Russia TV (RT) to cease broadcasting in UK? NatWest pulls the plug.

NatWest is to close Russia TV (RT)'s bank accounts in London.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/17/russia-todays-uk-bank-accounts-frozen-says-editor

The move appears to have followed a government edict, presumably a secret instruction from the security services.

Apparently it is likely to lead to closure of the service in the UK.

Some might regard this as a positive move - it's certainly the case that RT operates as a Putin propaganda channel. Others may argue that freedom of speech is at issue. Can it be right that the British government can effectively take down channels on a whim? Shouldn't there be a free market in news media?

We aren't at war with Russia, so although this is clearly about Syria, it doesn't seem to be a legitimate decision. I hope RT challenge it in the courts. The method used, closing bank accounts, is sneaky as of course the banks don't have to give reasons and can't be forced to offer an account.

This kind of thing should be openly discussed and not done using backdoor methods by unaccountable security services.

EDIT: RBS denies that RT accounts are being closed. So perhaps this story is more RT propaganda.

(edited 7 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

999tigger

Original post by Fullofsurprises

Reading the article now. I just read it as though NW had asked them to find a different bank, that was all. Perhaps there are more details in your link.

The article doesnt provide any further information. It doesnt preclude them from finding a different bank.
It may ofc be an official decision from givernment as part of the new range of sanctions, in which case we can expect them to respond with similar, probably kicking the BBC out of Moscow.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 2

Fullofsurprises

Original post by 999tigger

Reading the article now. I just read it as though NW had asked them to find a different bank, that was all. Perhaps there are more details in your link.

It will be a result of adding them to the proscribed list for blocking bank accounts, so no other bank in this country is going to accept them now.

Reply 3

username2659199

Definitely a good thing. Can't let one of the most corrupt men in the world to spread their propaganda so widely.

Reply 4

999tigger

Original post by Fullofsurprises

It will be a result of adding them to the proscribed list for blocking bank accounts, so no other bank in this country is going to accept them now.

Maybe , maybe not. The letter or the article simply doesnt say.

Reply 5

usainlightning

It has some interesting guests but I imagine many of the people watching it do not realise it is Russian state backed and therefore believe the Russian propaganda it spouts.

Reply 6

the bear

i am sure that German broadcasters were not welcome here in the last war...

Reply 7

Fullofsurprises

Original post by the bear

i am sure that German broadcasters were not welcome here in the last war...

It isn't easy to compare, as in the 30s the BBC had a monopoly on broadcasting. German books, newspapers and magazines were freely circulated and sold in Britain until the declaration of war. We have not, as I mentioned, declared war on Russia.

Reply 8

Fullofsurprises

Original post by usainlightning

It has some interesting guests but I imagine many of the people watching it do not realise it is Russian state backed and therefore believe the Russian propaganda it spouts.

You'd probably notice fairly soon. :teehee:

It really is a ridiculous channel at times, full of conspiradroid rubbish and half baked leftism promulgated by a state that in no way has a left wing government - probably the best description of Putin's political position is 'kleptomaniac'.

That said, the point is how broadcasting is controlled. The government shouldn't be free to clandestinely close down broadcasters by preventing them from banking - it should be more open than that for something so important as freedom of speech.

Needless to say, the big offshored owners of the Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph, etc, will not be facing this problem. Refusing to pay taxes in Britain is apparently better than saying nasty things about the government.

Reply 9

Aj12

I find it hard to sympathise. This is the channel that accused the bbc is fabricating a chemical weapons attack..

A decline in the availability of Russian propaganda is not the end of free speech

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 10

Willy Pete

I imagine that it is particularly difficult having a Russian State Operated client and staying within compliance.

They would be considered a high risk client at best and not worth keeping their business.

Reply 11

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Aj12

My objection is to the method, not the end result in this case.

However I also think diversity in news channels is a very good thing, the BBC is not above playing propaganda games, even if sometimes they are games more to do with their own internal hangups than government policies.

Reply 12

hoping4thebest

Can't they just find another bank account lol
Not much else out can do about it.

Reply 13

Fullofsurprises

Original post by hoping4thebest

Can't they just find another bank account lol
Not much else out can do about it.

They won't be able to. NatWest will have closed it because the government have placed it on the list of organisations prohibited from having bank accounts in the UK, such as terrorist groups, etc.

Reply 14

999tigger

Original post by Fullofsurprises

They won't be able to. NatWest will have closed it because the government have placed it on the list of organisations prohibited from having bank accounts in the UK, such as terrorist groups, etc.

This is what you suggest has happened but banks turn down other peoples business for all sorts of reasons. It just isnt clear. When there was a big scandal over money laundering then numerous clienst were told to bank elsewhere necause they didnt fit the profile of what the business wanted. For all we know they could have lots of suspect transactions that indicate money laundering or questionable financcing.

Wait and see to what the UK government says or if they try and find alternative banking arrangements. It will all come out in the wash.

Reply 15

Tempest II

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The security services are accountable to the UK government. The methods they use & the information they gather would harm the UK's national interest in most cases were the details made public. (& you're presuming they were involved, there's no evidence of that.)

I'm sure you know that already but enjoy trying to score cheap points against the West. I think that, should you compare the security services of the UK & those of Russia you'd prefer the former any day.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 16

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Tempest II

Of course, but how long will you prefer them if they act in the same ways? Closing down critical media is right at the heart of Putin behaviour.

It isn't really the case that the British security services are accountable. It would be more accurate to call it a charade of accountability. In reality, they do the PM's bidding (some of the time), and as we saw over the Iraq farce, they are willing to lie repeatedly to do so, including in public.

Reply 17

Fullofsurprises

Ah, the plot thickens. RBS are now saying that RT displayed a redacted letter from NatWest relating to a different company.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/natwest-owner-rbs-denies-claims-it-has-closed-rt-s-bank-accounts-1-4260808

More Putin propaganda perhaps? :rolleyes:

Reply 18

KimKallstrom

RT is complete gutter press and a purveyor of anti-western conspiracy theories of the most lunatic variety. In fact I'm surprised it managed to last this long without censuring from Ofcom. I would be surprised if they didn't make this up completely. If they didn't, however, let's wait and see about the details as to why the account was stopped before jumping to conclusions.

Reply 19

AlexanderHam

Original post by Fullofsurprises

You've added an edit saying that this isn't actually happening, but if it were it would be legitimate. Many state officials of Russia are under sanction for being part of Putin's fascist machine. These people swallowed up a whole part of another country (Crimea), the first blatant conquest of territory in Europe since Hitler took the Sudetenland.

The West is finally starting to push back; Russia sponsors propaganda in Western countries, it engages in mass murder in Syria, it hacks a political party in the US to try to manipulate a presidential election. We've been allowing them to get away with this stuff for years; President Obama is far too passive and the Russians have taken this as a green-light, knowing there will be no pushback.

Thankfully those days are coming to an end. Putin has been engaging in the most irresponsible and puerile campaign of political manipulation, it's almost unbelievable how self-entitled and hostile they've been behaving (and then doing this "Who? Wittle old me?" routine when they get called on it, and acting offended which is incredibly obnoxious, though in fact they believe they are morally innocent and that it is their right to behave this way; like all sociopaths they have believe their own propaganda).

They behave as if they have a right to try to fix a national election in a Western country. Somebody has to call the crazy game to order, and Hillary Clinton will. They will regret making her their enemy, and doing everything they could to bring her down. Come January next year, the bill will come due for the shenanigans of the last 5 years and Russia will pay a heavy price indeed.

Original post by KimKallstrom