Censorship and polls

Recent poll about Russian opinion on censorship in mass media brought headlines like Poll finds massive support for censorship. What's actually the poll found (here in Russian) was a bit different. Indeed, when asked "Do you think that Russian TV needs censorship" 47% responded "Yes, definitely" and additional 35% answered "Yes, probably". But when asked which kinds of content need censorship (up to three answers, in % of respondents), Russians answered this way:

sexual	57
violent	49
the advertisement of dubious-quality medicine	30
crime-glorifying movies and TV series	24
the advertisement of intimate products (tampons and pads, condoms, toilet tissue etc.	24
profanity	15
Big Brother-like reality shows	15
tasteless pop music	8
excessively graphic reportage on catastrophes, terrorist acts	4
educational, children's	2
political	1

As you can see, nobody wants political censorship, and this is the kind of censorship that really matters. So headlines like 'Russians want more censorship' are misleading. If one ask Americans whether they supports the censorship that exists on their TV, few would say yes, and many would ask back 'What are you talking about, there is no such thing'. For many do not think about ban on nudity and profanity on public airwaves as censorship. Those who support such restrictions are especially loathe to call it 'censorship', although some, like Jonah Goldberg, prefer straight talk, and call it 'the kind of censorship which I support, as opposed to political one which I oppose'. Well, Russians are with Goldberg on this issue.

Some other notes: the first place of 'sexual content' and relatively low number of 'profanity' would make some think that Russians are more prudish on the former than the latter. But these numbers reflect the character of Russian TV.

Russian taboo words 'the famous Mat) are bleeped, Russian movies very rarely contain them at all, and Western movies are translated in a way that replaces four-letter words with euphemisms, so, say, Full Metal Jacket is aired without any taboo word. When a former cop nicknamed Goblin started to translate Western movies using Russian language in full, many of his critics even said that English taboo words are not equal to Russian mat, that they are a way more acceptable. A funny notion for anyone who tried to listen how real Russians talk on streets or at work.

However, there are no real restrictions on sex and violence. Most of the channels have enough common sense to show movies by Tarantino or Tinto Brass after 10 PM, but milder ones, which would be R-rated in the USA, are showed without any formal restrictions. It's not that daytime TV is packed with them -- no, TV programmers can read polls too, but sometimes when they have no good talk show or Soviet oldie at hand, they can place an R-rated movie on, say, 5 PM slot.

Monument to Aleksandr II, the Tsar Liberator, unveiled in Moscow

At last. It was a bit incogruent that, while even Finland had a statue of Alexander the Liberator on one of Helsinki's downtown squares, Moscow had not.

RIA Novosti had a freudian slip in this article: the inscription says that he "freed Slavonic peoples from the Ottoman yoke", not "the Slavonic people from the Islamic yoke", as their article says. While his wars led to the independence of Bulgaria, Serbia, and Montenegro, Bosnia continued to be Ottoman until early XX century. Besides, most of Slavonic peoples didn't live under Islamic rule. And substituting general 'Islamic' instead of specific 'Ottoman' is historically wrong: while most of the war of the time were waged against Islamic countries, he integrated Muslims in the Russian society. Actually, among those who fought against Turks there were Islamic Azeri troops and officers. Khan of Nakhichevan, to name one, showed exceptional bravery and loyalty in the siege of Bayazet.

Alexandra Ivannikova update

It seems that Alexandra Ivannikova, whose case recently got big publicity, will be cleared of all charges. I'm happy that she will be cleared, but, unfortunately, it is not a court, but prosecutor's office again that is the real judicial power in Russia.

The Moscow Prosecutor's Office has asked the Moscow City Court to annual the guilty verdict a lower court handed down against Alexandra Ivannikova, who killed a man while he was trying to rape her.

"The capital's prosecutor's office has lodged a prosecutor's appeal with the Moscow City Court asking it to overturn the guilty verdict handed down against Ivannikova and to drop the criminal case against her due to the absence of any crime," a prosecutor's office spokesman told Interfax.

