The Russian rapper Scally Milano, whose real name is Daniil Dmitriev, performed live for the first time since a controversy over drug-related propaganda accusations. Coverage on a telegraph channel highlighted the moment and described the public interest surrounding the comeback, noting the involvement of a prominent public figure in monitoring online safety and content regulation.
Video clips from the concert captured fans greeting the show with waving Russian flags, a scene that drew particular attention for its symbolic visuals within the venue. The presence of the tricolor banner was clearly visible, underscoring how national symbols can become part of a live performance narrative and audience reception in contemporary media contexts.
Commenting on the return, a prominent observer remarked that it was Scally Milano and Uglystephan’s first show after a prolonged break, pointing out the absence of explicit drug-related phrasing in the stage banter and the overall tone of the performance. The remark framed the event as a cautious reentry into the public sphere for the artists, emphasizing a shift toward a less provocative stage dynamic during the set.
In late June, the Vasileostrovskiy District Court in St. Petersburg enacted an order to block several tracks by Scally Milano from multiple sources. The court cited a complaint filed by a citizen who alleged drug-related propaganda in songs such as Low66 – CBD FLOW, O, TWO, and Do It, prompting the legal move as part of a broader regulatory effort over public messaging in music and media. This decision reflected ongoing tensions between artistic expression and regulatory oversight in the online information ecosystem.
Analysts reviewing the material concluded that the lyrics in question could be interpreted as encouraging or normalizing drug use, a finding that fed into the court’s concerns and contributed to the formal restrictions placed on the songs. The case illustrates how music content can become a focal point in debates about public health messaging and youth exposure to potentially harmful material within digital platforms.
The artist Dmitriev’s concert schedule was subsequently paused indefinitely as the legal and reputational matters were resolved, a development that underscores how legal actions can directly affect touring plans and public appearances for performers amid controversy. The broader context includes parallel attention in international media and cultural discourse about the responsibilities of artists in shaping social attitudes through their work, and how audiences interpret and respond to provocative content in a digital era. It is part of a larger pattern where public performances and creative output intersect with legal scrutiny and policy considerations around content distribution. The situation stands in contrast to other well-known cases in the music industry where public figures face penalties for environmental or urban conduct, reminding readers that cultural events are often entwined with regulatory frameworks and civic discourse. A separate, unrelated note from the United States mentions a high-profile fine related to a different scenario in New York, illustrating how public governance and community standards play out across different jurisdictions, even as the music world seeks to move forward with performances and new releases.