, that Russians never invented anything (all the technology at all times was stolen from Europe and USA), Russia never won any war (including WWII that was "won" exclusively by USA), etc. They go even as far as to declare Russian language "stupid and barbaric and ugly" (Gasan Gusejnov). Not touching any other reason for now, for me it's a clear sign that all opposition is rusophobic and/or paid by the CIA/MI-6. Why would a sane person call his nation "stupid alcoholics using barbaric language"?..
- ordu 6y ago
  > There's one clear sign that you can find on any Russian anti-Putin and/or pro-liberal blog or channel[...] > Why would a sane person call his nation "stupid alcoholics using barbaric language"?.. Oh, yeah. Lets label any anti-Putin person as insane. What are you trying to do? Are you trying to get ban from `dang`, so you could then talk about bloody censorship on HN? "HackerNews is a branch of CIA/MI-6", isn't it?

3633737446 6y ago

As others have pointed out to varying degrees, everything you highlighted happens at the discretion of the government. Doing nothing does not imply a lack of engagement it simply means that the government sees no reason to act.

duckmysick 6y ago

Which NYT articles were blocked on Facebook?

anticodon 6y ago
At least an "questionably sourced article that made incriminating claims about Joe Biden and his son Hunter".
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Which is quite of importance if they are true (It looks like that to be honest, but the involvement of family matters should not have happened). It is highly relevant to developments in Europe and the relationship to Russia. It is silly that Trump was accused of what Biden is probably guilty of. That is a point where you loose me even if there are understandable objections to Trump. He didn't start shit like that at least.
- Miraste 6y ago
  That was the New York Post, not the Times.

SilentBan 6y ago

Its not russophobia but the truth. On the other hand the pro-russian channels are propaganda as they spread fake news(that Russia is good/right).

anticodon 6y ago
Most opposition channels also spread blatant and obvious lies. Just a recent example: Navalny posted a link to the video that says that crime rate in today's Russia is comparable to the crime rate in Russia in 90s. It's an obvious lie to everyone who lived in Russia in 90s. Also, about a year ago Navalny published a video that said that education in US universities is free for everyone (if you don't have money to pay, some rich businessman will pay for your education). There're tons of examples, usually ignored by the people watching his bullshit. They probably don't even know that most of his lies were debunked because YouTube, Twitter, Facebook will never show them any contradictory articles for two reasons: information bubble and manual censorship.