RFE/RL CIS: Behind An 'Information Curtain' --RED LINE EDITORIAL

THIS ARTICLE WAS SOURCED FROM RADIO FREE EUROPE/RADIO LIBERTY.

May 2, 2007 (RFE/RL) -- In a historic March 1946 speech, Winston Churchill painted the stark image of an "iron curtain" descending across the European continent. HOWEVER, IT SHOULD BE NOTED, THAT CHURCHILL HAD NO PROBLEMS HAVING THE SOVIET UNION AS AN ALLY TO DEFEAT THE THIRD REICH. WINSTON CHURCHILL FORGETS THAT IT WAS THE TSAR SYSTEM WHICH HAD REPRESSED AND BACKWARDIZED ALL OF RUSSIA FOR SO MANY HUNDREDS OF YEARS. IT WAS ACTUALLY THE COLLECTIVE EFFORTS OF SOVIET CITIZENS ALL WORKING TOGETHER AND SACRIFICING THAT LED THE FORMER SOVIET PEOPLES TO SO QUICKLY TRIUMPH OVER THE HUNDREDS OF YEARS OF NEGATIVE MONARCH CONTROLLED SOCIAL AND POLITICAL ENERTIA THAT WAS IN PLACE. CHURCHILL SHOULD ALSO REMEMBER THAT THE ROMANOV'S, AS CHARMING AS THEY WERE ON FILM, WERE FRIENDS OF BRITONS OWN WINDSOR FAMILY.
On the far side of that Iron Curtain, a closed and repressive system of governance was rapidly taking hold, in which dissent was ruthlessly suppressed, economic life rigidly managed by communist authorities, and media used exclusively as an instrument of the state.THE OPEN AND STATED GOALS OF THE WEST HAVE BEEN TO HINDER, CONFUSE AND SABOTAGE SOVIET COUNTRIES SINCE THEIR INCEPTION. IT IS ONLY A MATTER OF LOGICAL SELF PRESERVATION FOR THESE SAME COUNTRIES TO BE CLOSED TO THE WEST. MOREOVER, THE ECONOMIC PROSPECTS OF RUSSIAN AND SOVIET CITIZENS WERE DRAMATICALLY ENHANCED BY THE INCEPTION OF SOVIET RULE. AFTER WW2/THE PATRIOTIC WAR ENDED, THE SOVIET UNION WAS IN SUCH A DESTROYED AND INJURED STATE THAT IT IS A COMPLIMENT TO THE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE SOVIET STATE THAT THE SOVIET UNION WAS ABLE TO RALLY IN ALL SPHERES TO THE DEGREE THAT IT DID. IT WAS SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE FOR POST WAR SOVIET CITIZENS TO MOVE TO THE SUBURBS AND START LISTENING TO ROCK N ROLL MUSIC. It took decades for the Soviet experiment to collapse under the weight of its own contradictions, in an economic and political meltdown that ended the Cold War and brought the promise of greater freedom and openness to tens of millions of formerly captive peoples. WHILE IT IS CORRECT THAT THE SOVIET UNION DISSOLVED POORLY, YOU SHOULD REMEMBER THAT EVERY SINGLE STANDING BUILDING, EVERY SINGLE EDUCATED MAN, EVERY SINGLE FUNCTIONING GOVERNMENT ORGAN THAT EXISTS TODAY IN THE FORMER SOVIET UNION WAS ENGINEERED, PAID FOR, AND CONSTRUCTED BY SOVIET EFFORTS. THE WRITER ALSO FORGETS TO MENTION THAT WITH THE POWER VACUUM THAT FOLLOWED THE SOVIET COLLAPSE, CAME RAMPANT CRIME, ECONOMIC DESPAIR, MASSIVE THEFT OF PUBLIC ASSETS, IT WAS NOT ALL BLUE JEANS AND VISA FREE TRAVEL FOR ALL. Hopes ran high that these openings would permit all of the fundamental freedoms to emerge and flourish, including freedom of the press. I BELIEVE WALKER IS REFERRING TO FREEDOM OF CIA PAID PRESSES, PROBABLY NOT PRESSES CRITICAL OF WASHINGTON.
In fact, in the period immediately preceding the Soviet collapse and in its immediate aftermath, the flowering of open expression and a nascent independent press suggested a durable and institutionalized Fourth Estate might materialize. SADLY, THE SPIES AND PROVOCATEURS OF THE WEST ABUSED THESE NEW POWERS SUFFICIENTLY ENOUGH TO PROVOKE CIS COUNTRIES INTO RESTRICTING THEIR POTENTIAL FOR DAMAGE TO THE GENERAL GOOD.
Freedom House's most recent findings show that 10 of the 12 CIS states are ranked "Not Free," indicating these countries do not provide basic guarantees and protections in the legal, political, and economic spheres. ANOTHER WORDS, THESE SAME CIS COUNTRIES ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW CIA SPONSORED AND CONTROLLED MEDIA SOURCES TO CAUSE REVOLUTIONS, AND SPONSOR PUPPET CANDIDATES AT EVERY WHIM OF WASHINGTON.
The Soviet era's waning days saw the exertion from below of significant pressure for greater freedom of expression and a diverse and independent reporting of news. In most of the former satellite countries of Central Europe a free press rose from the ashes of what for 40 years had been known as the Eastern bloc. For the former Soviet republics, however, with the exception of the Baltic states, the promise of the opening in the late 1980s and early 1990s was short-lived. I WONDER IF THE RUSSIAN POPULATIONS IN THESE SAME BALTIC STATES WERE POLLED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEIR RIGHTS ARE UPHELD.
New Methods To Achieve Old Results
Across most of the former Soviet Union today, an "information curtain" has descended that in some aspects differs from that of the Soviet era, but in important ways is imposing a no less repressive news-media environment. THE WORLD IS NOW VERY AWARE OF THE METHODS THE US GOVERNMENT USES TO INSTALL PUPPET LEADERS, TO INCLUDE USING "FREE" PRESSES TO ATTACK INCUMBENTS, AND SUPPORT "DEMOCRATIC" CANDIDATES THEY LIKE.
Gone is the smothering, all encompassing ideological control across wide swaths of Europe and Eurasia. IT IS NOW IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE THESE WILD ACCUSATIONS WHEN ALL THE WORLD CAN CLEARLY SEE THEY ARE LIES, SO NOW WE MUST UPDATE OUR PROPAGANDA. A more geographically circumscribed area -- Russia and most of the countries on its periphery -- now lies behind a new curtain that effectively shuts off the majority of people in these lands from news and information of political consequence. NO, THESE SAME COUNTRIES JUST WON'T TOLERATE SPOOKS PRINTING LIES TO DISTURB AND ALTER THEIR NATIONAL POLITICS. Today, methods for dominating news media are different, based on state-enabled oligarchic control, broadcast monopolies of presidential "families," and mass-media manipulation intended to create a veneer of democratic practice without its substance. THIS SOUNDS LIKE HOW CBS,NBC,ABC AND FOX DOMINATE THE AMERICAN NEWS BUSINESS. DOES ANYBODY THINK WE HAVE A QUALITY DEMOCRACY HERE IN AMERICA? IF DEMOCRACY IS MEASURED BY PUBLIC TRUST AND PUBLIC APPROVAL OF A PRESIDENT THEN RUSSIA AND BELARUS MUST BE THE MOST DEMOCRATIC COUNTRIES ON EARTH. MAYBE THAT IS WHAT BOTHERS WASHINGTON.
Putin (right) meeting with leading Russian newspaper editors in June 2006 (epa)Unlike the Soviet era, some intrepid journalists now do manage to report independently. However, absent the rule of law and meaningful legal protections, the former Soviet Union is today one of the world's most dangerous places for journalists. PROBABLY NOT AS DANGEROUS AS IRAQ, OR AFGHANISTAN. Reporters willing to investigate issues such as political and corporate corruption are confronted by powerful vested interests that strive to muzzle news professionals. I AM CURIOUS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT CHURCHILL WOULD BELIEVE IT WAS NEWS PROFESSIONALS CHASING LADY DIANA THE NIGHT SHE WAS KILLED, MAYBE SOME PEOPLE IN THE NEWS BUSINESS ARE NOT SO PROFESSIONAL. Intimidation, physical violence, and even murder of reporters and editors have become commonplace. IT IS MODERATELY IRONIC THAT YOU SHOULD COMPLAIN SIMULTANEOUSLY ABOUT STRONG GOVERNMENT LEADERSHIP IN CIS COUNTRIES, AND OF SLAIN JOURNALISTS. IS IT NOT STRONG GOVERNMENT LEADERS THAT PROTECT JOURNALISTS? YOU CAN'T ADVOCATE TO WEAKEN THE POWER OF A PRESIDENT WHO PROTECTS THE PEOPLE , AND THEN COMPLAIN WHEN YOU ARE KILLED BY MOBSTERS AND HOODLUMS.
Journalists in virtually every former Soviet republic have been victims of contract killings or otherwise met death under suspicious circumstances. THE KEY WORD HERE IS "FORMER" SOVIET REPUBLICS. Russia, for example, has been a deadly place for journalists in both the Yeltsin and Putin eras. IT IS TOO BAD YOU DIDN'T MENTION THAT IN THE GORBACHEV YEARS THE STAGE WAS BEING SET FOR THIS VIOLENCE. Since President Vladimir Putin assumed office seven years ago, at least two dozen journalists have been killed, including Paul Klebnikov, editor of "Forbes-Russia," who was shot nine times with a semiautomatic weapon on the street outside his Moscow office in July 2004; Anna Politkovskaya, an investigative journalist who wrote for "Novaya gazeta," who was executed in the elevator of her apartment building in October 2006; and Ivan Safronov, a defense correspondent for the "Kommersant" newspaper, who in very unclear circumstances plunged to his death from his apartment building in Moscow in March. Rarely are serious investigations pursued or perpetrators brought to justice. Impunity is the standard. THAT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT HAPPENS IN AMERICA WHEN A POOR PERSON, OR A MINORITY IS SHOT BY THE POLICE. SINCE RADIO FREE EUROPE COVERS IRAQ, WAS THERE AN ARTICLE WRITTEN ABOUT THE TORTURE/RAPE/MURDER OF THE IRAQI FAMILY BY THE MARINES ON PATROL IN BAGHDAD? I BELIEVE THE BODIES WERE BURNED WITH GASOLINE AFTERWARDS. WAS THAT MENTIONED HERE ON THIS WEB PAGE?
To ensure regime security and shield from public view all-pervasive official corruption, the post-Soviet authorities seek to limit scrutiny of their decisions and activities by silencing the independent press.
Entertaining, But Not Informative IT ALSO HELPS TO PREVENT CIA OPERATIVES FROM PRINTING LIES TO DISTURB A POPULATION AND START AN UNNECESSARY REVOLUTION JUST TO INSTALL A FRIENDLY PUPPET.
This modern variant of media control is a more sophisticated, distant cousin of the raw and overweening institutional censorship of the Soviet era. The stodgy, Soviet era broadcasting diet has in large measure been cast aside. NO MORE MUNSTERS HERE EITHER.Today, modern media fare, rich in entertainment and news programming of high technical quality and production values are staples, especially in Russia. THAT ACTUALLY SOUNDS PRETTY GOOD, HOW COME WE DON'T HAVE THAT HERE. While the contemporary media menu in Russia offers a wide assortment of entertainment options, it for the most part excludes alternative views and analysis on news and public affairs, particularly where it counts most, on national television broadcasts, from which most citizens continue to get their information. ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT WE HAVE ANYONE CRITICIZING GEORGE BUSH HERE? A SECOND OPINION COUNTED MOST BEFORE WE MUGGED IRAQ, BUT THAT WASN'T ALLOWED BECAUSE J.R. EWING/GEORGE BUSH OUTLAWED AND PREVENTED IT. REMEMBER THE PATRIOT ACT?
All of Russia's major national television channels -- RTR, Channel One, and NTV -- are now effectively state controlled. SO INSTEAD OF 5 CORPORATIONS TAKING THE PROFIT FROM TV HERE IN AMERICA, YOU ARE CRITICIZING THE PEOPLE OF RUSSIA FOR OWNING THEIR OWN MEDIA? 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]." HAS GORBACHEV TURNED ON TV HERE IN AMERICA?
