Fun fact, this is objectively harsher than the Great Firewall, which does not have any criminal codes against sharing outside information.
The EU is more pro-censorship than China.
deleted by creator
Unironically,
Are all Europeans as evil as their oligarchs that want to raze Russia since time immemorial?
If European people supported these things, there would be no need for censorship.
Europeans supported it until it started hurting them financially. Now that the EU and USA economy starts hurting they’re going to crank up the censorship because murdering those pesky non-Aryans is starting to become a lot less popular.
Do you think all European people are a hive mind like the Borg? There are many people here who followed the events in Ukraine from 2014. Especially the numerous ethnic Russians in Eastern Europe and Germany. However the mainstream media never reports about them. In many cases they were even criminalized for supporting Donbass and Russia.
If you only follow the news media, you will see what the European ruling class wants you to see and nothing more.
Are we doing the #NotAllEuropeans? It’s a generalization like how is talked about US “lefitsts”.
The overwhelming majority of Europeans don’t care about Ukrainians going into the meatgrinder. They don’t care about Palestine either. They keeping voting for whatever politician they believe will put 5 euros more in their pocket no matter how many non-Europeans have to die for it.
What do I know? Immigrant persecution, Neocolonialism, anti-Russia sentiment, Ziorovision, etc.
And the most obvious: Gaza is the outcome of European settlements in the Palestine. Something smells bad and this time it’s not European people in public transportation.
all westerners are also guilty of turning a blind eye to absurd levels of evil revealed by the epstein files and maxwell case; if they’re capable of ignoring literal baby farms to manufacture child fucking kompromat or genocides, then they will do whatever their oligarchs want them to do.
I’m glad I don’t live in the EU
Ye Power Trippin’ Bastards
More like Leopards Ate My Face
Ah but you see, there’s no free speech in Russia. Posting anything could get you imprisoned by the orc regime. For that reason, it would have been authoritarian of us to not criminalise RT, actually.
Hope that makes sense 👍🇪🇺
The EU would not need to do this if they were winning. This is desperate.
this is the price for freedom of speech bro
Oh yes. But to be fair, RT is pure Russian propaganda.
[finding out Jeffrey Epstein’s associates will imprison me for questioning them] this is good for me because I already don’t do that
Are there any big EU propaganda outlets you can think of?
Whataboutism
No, really. Do you think the EU puts out any propaganda at all?
Of course it does
But once again a .ml account can’t stay on topic
All “news” outlets will selectively only focus on certain news. Especially the ones you probably think are “unbiased” such as the BBC.
Even on news outside of Europe such as the genocide in Gaza, many great news clips have an RT logo because RT is one of the few willing to hire freelance journalists in Lebanon and not spout pure Israeli propaganda.
RT has plenty of good reporting on topics which European “news” would never air because it runs counter to their narrative. And I still post plenty of articles from TheGuardian and BBC despite knowing they frequently post propaganda.
Okay, what’s the outlet? Are you able to point to one media organization and say "this organization is an organ of EU propaganda?
Or are you just pretending to hold that opinion because being honest about what you actually think propaganda is (i.e. anything a Designated Enemy government says at all, for any reason, ever) would reveal your position to be exactly what you guys always claim is the communist position: rabid, uncritical in-group loyalty divorced from facts.
lmao
I just realized (at least I think so) that I missinterpreted your original comment
I thought you were a provoking tankie but it might have been a (somewhat) genuine question
If you think I am pro russia just check my comment history :D
However I stand by what I said, thinking that any sufficiently large governing body is not influencing news is just naive.
I don’t think the EU has anything comparable to RT, but that does not mean they are not influencing news and narratives
What’s your issue with communists? Why do you think communists are incapable of being genuine? Either way, BBC is easily an analogue to RT, both spread state-friendly messaging for either side, and both have been caught spreading disinformation (the BBC for example lies about China, Russia, and other western adversaries all the time).
How “convenient” of the screenshot to not even mention that RT stands for “RussiaToday”: a website and organization that was proven to spread Russian propaganda, and is proven to be sponsored by the Russian state.
In reality, yes the EU resources are limited and you can’t bring down every individual post after going to court first. If the platform systematically does illegal stuff and spreads lies and propaganda, you ban the platform. That’s the only logical way.
The BBC is proven to spread western propaganda and is proven to be sponsored by the British state… Ban when?
Ban both?
Maybe less censorship and higher reporting standards?
So then ban BBC and other state owned propaganda outlets. The BBC has been proven to spread disinformation about socialist countries and geopolitical adversaries to the west. Either commit to censoring disinformation, or commit to “free speech,” as it stands it’s just protecting fragile western narratives.
