Disinfo: Ukraine and Baltics use restrictions against Russian media for the achievement of geopolitical goals against Russia


Three leading TV channels were closed in Ukraine. It shows the double-standards of freedom of speech in Ukraine.


One more example – the situation in the Baltics. In one shot, Latvia killed 16 of our (Russian) media. Where is the evaluation of the situation of freedom of speech in Europe from the side of Western truth-seekers? There is silence.


All these examples show that it (restriction of Russian media) is the tool for the achievement of geopolitical goals against Russia.


A recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about discrimination against Russian language media in the Baltic States and Ukraine. The West are also accused of double-standards and violating freedom of speech.

Ukraine's decision to close three TV channels is linked to the implementation of personal sanctions against Taras Kozak. Economic and other restrictive measures were applied against the TV channels that he owns such as 112 Ukraine, ZIK and NewsOne after the decision of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine. As stressed by Ukrainian President, Volodimir Zelenskyy, these channels were the source of disinformation and “earned money on the war”.

The decision to implement sanctions on Taras Kozak and his TV channels was supported by Ukrainian NGOs Countering Disinformation. In a joint statement, they stressed that these channels were tools of foreign influence operations, and were a systemic threat to the information security of Ukraine.

Latvia also decided to suspend 16 Russian TV channels due to clear circumstances. On 9 February 2021, Latvia's broadcast regulator, the National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP) removed 16 programmes from the list that can be retransmitted into Latvia. These programmes are all produced in and rebroadcast from Russia, most of them classed as entertainment. NEPLP found that as of 1 February, the audiovisual service provider legally authorised to distribute these programmes can no longer be identified. The entity formerly bearing the legal right to distribute and retransmit the TV programmes no longer holds that right. The potential new distributor has so far been incapable of showing documentation that proves that it has the legal right to act in that capacity. If a new distributor acquires and can document the distribution rights to these programmes, it can apply for new licenses.

See similar cases claiming that the Baltic states continuously obstruct the work of the Russian media or Ukraine and Latvia clear their educational space from the Russian language.

As for the claim on the pressure on Russian media in Western countries and limited freedom of speech, read a further debunk here.


  • Reported in: Issue 232
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 17/02/2021
  • Outlet language(s) Russian
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: Baltic states, Ukraine, Latvia
  • Keywords: Freedom of speech, Media
see more

Navalny is a NATO agent, provoking a colour revolution in Russia

What makes Navalny so dangerous isn’t that he’s a “pro-Western liberal, anti-migrant nationalist, or political opportunist” like RT described him, but that he’s attempting to mislead dissatisfied people — and increasingly even children — into breaking the law by exploiting their frustrations with the state of affairs. The content of his political platform isn’t as bad as the means through which he’s seeking to implement it. This NATO agent is manipulating people for the purpose of provoking a Colour Revolution, hoping that the authorities’ legally justified but sometimes forceful response to his illegal protests can be decontextualized, misreported, and then weaponized to incite a self-sustaining cycle of unrest.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Alexei Navalny and popular protests as staged operations by foreign powers. Similar claims can be found here on Venezuela, Ukraine, Belarus, Hong Kong and, now, Russia.

Pro-Kremlin disinformation often targets Russian opposition figures accusing them of being agents of Western intelligence services. There is no basis to claims that Navalny has connections with foreign intelligence. He has been charged with mock accusations on embezzlement in trials. The European Court of Human Rights have concluded that the trial were politically motivated. The European Union has condemned the detention of Alexei Navalny and called for his immediate release.

In Europe, the state has the right to attack families

Europe and the West has embarked on the path of the brutal concept of Children’s Rights, and the state has received the right to intrude in family matters. This is very strange from the background of the liberal concept of freedom.

People say that the Soviet Union was a bad totalitarian state. But in the USSR families were never attacked as now in Europe or America under the pretext of children’s rights. To whom are those children handed over? In what families to they end up? What if they are given to paedophiles or other perverts.


An unfounded claim, consistent with a trope, suggesting that European governments have the rights to "steal children" from their families, and, potentially, handing them over to "perverts". Similar stories can be found here and here.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child obliges national authorities to protect children from violence. This convention is signed and ratified by Russia and all EU Member States.

The Western Navalny project to destabilise Russia has failed

Today, we can actually speak of the complete failure of the Navalny project, orchestrated by the West, to destabilise Russia.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Alexei Navalny. The claim that Navalny is somehow used by the West and foreign special services for the political destabilisation of Russia is disinformation.

Anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny has long been the most prominent face of Russian opposition to President Vladimir Putin. His candidacy in the 2018 presidential election was banned by authorities over his conviction by a Russian court for embezzlement, which bars him from running for office. He has been arrested and imprisoned several times during his political career.