At the XVIII international media forum “Dialogue of Cultures,” Vladimir Solovyov, president of the Union of Journalists of Russia, outlined concerns about the emergence of a new category labeled as “third parties” within the foreign agents law and how this could shape media operations. He noted that the change could redefine obligations for journalists and media organizations, potentially narrowing the range of permissible activities and creating new legal risks for those who report, comment, or share material that lawmakers might deem associated with foreign influence. Solovyov emphasized that these considerations extend beyond formal compliance, touching the day‑to‑day realities of newsroom decision‑making and editorial independence. He stressed that the impact could be felt not only by large outlets but also by freelance reporters and regional media workers who rely on timely information and open reporting. Solovyov pointed to the need for a careful assessment of how the law would translate into practical steps for newsroom governance and risk management, including the potential chilling effect on journalism. He also mentioned that the Union’s legal team is conducting a thorough review to craft clear guidance for colleagues, outlining what to do and what to avoid in order to prevent accidental inclusion on the foreign agents or third parties lists. The aim is to provide a concrete framework that helps journalists maintain professional integrity while navigating new regulatory boundaries. Solovyov expressed concern about penalties that could arise from inadvertent reposts or inadvertent associations, stressing that even seemingly minor mistakes could trigger legal scrutiny in a heavily regulated environment. If the legislative proposals advance, the Union plans to publish a detailed set of instructions to help media professionals adapt their practices without compromising reporting quality or editorial standards.
In this context, former Deputy Justice Minister Oleg Sviridenko commented on the proposed inclusion of the “third parties” category within the foreign agent framework, highlighting the broader implications for how information is curated and disseminated in Russia. Sviridenko indicated that such a designation could redefine responsibility for intermediaries who participate in the flow of information and might compel outlets to reexamine their sourcing, verification, and redistribution processes. His remarks underscored concerns about how the classification could affect press freedom, the speed of information sharing, and the need for precise criteria to distinguish legitimate journalistic activity from activities that authorities might consider politically involved or externally influenced. The debate, he suggested, should focus on balancing transparency and accountability with safeguarding the operational viability of independent reporting.
Vasily Piskarev, who previously chaired the Duma Security Committee, reflected on the core idea behind the term “third party” within foreign agent law. He articulated that the concept targets entities that act as conduits or facilitators in information propagation, potentially including individuals or organizations not directly funded by foreign entities but whose actions could be construed as assisting foreign influence campaigns. Piskarev argued that clarifying the scope of this concept is essential to avoid ambiguity that could ensnare ordinary journalists who simply publish or share news content. His comments implied a need for precise regulatory language, ensuring that legitimate journalistic activity remains protected while preventing covert operations that aim to mislead or manipulate public discourse. The discussion highlighted the ongoing tension between regulatory oversight and the practical realities of modern journalism, where rapid information exchange and digital platforms complicate traditional borders.