Russian television as a threat

The court in Kyiv did not cancel the ban on the broadcast of Russian television channels - for inciting enmity and calls for war

In Kyiv, on Tuesday, April 15, the district court refused to cancel the ban on broadcasting state Russian television channels in Ukraine. The ban was introduced during the investigation on the compliance of the first channel, RTR, NTV, Russia-24 Ukrainian laws, primarily with regard to the incitement of interethnic enmity and calls to war and separatism.

Kiev journalist, editor-in-chief of the online publication "Telekritika" Natalya Ligacheva has long been against such sanctions against Russian television, but now her opinion has changed:

There is every reason for Ukraine to defend from lies of Russian television channels

- The scale of the dirty propaganda campaign, which is deployed on Russian television channels, in my opinion, poses a real threat to the territorial integrity of the country and national security. People who are used to watching Russian television channels, unfortunately, believe in a lot of what Russian television channels lie about. We see that these riots, which are now in the east and south of the country, are largely provoked precisely because people are already zombie this propaganda. We know that article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights implies the necessary restriction for freedom of speech. Just this situation is completely suitable for these restrictions. I think that Ukraine has every reason to defend from lies of Russian television channels.

- Russian television channels in the east of the country enjoy such a powerful influence?

- Yes, this is a fact, it's true. In Crimea, they generally occupied a dominant position. We were loyal. I have always been a supporter of this loyalty to the broadcasting of other countries. True, this has always been only Russian television, because there is also a language factor. But we now saw that this really threatens our territorial integrity.

- How does the media community in Ukraine as a whole relate to the ban? Is there any common position?

- No, I do not think that the whole community shares this point of view. Of course, there are opponents who, like me, previously believe that this cannot be done, that this will cause only rejection of those who watch these television channels. This is on the one hand, and on the other hand, that this is a violation of freedom of speech and so on. But the dominant recently, after all, I think this point of view can be called. Recently, “telekritic” was looking for supporters and opponents of a similar measure for her program and, frankly, it was already difficult to find opponents. I think that Russia itself contributes to this. Now such an unprecedented shaft is not only propaganda, but so impudent and cynical lies that even public opinion is more and more radically begin to relate to what Russia does not only in the real, but also in the virtual world.

- Do you think this is a necessary violation of freedom of speech? Or in general, to what Russian television channels do, the very concept of freedom of speech does not apply?

The concept of freedom of speech cannot relate to lies. But those who say anything will always say that they tell the truth

- The concept of freedom of speech cannot relate to lies. But those who say anything will always say that they are telling the truth. Therefore, they will never agree with the fact that they lie. Although, of course, it is even difficult to make excuses to Russian television channels, because they have already been caught by the hand many times on a frank lies. When the queues are shown on the Ukrainian-Polish border and it is said that this is the line of those who want to leave for Russia. When the same person is shown to both the supporters of the "Right Sector" and a participant in Russian rallies. What Russian television channels do is beyond good and evil. Therefore, in my opinion, such a thing as freedom of speech cannot even be attributed to them. But on the other hand, if nevertheless we can say that this is their belief, that this is their opinion, that they have the right to this (for example, Zhirinovsky has the right to speak simply evaluative judgments), then, in this case, I think, freedom of speech may have restrictions. For example, for the purposes of national security, territorial integrity or even public order. Because what is happening in the east and south of the country now, provoked by the media, is also a violation of public order.

- Can't it turn out that this ban will be again used by Russian propaganda - and will be more harmful than benefit?

- That's why I thought for a long time that this should not be done. But the fact is that now we see how, whatever we do, Russian propaganda turns everything upside down. If we forbid TV channels, she uses this for her own purposes. If we do not forbid television channels, she also uses this for its own purposes, only to a greater extent, continuing to lie with impunity. On the other hand, she will also turn this over, which is good, in her direction. Suppose, he will say that the opponents of the new government won, etc. Therefore, I think (and many join this opinion) that we do not need to pay attention to what the Russians do in their media. We need to do our job. If you constantly look around how someone will perceive, then we will all the time hostages not of our own, but other people's interests.