4 Attachment(s)
Google Deindexes 200 Streaming Sites For Violating EU Sanctions on Russia
In the wake of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the EU banned a number of Russian news outlets from broadcasting to any member state, including via websites and IPTV. Following a recent move by Lithuania, Google has reportedly deindexed over 200 websites offering EU-sanctioned content. The list includes the websites of specific broadcasters but also many portals offering pirated movies, TV shows, and unlicensed live TV streams, including some from Ukraine.
The adage that the first casualty of war is the truth held solid as Russia denied any intention of invading Ukraine, even as it was actively doing so.
State-controlled media, television presenters in particular, turned in some remarkable performances for the benefit of local audiences. While dramatically documenting events that bore only a passing resemblance to reality on the ground, broadcasters including Russia Today, Sputnik, and RIA Novosti, ensured that Russia’s position on Ukraine was presented overseas exactly as the Kremlin intended.
After quickly running out of patience, the EU banned all three broadcasters and many others (list) from transmitting from or to any EU member state, using any technical means. Whether by cable, satellite, websites or IPTV, the ban applied across the board to prevent (or at least limit) the spread of what the EU described as disinformation and propaganda.
Lithuania Saw Room For Improvement
On December 18, 2024, the Lithuanian Radio and Television Commission (LRTK) adopted a decision to block websites that provide access to Russian TV channels targeted by EU sanctions. In an announcement Tuesday, LRTK said that in order to ensure “more effective implementation” of the sanctions, it contacted Google with a request to deindex those websites from Google’s search results.
Obtained by TorrentFreak from the Lumen Database, the request envisions the deindexing of more than 620 domains.
“On January 3, 2025, Google announced that it had decided to remove 201 websites that hosted EU-sanctioned content,” LRTK continued.
“This means that a user who wants to access a blocked website and enters its address into Google search will not be offered the site among the search results. Thus, the implementation of EU sanctions will be even more effective and the accessibility of such websites will be even more limited.”
Silencing Only Propaganda?
The list of 279 domains present in the only notice seen by TF reveals numerous proxy domains not dissimilar to those deployed by pirate sites. Sputnik news, for example, appears in 53 fully qualified domains, with subdomain usage indicating the direct targeting of EU member states; cz, fr, it, and ro, for example.
Similar domains relating to Russia Today, Izvestia, and others facilitating access to already sanctioned platforms, offer no real surprises. Regardless of any propaganda value, the domains provide access to single, legitimate platforms. Under additional scrutiny, other domains on the list aren’t quite so straightforward.
For example, ottplayer.tv displays no content whatsoever, at least to those without an account. While links to Russia are fairly obvious, the service is described as an IPTV playlist aggregator/manager, with users apparently required to bring their own content.
The live TV portal at InternTV also seems like an unusual addition. Several of the sites subject to sanctions do appear on the portal for embedded viewing, but in this case context is everything.
In addition to providing access to pirated movies and TV shows, live TV channels from all around the world are featured no less prominently than their Russian counterparts.
Other live channels on offer include BB1, ITV, ITV2, ITV4, CNN, Bloomberg, Euronews, and Sky Sports. Sitting alongside in the same list are channels including Sport 2, XSport, Black Sea TV, and 1+1, all of which are notable for being Ukrainian channels targeting a Ukrainian audience.
So as an alleged outlet for propaganda, in general InternTV seems to perform quite poorly. By catering to an international audience with a platform that allows all sides to see and hear what everyone else has to say, it not only provides more balance than Russian state-controlled media, but outperforms the EU as well.
There will be no shortage of government leaders prepared to argue that responsibility to protect citizens from the evils of propaganda lies with them. Unfortunately, without first-hand experience of how propaganda manifests itself, those same citizens are denied an opportunity to learn and then think for themselves.
On the plus side, social media remains freely accessible to all, with propaganda conveniently delivered mostly in English, by those currently too difficult to block.
