- War propaganda; pornography and antisocial behavior propaganda

- Free speech abuse: Extremism

- Free speech abuse: Drug production and acquisition information

- Free speech abuse: Secret information disclosure

- Free speech abuse: Latent influence (e.g. hipnosis)

- Anything related to extremism

- Malicious programs

- Information which is a crime by itself (slander, humiliation, call for terrorism, offer for a drug use, etc.)

- Improper advertisement (alcohol and tobacco ads)

- Secret inforation

And in practice anything they want. Example: navalny.livejournal.com is not available in Russia for some time. Not chosen articles, whole blog.

Perhaps you've missed it, but numerous media outlets have published US secrets collected by Snowden. Where are the takedowns you expect against NYT, Washington Post, Guardian, NBC News, etc.?

All these media outlets make a point of saying that they have carefully redacted anything that may put people's lives in danger. I imagine that any site which published it raw would be taken down even in USA.

Remind me, those photos of Guardian destroying Snowden files all over the news sites are clearly because Russians forced them to? Or was it UK government?

That was a quick moving of the goalposts.

Navalny is a political opponent of Putin. He has nothing in common with whole whistle-blowing thing. Blocking his blog is like banning Fox from broadcasting.

It's worth to note, that they can and actually do block addresses without court order.

Anyone want to start a pool on when "Free Speech Abuse" becomes a thing in the US?

> Information which is a crime by itself.

Which includes gay propaganda, i.e. anything that mentions homosexuality in a positive or accepting context.

> to put it politely

Yes, you were almost too polite given that these journalists mostly had anti-government attitudes.