Revelations are coming. In pursuance of the wishes of the All-Russian Popular Front, the head of Roskomnadzor A.A. Zharov promised to present to the congress of the Union of Journalists of Russia “All Russia-2019” a list of “publications, online communities and people who regularly participate in the distribution of fakes.”
Zharov’s list will include the addresses of pages (Internet communities, publications and individuals) that disseminate false information and a description of such information. That is, the address www. ****. Ru, owned by a liar, and so that the charge is not bald, are specific examples of knowingly lying.
In fact, such a list has long existed, albeit in an informal and informal way. Professional (journalists, experts) and semi-professional (reputable bloggers) consumers of information have an internal exchange on which different information providers are quite uniquely quoted.
You cannot trust one media (author), because it constantly lies like breathing. Other media, by contrast, can. In the vast majority of cases, his information is reliable. There are also intermediate cases when, perhaps, it is possible to believe, but carefully, preferably with reconciliation of parallel sources. The rules "one witness - not a witness" has not been canceled. There are a number of additional security measures.
For example, muddy references to an unknown source are a clear reason to think.
Moreover, ideological disagreements do occur, of course, as without this, but in fact their role on this internal exchange is far from as great as one might think. Figuratively speaking, stories about liberals drinking the blood of Christian babies, about quilted jackets drinking the blood of liberal babies, are all the same rejected. "Yes, yes, very interesting, thanks, no."
All this exchange arose from the need to somehow structure the news flow. For the same need are, for example, intelligence services. For their inner kitchen, they need to understand where reliable information is, where is the error, where is the message from the OBS agency, and where is the explicit and conscious disinformation. Work that does not require genius, but just a good memory and hard work.
With news filtering and fake separation, it's no more complicated. The simplest mental hygiene.
And of course, if A.A. If Zharov presents his version of the list of liars, there will be no harm, but only benefit. Additional information for consideration. You can compare it with the exchange data. Again, if full ownership of the exchange data is acquired over the years and experience, then the list can be useful to young and inexperienced as a training tool.
Another thing is whether A.A. Zharova has enough qualified personnel to make his list really interesting, and not to be hackwork, hastily drawn by younger letter-masters on his knee. The quality of bureaucratic documents is not always at our level - and this is still very softly said. Is that Roskomnadzor will be a pleasant exception.
As for the punitive meaning, it is absent from the list (so far at least). A.A. Zharov, like George Washington, intends to state that "we have several dirty leaflets that rely on undermining public peace," but we will limit ourselves to this statement without making any organizational conclusions.
It’s just that at the All-Russia 2019 Congress, the delegates will be presented with a list of dirty leaflets and they will be called to caution. This is similar to the recommendation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation not to go to some countries where serious troubles can be raided, but if you’re completely unbearable, you should warn: “At your own peril and risk.” Or how the Ministry of Health makes terrifying stickers on cigarette packs - at your own peril and risk.
In principle, it’s already known who the notorious yabednik is, who is more trusted to trust himself, but now the state instance has decided to join the business of defamation of the yabedniks. Let's wait, who will appear in the "Zharov list".
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.