We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Putin and the Russian internet

Via the Twitter page of Dominique Lazanski, I recently found my way to a fascinating but depressing piece about Russian internet policy, by “Russia’s First Blogger”, Anton Nossik:

As for Putin’s solemn oath to protect the Russian Internet from any undue and arbitrary attempts at government regulation, well, he honored it for the next 13 years. As keen as Putin was to control the federal nationwide TV channels, he seemed absolutely uninterested in regulating the Internet, be it the content, the cables, or the e-commerce. Any attempts by overzealous Russian lawmakers, ministers or law enforcement (the infamous siloviki, or strongmen) to regulate the Net were routinely aborted by Putin’s administration. Anyone who proposed such legislation to please the Kremlin soon found out that the Kremlin was very far from pleased. Internet regulation bills sponsored by everyone from Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov, to government ordinance drafts by ministers, and dozens of other proposals to regulate the Net had been quickly buried and forgotten for lack of presidential support between 2000 and 2012.

As a result, the Internet developed into Russia’s only competitive industry. Companies like Yandex and VKontakte easily outperformed international competition (Google and Facebook, respectively) in Russian-speaking markets. These Russian start-ups did not copy successful American models, but rather the other way round: Almost every Yandex service (maps, payments, webmail, contextual advertising, etc.) was launched several years ahead of its Google-based analog. The VKontakte social network has many services and features that Facebook badly lacks, such as social music and video hosting and an advertising exchange, allowing any popular page or group to monetize its traffic almost automatically.

The Internet also became Russia’s only territory of unlimited free speech. Opposition figures, banned elsewhere in mass media, found easy access to their audiences by going online. Moreover, privately owned online media sources, such as Lenta.Ru, Gazeta.Ru, NewsRu.com and RBC News, used to outperform traditional mass media outlets in terms of audience and pageviews. Alexey Navalny, Russia’s most prominent independent politician and Kremlin-basher, found millions of followers all over the country, despite being banned from all nationwide TV channels and radio stations for almost half a decade.

But then, President Putin decided to shut it all down. What had happened?

We should blame the 2011-2012 Moscow protests for Putin’s unexpected and instant conversion into a paranoid Internet-hater.

He blamed the messenger for the message, in other words.

He made his change of mind public during a speech on April 24. Putin shocked the entire world with his epiphany that the Internet was initially created as a special CIA project, and is still run as such. Putin went on to claim that Yandex, Russia’s biggest and most successful Internet startup – ranked fourth in the world by number of search requests, valued at about $15 billion on NASDAQ in mid-February 2014, earning more revenues and profits in 2013 than any other media company in Russia—is also controlled by foreign intelligence seeking to harm Russia’s interests. Those remarks instantly brought Yandex shares down 5.5 percent. As of this writing, the company is now worth $9.19 billion, nearly $6 billion off its mid-February mark.

And so on. The golden days of the Russian internet would appear to be over:

Under the new laws, any social media platform that wishes to serve a Russian audience will be obliged to retain all user data for at least six months and to surrender this information to Russian security services upon request, without a court ruling or any other form of justification or explanation. Moreover, any foreign social media platform serving Russian users has to physically keep all sensible user data within the boundaries of the Russian Federation. And we’re not talking Russian user data, but rather all personal information of any user who happens to have some readers from Russia – like, say, Barack Obama, who has no less than 3,000 Russian nationals among the 40.5 million subscribers to his Facebook page. Twitter should also prepare to move all of Obama’s personal data to Russia and hand it over to the FSB, since both Putin and Medvedev are his followers on Twitter. Ditto for Google. If any of these companies don’t comply they would be subject to administrative fines, up to 500,000 roubles ($14,000), and Russian ISPs would have to block access to these platforms.

This Orwellian masterpiece of legislation was signed into law by Vladimir Putin on May 5, 2014, and it will be enforced from August 1, 2014. Will that be the last day of Russian Internet? Maybe. Unless a new law kills it even faster.

As you can see, picking out the highlights of this piece was a task that was basically beyond me. This really is one of those Read The Whole Thing things. I am in no position to second guess Anton Nossik, but given that the excellent Dominique Lazanski linked to it, I assume the story he tells to be at the very least roughly right. And if it is roughly right, doesn’t it remind you of another similar tale that unfolded in Russia just under a hundred years ago? From dire economic necessity, Lenin had presided over a similar period of economic liberty and creativity, known as the New Economic Policy. And then he shut that down.

But Lenin shut down his NEP because he never believed in it. He only let it happen in the first place because people were starving and the Soviet State wasn’t yet able to suppress the resulting popular complaints. As soon as Lenin and his new apparatus of tyranny got strong enough to do this, bye bye NEP.

But what is Putin thinking? My first guess at a guess would be that he thinks that shutting down the Russian internet is of no more consequence than had been his initial impulse to leave it alone. Letting a thousand internet flowers bloom didn’t mean anything. And nor does him zapping all the flowers with legislative weedkiller. That’s his attitude.

But what do I know? Not much, but I will soon know rather more about such stories as this one, because Dominique Lazanski will be speaking at my home this coming Friday, on the subject of “The Future and Its Digital Enemies”:

I will talk about International Internet policy issues otherwise known as Internet Governance and how individuals, groups and governments play key roles in this process. Ultimately, it is the work of governments that is the real threat, but many play interesting roles in the political chess game. However, all is not lost, innovation and the market process are helping to undermine these threats.

Whenever that word “governance” is heard, you just know that something very bad is being attempted, so it is good to know that the Governancers are not having it all their own way in these matters.

10 comments to Putin and the Russian internet

  • Peter

    Interesting, I’d not heard a word until now. Hope The Peoples’ Cube isn’t hosted in Russia as I’d miss it.

  • I’m surprised it didn’t happen sooner.

  • Zarba

    And so the US Gubmmint. in it’s infinite wisdom, plans to hand over control of the Internet to that august body of freedom-loving despots, the United Nations.

    While many consider this a bug, I’m sure the Obama administration considers it a feature.

  • Paul Marks

    Mr Putin is not a Marxist (the KGB used to call people who actually believed in Marxis “shit eaters” as the believed the propaganda “ate the shit” the KGB put out about “the rich” and “the corporations” being behind everything bad) – he is just a vicious gangster.

    As a vicious gangster Mr Putin would have no reason to attack the internet industry – any more than Al Capone went after book publishing (or any other industry) in Chicago.

    Only once he came to believe that the internet was a threat to his own power (to him personally) did Mr Putin act against it.

    Then the lack of “little” things such as the rule-of-law in Mr Putin’s Russia made themselves felt.

    Russia is an absolute (not a Constitutional) monarchy – and that is a bad thing, because there is a no limit on the power of the ruler (in this case Mr Putin).

    Of course Mr Putin USES Marxists (such as the “Occupy” vermin who are presenters on some of the shows, such as “Breaking the Set”, on “Russia Today”), but that is not the same thing as being a Marxist.

    It is an alliance of convenience – as it is with the Marxists in the Ukraine.

    Deep down these people do not really love each other.

  • Mr Ed

    It is an alliance of convenience – as it is with the Marxists in the Ukraine.

    Deep down these people do not really love each other.

    I suppose that counts as optimism these days.

  • CaptDMO

    I don’t get it.
    How is it any different than what Mr. Putin’s new guest(what’s the time line here?) has revealed about the NSA?

  • The NSA seem to be smarter. Trying to block or censor the internet is a never-ending arms race (which must be what this is about, Putin cannot seriously expect the likes of Facebook to set up servers in Russia specially to comply with his law). It’s much more cost effective just to keep an eye on whatever people are saying on the internet, so you know which ones to round up.

  • Rich Rostrom

    He blamed the messenger for the message, in other words.

    It would seem more accurate to say he decided to shoot the messenger’s horse. Which is despotic and corrupt, but not irrational.

    I don’t think the analogy to the NEP really holds. The Communists had already started their program of total socialism, and many of them argued continually against the NEP on Marxist grounds. There is no ideological basis for Putin’s new Internet policy, only autocratic defense of power.

  • Putin is the last that restricts Internet freedom.