Putin's tenure has seen a systematic muzzling of independent reporting. Current methods of news media control rely on the imposition of state ownership on media companies whose editors are replaced by Kremlin supporters. YES, IT IS OBVIOUS THE WEST REALLY ABUSED THEIR WELCOME AFTER THE FALL OF THE USSR, AND NOW WE ARE WHINING ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO STIR UP ANY MORE TROUBLE IN RUSSIA. Gazprom-Media, an arm of the state-controlled gas behemoth, has taken control of a number of previously independent news outlets and either closed their doors or summarily abolished independent reporting. Today, journalists at the Russian News Service, Russia's largest nonstate radio network (owned by businesses close to the Kremlin), work under a "50 percent rule" imposed by station management to ensure that at least half of the network's total reporting on Russia is "positive." NEGATIVE VIBES DON'T SELL. HOW MANY PEOPLE HERE IN AMERICA BUY A PAPER TO BE MISERABLE?
The repressive media landscape in the former Soviet Union is illuminated by findings from "Freedom Of The Press 2007," Freedom House's annual survey of global media independence. FREEDOM HOUSE, NOW THAT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE IT IS CONTROLLED BY THE US GOVERNMENT. The Russian authorities are not alone in forging a media environment that filters out critical voices. HOW MANY US NEWS SOURCES PRINT CRITIQUES FROM NORTH KOREA, OR WERE PRINTING CRITIQUES FROM PMI/PRE MUGGED IRAQ? The survey's most recent findings show that 10 of the 12 CIS states are ranked "Not Free," indicating these countries do not provide basic guarantees and protections in the legal, political, and economic spheres to enable open and independent journalism. ANOTHER WORDS, THEY ARE GETTING PRETTY GOOD AT SPOTTING CIA OPERATIVES TRYING TO STIR UP TROUBLE BY STARTING A PAPER UNDER THE GUISE OF "FREE PRESS".
Moving In The Wrong Direction
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT WHEN THE UNITED STATES ALLOCATES 40 MILLION DOLLARS TO SUBVERT THE EFFORTS OF LEGALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENTS, LIKE THE BELORUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, A SYMMETRIC PROTECTIVE RESPONSE IS ONLY SENSIBLE AND PRUDENT. Of the 10 Not Free countries, none is moving in the direction of more freedom and most have a decidedly downward trajectory. Of the 193 countries examined in the survey, three of the 10 worst press-freedom abusers --Belarus, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan -- are in the former Soviet Union.
An Internet user in Minsk (bymedia.net file photo)The Internet has emerged as the principal alternative and challenger to media hegemony in the former Soviet Union. Despite the authorities' dogged efforts to control it, the Internet and other news media set today's Soviet successor states apart from their Cold War ancestor. Blogs are stimulating debate and discussion, and domestic and foreign news websites offer an alternative to state-controlled or -influenced news outlets. However, while the Internet holds further promise and connectivity is growing at an impressive rate, it remains a medium through which only a small fraction of news is obtained. It is also fast becoming a target of greater interest for new regulatory intervention by the authorities. IS THAT LIKE PREVENTING US SOLDIERS FROM ACCESSING MYSPACE AND YOUTUBE?
Through a revitalized crackdown on press freedom, post-Soviet leaderships have managed to draw the media back under control. Only a decade and a half after the end of the Cold War, freedom of the press for tens of millions of people across the former Soviet Union has come nearly full circle. In post-Soviet states that suffer from ill-conceived policies, (EDUCATION, FREE MEDICAL CARE, SAFE STREETS, CLEVER SOCIAL ENGINEERING, THAT ALL SOUNDS PRETTY BAD TO ME. )entrenched corruption, and unaccountable governance, denial of the indispensable role played by the free press in allowing critical scrutiny is bound to delay, possibly indefinitely, progress toward true and vibrant democracy. HOPEFULLY IT WILL DELAY, AND DENY US GOVERNMENT ATTEMPTS TO INSTALL PUPPET PRESIDENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ROBBING THE PEOPLE OF THEIR COLLECTIVE ASSETS, AND MAKING THEM VICTIMS OF US ENGINEERED ARTIFICIAL SOCIAL TRAGEDIES LIKE WE SUFFER FROM HERE IN AMERICA.

THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE MAY BE VIEWED AT http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/5/7D8B74B8-7CAB-4726-90CD-8F95617430F3.html


Christopher Walker is director of studies at Freedom House. Freedom House's annual survey of global media independence, "Freedom Of The Press 2007," was released on May 1.