Agreed
This seems like a nothing burger. The ban of RT is in place already, the new decision is not relating to whether it stays in place or not:
In the law, operators are forbidden from distributing content from a list of banned media, including RT. The question is not relating to the continuation of that ban, but on the word “operator” in particular; it essentially means that it’s an entity distributing the content from a commercial perspective.
The question is whether gifts & donations to a private (non-commercial) individual turn that private individual into a commercial distributor and thus an operator.
‘Must Article 2f(1) of [Regulation No 883/2014] be interpreted as meaning that operators, within the meaning of that provision, also include natural persons who, through a website operated by them, only generate income in the form of voluntary contributions from third parties (donations or gifts)?’
Cited in Judgement #16, page 6
And it follows in the conclusion:
[The law] must be interpreted as meaning that a natural person who operates a website by broadcasting on it content originating from legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex XV to Regulation No 833/2014, as amended, and derives from the operation of that website only income from voluntary contributions from third parties, in the form of donations or gifts, comes within the concept of ‘operator’ within the meaning of that provision
This is the conclusion on the last page of the judgement (is it me or the wording is pretty bad around “that website only income from”?)
The judgement also carefully qualifies why gifts & donations are qualified as income in #15
However, that court observes that the collection of private donations, which constitute gifts under civil law, is capable of being classified as a ‘professional activity’, where it is carried out to such an extent that the beneficiaries receive significant sums enabling them to finance, at least in part, their means of subsistence. In the present case, the appeal for donations appears to be designed to generate financial resources for the continued operation of the traugott-ickeroth website and therefore to constitute a sustainable source of income, which is characteristic of a professional activity
So essentially, the information itself can still be freely shared so long as it’s done without monetary support that can be qualified as “income”; they’re not further banning the information itself, simply closing a “loophole” around hidden commercial exploitation.
I don’t like the original law either (because the media list can be amended to practically include anything and anyone), but this is not changing much, and given the amount of the donations (60k in a year) it’s surprising that they thought it would not be considered commercial exploitation to begin with.
Honestly, if they had cut off donations early or capped them to their server costs, then the prosecution would have no recourse.
Edit: Cutoff sentence, wording
The ban of RT is in place already
How authoritarian of them
Thank you for this detailed context. On the one hand, that makes perfect sense: Closing a loop hole. On the other hand, it’s chilling how this could be extended to cover other media or, ultimately, other community-driven projects, like open source, which rely on donations to survive.
So essentially, the information itself can still be freely shared so long as it’s done without monetary support that can be qualified as “income”;
Wait till you hear abouty Radio Free Asia
RT isnt a news source, its a propaganda mouth piece for Putin. This isnt a restriction on freedom of speech, irs cutting off a source of blatant lies, that go unchallenged.
So then ban BBC and other state owned propaganda outlets. The BBC has been proven to spread disinformation about socialist countries and geopolitical adversaries to the west. Either commit to censoring disinformation, or commit to “free speech,” as it stands it’s just protecting fragile western narratives.
RT are a whole other level of insane. They are like infowars. Nothing but lies, not a shred of fact in anything they report. BBC are nowhere near the same level
Depends on the subject, actually. The BBC is more than happy to doctor footage and outright lie as long as it pertains to geopolitical adversaries. They frequently edit videos of China to give them a grayed-out filter, lmao.
Also, as a side-note, try not to use “insane” in that way, it’s ableist when used as a pejorative.
Same is true for Fox “news”… and I’d rather have a ban on them t.b.h.
Oh I agree with banning fox as well. They consistent in their lies.
And the BBC?
This isnt a restriction on freedom of speech, irs cutting off a source of blatant lies
Fucking incredible.
Oh, this is on lemmy.ml. Should have noticed that first before I went into the comments.
Why do people like you even bother commenting stuff like this instead of just blocking us?
Genuinely curious.
What do you gain from commenting this? Why is it worth the apparent mental anguish of continuing to see our posts?
I think it’s to remind Lemmy noobs that not all Lemmy is equal and that some servers are seeded by government appointed handlers of fascist regimes.
Like the ones making news illegal lol?
Do you have any evidence of this, or is it just your way of dismissing speech you don’t like?
i’ve been saying it for years.
obviously, nobody likes a violent neighbor, and nobody likes russia invading ukraine. so much should be clear.
but, the fact that the EU just literally doesn’t allow russia to speak or to give any kind of explanatory statement, makes me thing that russia actually has good reason and EU does not want us to see that.
You say that Russia is not allowed to speak in the EU and state it as a fact. However I am living in the EU and still get to hear or read about e.g. what Lawrow has to say.
do you mean, what Tagesschau and other western newspapers report that lawrow says? because i’d rather hear it from themselves personally. otherwise it’s just a game of chinese whispers
makes me thing that russia actually has good reason and EU does not want us to see that
Are you starting to notice the contradictions? Check this documentary out.