On the bright side, this case showed the power of Russian public opinion. Demonstrations weren't numerous, but they were held by very unlikely allies: anti-immigration nationalists, liberals and gun right activists united for anything would be almost unimaginable before. Naturally, they weren't truly united, and each side tried to show clearly that they are here on their own, but such disunity of thought combined with unity of action is the most powerful combination.

Two recent verdicts

So. Mikhail Khodorkovski and Platon Lebedev were found guilty on almost all charges, and sentenced almost to the longest term available: 9 years of 10 years possible.

Today, another defendant was found guilty: Alexandra Ivannikova, a Moscow young wife and mother who inadvertently killed a would-be rapist. She got two years on probation and must pay $9000 to the late rapist's relatives.

In both cases the society and blogosphere as a part of it are split. Heated arguments, ad hominem attacks, questioning of opponents' motives are rampant. But in the essence, both cases share one cause: the mindset of Russian courts which prevents them from acquitting anyone who was charged. Juries alleviate this a bit, but in some cases (such as of Sutyagin, a defense analyst convicted for espionage) judges dismiss juries which look like potentially pro-defendant and call new ones with abnormally high percentage of former governmental, security and defense officials. In other cases, such as that of colonel Budanov and captain Ulman, charged with war crimes in Chechnya, acquittals are reverted, and new trials continue until the defendant is convicted. Sometimes, like in Ivannikova case, the defendant gets some years in probation. This way, judges try to prevent appeals while still convicting the indicted. Virtually the only way to acquit oneself is to prove self not guilty before prosecutor, before the indictment. Otherwise one is guilty.

That is why the trial of Khodorkovski was so important for Russia and that's why the sentence was so shocking even for those of his supporters who were sure that he would be incarcerated. When a judge doesn't even try to show that he has his own mind, but simply retells the indictment almost verbatim, it is bad. But when he does it in a case that got such publicity, it is the sentence on Russian judicial system, which is publicly pronounced dead.

While prosecutors were as bad in Yeltsin's tenure, judges then were a way more independent. Several high-publicity cases ended in acquittals, and some of the Presidential decrees and Duma's laws were overturned by the Constitutional Court. While many problems persisted, when a court was sentencing someone back then, most of the public accepted their judgment. Now it's all over. The destruction of the Russian state by attempts to strengthen it continues.

On blackout

The Moscow blackout itself was thoroughly covered by Andy of Siberian Light and Lyndon of Scraps of Moscow (many articles, scroll down or look in the archive on May 25-27 postings).

The public behavior during the blackout was probably the most interesting issue of the day. From what I gather from numerous Russian-language blogs, newspapers and official data, Muscovites could get B+ or even A-.

The most persistent complaint was that there was not enough cooperation among people struggling to get to their homes or offices. With subway closed lots of people tried to catch a car, but semi-professional taxi drivers charged about 1000 rubles for the ride that usually costs about 100-200 rubles. And not enough drivers who usually don't pick any passengers changed their mind in the emergency. However, those taxi drivers who hadn't significantly raised their prices, got passengers in seconds, and weren't available for anyone else. And free rides by those who do not usually allow strangers in their cars were restricted to the obviously needy (grannies, moms with kids, etc.) or at least to pretty girls. No wonder that most of those who complained about selfishness of Moscow drivers were young and middle-aged men: the only ones who were easily available for them were, indeed, those who raised their prices outrageously.

However, it is notable that there were no lootings, even when most of the street kiosks refused to sell water, sodas and ice-cream in the hot weather (they couldn't: their cash registers, which are compulsory even for smallest ventures, went out of power too). Moscow drivers managed to sort out their priority rights without traffic lights or police, and did it so well, that overall traffic accident level lowered. There is even a joke about that: "With traffic lights out, the accident level on Moscow streets dropped. The city police department dispatched additional traffic police to the streets, and the accident level returned to normal". There were lots of jokes, lots of news swapping, but overall reaction was mostly subdued. Nobody wanted any additional trouble, and most tried to behave themselves in a damage-minimizing way. On the whole, I think that such response was healthy, much healthier than I'd predict before.