The blocking of 426 sites was a practice: the list will be reduced to a dozen and hit on specific

The National Commission on Communications and Informatization has published list of websites to be blocked - 426. Among the little-known was the GitHub section, which is important for developers, the LiveJournal blogging platform, as well as the large Russian media RBK.ru.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs reacted to this case, for example, Deputy Minister Anton Gerashchenko said that the police would initiate a process of a more detailed check of the Goloseevsky District Court, which issued a decision to close these sites. He also invited the deputies to reform the criminal code of Ukraine. After that, the police withdrew their statement from the National Commission and the case seemed to be closed on this.

In the last article, we tried to understand this topic and find out what it was - someone's hasty mistake or a deliberate go-ahead. The expert suggested that the blocking is directly related to the sanctions and the recent closure of TV channels. However, much of this theory did not fit. For example, the fact that the attempt to close was initiated not by the president personally, not by a people's deputy or someone from the guarantor's team, but by some Alexander Pan. 

So today we talked to political scientist Andrei Zolotarev. The expert, having analyzed the list of sites, found a dozen of those that have a common theme and put forward the theory that the blocking was only a training field, and next time the blow would be more targeted. 

The editors may not share the assessments of the authors posted in the "Opinions" section.

I would like to answer right away - this is an intentional action, but not completed. Didn't it occur to you that this is a very strange set of sites that suggest certain thoughts. If we are talking about Russian narratives, as they say about propaganda, then it is very strange to find something like that on the website "Business Cards of the New York Kindergarten". And so on almost all the list. I don't see any logic in the selection. And not in vain...

Let's dot the "and" correctly, in fact, it was not a blocking of sites, but an attempt to seize intellectual property. So, if we cut off sites about Chinese culture, business and hotel booking, it turns out that among the 426 there are some that specialize in leaking various fakes, compromising materials and other unreliable information, which, as a rule, discredit the authorities or certain people in power. I think the sight was on these sites, while the rest played the role of accuracy and curtains.

Most likely here we are talking about the teachings of blocking sites. They probe, open the Overton's window, see how the society reacts, look at the reaction. Top officials were the first to perceive such an action with bewilderment. The people didn't react at all. Therefore, there is every chance to see repeated actions, but again, with dozens of specific sites.

The very idea of ​​building a Ukrainian firewall is naive in the 21st century. Just look at the statistics of VKontakte. This social network is not available on the territory of Ukraine, but schoolchildren safely use it via VPN.

For the first time, at the end of last year, sociologists started talking about the fact that the Internet is becoming the main source of socio-political information. And the policy regarding TV channels and what our National Regulator, which sits on Proriznaya Street, is doing in relation to the media, will lead to the fact that people will switch to satellites and refuse to connect cable, in other words, give preference to the Internet, not TV . Also, judging by the latest data, in Russia, for example, 60% of the population receive information from TV and only 40% use the Internet for this. In Ukraine, the situation is quite the opposite. Approximately 60% receive information from the Internet and only 40% from television. The older generation, I speak for 70+, already know how to use mobile phones and know what TG channels are, moreover, they successfully use them. That is why the authorities want to put a handkerchief over this "mouth" in order to somehow control the processes.
We remember the statement about TG channels that the authorities were allegedly looking for a Russian trace there. There were questions to the major channels "Legitimny", "Resident", etc. It is technically impossible to close them. Pavel Durov will send both the SBU and everyone else who tries to do this on a pedestrian erotic journey. Therefore, the government is trying to hit the reputation, they say, this is Fake News.

Returning to the topic of 426 sites, I think that next time we will talk about a much narrower circle, we will talk about dozens of sites, but they will hit more precisely and more harshly. The problem here, as for me, is the existence of the Ukrainian journalistic community and the Hottentot morality prevailing in this environment. We see by the Sternenko case how journalists from different publications and experts along with them, affiliated with various political forces, react differently. That in our situation, that in the case of this "Odessa activist", I'm more worried not about the stupidity of the authorities and the SBU, since the thoughtless tightening of the screws always leads to the failure of the thread, but the society that is ready to accept and support such actions.