Digital Hygiene: Why the Blocking of ONT, STV, and BELTA on YouTube Is Not "Censorship" — It Is Justice

Illustrated photo

Recently, debates have grown louder over the blocking of Belarusian state media resources on Western platforms. Some call it a restriction of free speech — but a look at the facts makes one thing clear: this is a classic case of violating the rules of civilised coexistence and international law.

Let us go through the reasons why the removal of ONT, STV, and BELTA channels is a logical and entirely justified step on YouTube's part.

1. A Toxic Asset: Sanctions Compliance

YouTube is a global platform operating within the framework of international law. When executives, key figures, and entire organisations fall under serious international sanctions, their presence on commercial platforms becomes legally untenable. The list of sanctioned propagandists working within these structures is extensive:

BELTA: The news agency was run by individuals directly responsible for supporting repression. Former agency heads Irina Akulovich and Dmitry Zhuk are under EU and UK sanctions.

ZAO Stolichnoye Televideniye (STV): The outlet employs notorious figures such as Grigory Azarenok and Yevgeny Pustovoy — both under EU, UK, and Ukrainian sanctions. The EU list also includes Nikita Rachilovsky, host of the programme "Senat" on STV.

ZAO Vtoroy Natsionalny Telekanal (ONT) and affiliated resources: Former board chairman Marat Markov and presenter Igor Tur appear on the sanctions lists of the EU, Canada, and Switzerland.

Using YouTube to monetise or promote individuals recognised by the international community as accomplices of a dictatorship is a direct violation of the platform's own rules.

2. Disinformation and the Fabrication of Reality

Freedom of speech ends where deliberate falsehood, manipulation, and incitement to aggression begin. These outlets ceased to be "media" long ago — they have become combat leaflets in an information war:

Justifying foreign aggression: Systematic and aggressive support for the war against Ukraine, amplifying Russian narratives, and spreading claims about a "Nazi regime."

Broadcasting fabrications: BELTA and the TV channels deliberately propagate the claim that the tragedy in Bucha is a "fake," cynically devaluing human lives.

The migration crisis: Active participation in constructing a false narrative around the crisis at EU borders — artificially engineered by the regime — while simultaneously blaming Western countries.

3. Complicity in Repression and the Destruction of Independent Media

The central cynicism of the situation is this: these very propaganda structures had a direct hand in destroying genuine, independent journalism in Belarus — and are now demanding "democratic treatment" for themselves.

The BELTA Case: In 2018, the state agency served as the primary instrument for fabricated criminal prosecutions against journalists from TUT.BY, BelaPA, and other honest outlets. UN Special Rapporteur Miklós Haraszti explicitly described this at the time as a flagrant violation of human rights.

Denial of torture and violence: Publications in which testimony about torture at Okrestina is dismissed as "fabrication" are not an alternative viewpoint. They are direct informational complicity in concealing crimes against the regime's own people.

The blocking of ONT, STV, and BELTA channels is not an attempt to "silence" anyone. It is basic digital hygiene — protection of the information space from:

• the incitement of hatred and international hostility;

• the promotion of individuals directly linked to the repressive apparatus;

• the use of the technological achievements and platforms of the democratic world to undermine the very foundations of democracy.

When a media outlet becomes a tool of repression, it forfeits the moral and legal right to call itself press. Removing such channels from global platforms is not censorship — it is a necessary act of sanitation.

---