The information war is running at full speed between the European Union and Russia.

While the EU has already banned five Russian public media including RT and Sputnik, the President of the Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced on December 7 that she wanted to suspend four additional channels, accused of feeding "the Russian propaganda machine ".

"Their name was not mentioned but it seems that they are Russian-language televisions broadcast in the Baltic countries," explains Dave Keating, France 24 correspondent in Brussels.

"These channels particularly target Russian-speaking populations in Latvia and Estonia, where they represent more than a quarter of the population."

To become effective, the suspension must be approved by the members of the European Union, who will discuss it on Monday in Brussels.

The European Federation of Journalists, for its part, criticizes the method, affirming that the prohibition of media by the States represents a danger for the profession.

Interview with its secretary general, Ricardo Gutiérrez.

France 24: The EU justifies the ban on Russian media by the desire to prevent Russia from disseminating its propaganda in Europe.

What do you think of this approach

?

Ricardo Gutiérrez:

The rules are very clear in this area: if these television channels violate the broadcasting rules, by inciting hatred for example, then yes, they must be banned.

But it is not enough to say that they are propagandists.

In each country, the State must file a complaint with the body responsible for regulating the media, which is responsible for deciding independently.

This system is essential to protect the press against political interference.

However, for RT and Sputnik, the European Council wanted to go quickly and bypassed these bodies: it was the States which voted directly for the ban by integrating it into the economic sanctions against Russian companies.

This measure creates a dangerous precedent that represents a threat to the freedom of the press.

Do you think the ban is an effective measure to counter the Kremlin's message

?

This measure may be necessary in some cases, but I do not think it is effective.

The fight against propaganda goes through the development of quality media, through education, and not through repressive measures or anti-fake news laws like the one adopted in France.

The best weapon remains to carry a counter-speech and to convince.

This type of measure also poses the risk of consolidating propaganda and conspiracy enthusiasts in their positions.

Moreover, those who really want to access these channels can still do so through foreign platforms.

The ban has reduced the visibility of these media, but not completely blocked them.

I consider that for the EU these measures are above all symbolic.

It is a question of weighing in the arm wrestling engaged with Russia, more than of seeking a real effectiveness.

11:22

How Russian propaganda justifies strikes on energy infrastructure in Ukraine © FRANCE 24

This new prohibition measure seems to concern Russian-language television channels, watched in particular by Russian-speaking communities in the Baltic countries.

How is the question of Moscow's propaganda approached in these countries

?

It is a very sensitive subject because these States have lived under the Soviet yoke and are very afraid that the war will spread.

Earlier this month, a media scandal erupted in Latvia with the exiled Russian independent channel Dojd.

It broadcast a map of Russia including Crimea in a report and one of its presenters was accused of making pro-Russian remarks.

The channel, which claims an anti-war and pro-Ukrainian position, admitted mistakes, apologized and immediately fired the presenter.

But Latvia and Lithuania still decided to revoke its license, saying it poses a threat to national security.

For me, this is a very disproportionate measure, quite symptomatic of the way in which Russian journalists fleeing their country are treated.

Contrary to what is sometimes said, there were critical voices in the Russian press before the war, in the regional newspapers but also in the major business daily Kommersant, for example.

Thousands of journalists have been forced into exile since February by the Kremlin's terrible crackdown.

We help them to get protection from Europe, but we get a lot of visa refusals from member states.

I find this attitude shocking.

We too often forget that they too are victims of Moscow's actions. 

The summary of the

France 24 week invites you to come back to the news that marked the week

I subscribe

Take international news everywhere with you!

Download the France 24 app