Translated and subtitled by Leo.
Hello dear friends, you liked the ‘This Is Different’ rubric. So today, I offer to continue it. Last time we were comparing the relationship between the Russian opposition with the social media blocks. Back then, we found out that an American IT company has the right to block whomever they want. Including the American president and his supporters. But for a Russian IT company, this rule does not propagate. Today we’re going to talk a little more about social medias. Now the black belt for double standards goes to the American New York Times.
Telegram, Pro-Democracy Tool, Struggles Over New Fans From Far Right. Yes, in this article, everything magnificently begins with the headline. By the way, one of my last videos were devoted just in time how the USA is making an active offensive towards Telegram. Which they, along with all possible human rights organizations were fighting to begin for so long. They even wrote the address to the UN. The link to this video will be in the description, you should surely watch it. It is mentioned in the article of the NYT. The author of this material, the journalist-investigator Michael Schwirtz brings a subheading to this next thought.
Michael Schwirtz (NYT): “Telegram has helped fuel democracy movements in Iran and Belarus but now faces scrutiny, because in the US, extremists and conspiracy theorists flock to it amid crackdowns by Facebook and Twitter on disinformation.”
This is so good that I don’t even know how to comment on it. I even worried that I might not be able to find material regularly for the rubric ‘This Is Different’. In general, a democratic movement is a democratic movement where it’s needed. But in the USA, Telegram became a refuge for extremists. It’s interesting to see what Schwirtz would have wrote if many Black Lives Matter activists or Biden supporters had massively went to Telegram. However, the master class on demand is given not by NYT, but by CNN host Chris Cuomo.
2:23 – Clip begins.
CNN host about the supporters of Trump in January 2021.
“Our democracy almost collapsed. This is not an exaggeration. And what would have happened if they showed up there with weapons? God forbid, God forbid! This should not go unpunished.”
Half a year before this, about the BLM protests.
“Many people look at these protests as a problem. No, the problem is what is bringing these citizens out in the streets. Show where in the constitution it is written that protesters should be respectful and peaceful?”
2:45 – Clip ends.
Okay, let’s move on. From the headline to the actual text:
“Telegram has long been an engine of resistance and an annoyance for tyrants. Authoritarian leaders in Russia and Iran have tried to ban it. When protests broke out recently in Belarus and Hong Kong, Telegram was the glue that held democracy movements together in the face of violent onslaughts by powerful security services. Lately however, Telegram is quickly becoming the online refuge for a different, undesirable for us form of resistance.”
Because NEXTA in Belarus is a desirable resistance, but Trump supporters are undesirable. Demonstrators in Iran are fighting for freedom, while demonstrators in the USA want to lead the country into the abyss of fascism. Schwirtz calls them supporters of conspiracy theories, racists and I quote verbatim, “violent insurrectionists that are not needed for us.” I understand that with the magazine The New York Times, most of its existence has served the interest of the Democratic Party, this kind of uprising is really not needed.
Michael Schwirtz (NYT): “25 million new users flooded Telegram in the days after Twitter and Facebook, reacting to the January 6 mayhem at the Capitol, purged users they deemed responsible for having incited violence or spread disinformation.”
25 million people, think about it. If we use the logic of the NYT journalist, they are 25 million racists and chauvinists. A question: how is it that in the country, which for years presented its internal political structure as a sample for other governments, how is it in this guiding star, as Obama wrote in his memoirs, did so many chauvinists spread out? It’s the question of questions. Friends, I know that there are many quotations here, but you have to hear these thoughts in their original form, without any paraphrasing. [Ed. – This is not entirely true, it seems some quotes have added other words not in the NYT article.]
Michael Schwirtz (NYT): “Some fear that the features that make Telegram a popular tool for organizing resistance to authoritarian regimes could be used by the far right and extreme supporters of Mr. Trump to cause further mayhem.”
“Instead of an uprising in Belarus or Iran, they can continue a violent anarchy in the US, as was started in the Capitol. Already the F.B.I. has warned police chiefs across the country to be on the lookout for potential attacks by armed white militia groups and are ordered to mercilessly beat down racist extremists.”
To mercilessly beat down extremists? Did I hear it wrong? Who is explaining this to us, the NYT? Which a few days ago had these main photos in their front page. [Shows pictures of Russian OMON riot police with batons hitting protesters.] Oh but here are kind protesters, there in the USA they are not friendly. The lexicon of the journalist of course deserves an individual attention. Okay, this part I especially liked. “Instead of an uprising in Belarus or Iran, they can continue a violent anarchy in the US, as was started in the Capitol.” But Schwirtz shouldn’t worry about that one.
Michael Schwirtz (NYT): “Mr. Durov initially welcomed the influx of users and criticized the big American competitors for the expulsions, suggesting they were an effort to limit free speech. Last Monday, though, Mr. Durov announced that his team had blocked hundreds of posts from American channels calling for violence ahead of the presidential inauguration.”
Here I once again recommend my video on this topic. There I explain it in more details. The main question stems in whether Telegram is going to ban the USA. But considering whether Durov is going to contact the American authorities – it’s unlikely. And this is where I will end it, I hope you enjoyed the video. For now, I am saying goodbye and will be looking for new material on the next release for the rubric, ‘This Is Different’. I remind you that your ideas for releases can be sent to my social media, which are included in the descriptions for each of these videos. Bye.