Foreign agents have rebelled

Foreign agents have rebelledMPs from the faction "United Russia" Andrei Romanov and Yevgeny Fyodorov suggested to make some softening points in the bill to the media, receiving funding from foreign countries. Refreshed bill already under consideration in the lower house of the Federal Assembly of the Russian. The initial version of the bill came a few months back, and in it the status of "foreign agent" got any media, working on the ground Russian Federation and funded from abroad. Any — regardless of the level of foreign funding. The new draft law regulates the level of funding. The deputies Fedorov and Romanov brought the suggestion that the media for giving the status of the foreign agent, it is necessary that the level of funding from outside the publication was more than 50% of its income. In other words, if the newspaper "X" has a yearly income of N RR, it should declare itself a foreign agent in this case, if her account (or other another method) received funds in excess of N / 2 rubles from the representatives of the foreign country.

Making additions to one side looks completely appropriate, but there is here and its underwater stones. The fact that it would be stupid to name a newspaper or magazine foreign agent if his bill came a thousand dollars from a poor sponsor, for example, from Ulan Bator. It is no secret that without the sponsorship funds that far do not always have to own some politicization, live modern press is virtually impossible. Another thing, when some of the media tries to use the financial sector (in particular, and from the foreign companies), not just as an opportunity to earn for the development of publications, and to solve some political problems, promoted outside.

At the same time, through the whole can not be financed by 50% of its own budget, as, for example, at 49%. According to the new changes in the bill, it appears that such mass disk imaging should not get status foreign agent. The difference of only 1%, and what terminology gap can succeed … If the gap, of course, in general, is …

It states that the bill to our parliamentarians need to work out in detail, so that the enormous field of Russian mass media was not plowed at random, and the citizens realize quite finished, where is unbiased and proven information, and where — financed from sources zabugornyh politicized "the scene of the apocalypse in Russia. " Although there is currently a clear distinction reader (viewer, the user) may not always be that, in principle, be explained. After some media be successfully disguise themselves under the legal instruments of upholding the interests of ordinary Russians, and others not quite disguise themselves, showing a clear direction of their own work.

Recall that for almost a few days prior to the consideration of the modified law on the status of media, joined by NGO law, which was signed by President Putin. And now both of the bill becoming law, in fact, a single whole legal framework regulating the activities of information and tools for constructing the institutions of civilian society.
And while the laws themselves are not yet fully start working, would have cost more detail refer to the fact what the reaction was designated in connection with the occurrence of these legislative initiatives in Russia.

Immediately following the entry into force November 20, 2012 "Law on NGOs' representatives of certain non-profit organizations have decided that the best defense — attack. Can not put up with the fact that they have to disclose to the whole country "mystery" of their own "foreign agency" nor Metropolitan Helsinki Group, or "Memorial" or "Amnesty International", nor a number of other organizations which receive generous funding from abroad and working for the benefit of those who are engaged in this financing. Human rights activists, specifically the so-called favorites themselves of these organizations have decided that it is now time to open his own legal front, when suddenly someone will make them bring their own status in the configuration and signed by the phrase "foreign agent. " Not a lot of gentlemen of the Moscow Helsinki Group, "Memorial" and other organizations have decided on one hundred percent ignore the new law. Specifically, this claim known favorites listed NGOs.

And who, no matter how people who claim to be progressive lawyers and legal scholars argue that a law in Russia can not care, grind, and then jump … And then the same people in all corners of the need to promote life strictly within the law. I'm sorry, whose law? ..

But the issue is something, in fact, is not worth a rotten egg. After all, nobody is going to restrict neither the media nor the NGOs to ensure that these organizations received zabugornye grants or sponsorship. No one says that the flow of funds channels overlap. Just need to be completely honest to the Russian people is the means by which work is under way, whose interests it defends the work. After all, the same can not be so, that-independent human rights organization, they baked just about protecting the rights of persons who, with or without cause replicate the word about the futility of life in Russia, a mandatory welfare-sex marriages and the fact that power in Russia by definition — and the Ghoul abscess if in this world has the power, the good from the world of Western advisers. -Independent human rights organization that is what exists to defend the interests of at least some citizens to whom law was cruel and unfair. And then it is difficult to find in the records of our human rights NGOs line against corrupt bureaucrats, the protection of those who were sentenced to long terms for stealing a sack of potatoes unfortunate, but how much material about the "political prisoners", "prisoners of conscience" and other victims of its own pseudo- Activity! ..

So where is the rejection of the very ability to tell the truth? Or, perhaps, superfluous to our politicized NGO grantees to think that the secret to the Russians, where "a pittance" … Apparently, cooking in its own juice, indeed, does not benefit. Open your eyes to the truth, it turned out more difficult than stating a desire to suppress their activity by municipal instruments. What is the problem? In a tick in front of the phrase "foreign agent "? If yes, that's exactly disease: a persecution mania, coupled with mandatory his innocence.

If the status of a foreign agent for someone looks reprehensible, there is the question of what, in fact, reprehensible in the need to call a spade a spade. If an organization called the Federal Security Service and receives funding for its activities from the municipal budget, it's not trying to change his title, status, and make everyone treat for yourself with the obligatory piety … If an organization called the CIA, and here none of the its employees do not desire to change its name appears in the "Children and Youth Foundation democratizers enthusiasts."

So, maybe it is time to cease to lament the mirror …

Like this post? Please share to your friends: