VKontakte refused to advertise Transparency International because of contentious content
Advertising of the anti-corruption public has been rejected twice.
Press Secretary of Transparency International Artem Yefimov told TJ that the advertisement with an inscription on the banner "We are against corruption. Sign" has already been rejected twice by the social network VKontakte. VKontakte support connects the reason for rejection with "contentious information, which arises questions." Also, the representative of the social network referred to the 9th paragraph of the rules, which states that, the placement of advertising "may be denied in case advertising does not correspond to the general advertising policy, views and convictions of the administration".
"According to moderation and lawyers, this advertising is contrary to the rules, paragraph 9, obviously. I have no details," said VKontakte spokesman Yevgeny Krasnikov.
In the note to the rules of the social network there is an explanation. The administration has the right to refuse advertising, "if unchecked, questionable goods, works or services are advertised". Further, specific unreliable forms of earnings are listed. Among them are healers' services, financial pyramids, mutual assistance funds, quick earnings services and so on.
The Transparency International community hardly suits one of these points. It publishes anti-corruption investigations, its audience is 1.1 thousand subscribers.
A federal judge other than retired Catherine Forrest will consider the case of Razhden Shulaya, who is charged with the creation of a criminal syndicate and other crimes, in the Federal District Court of the Southern District of New York.
Ismail Efendiev is suspected of exceeding authority in connection with the investigation of cases of detained earlier former First Deputy Prime Minister Ramazan Aliyev and nephew of the former head of Dagestan Askhabali Abdulatipov. Searches are being conducted at Efendiev's office and house.
The disappearance of an elderly Muscovite, who owns three rooms on Ostozhenka Street, and her disabled son, worried the neighbors, but the police refused to initiate criminal proceedings on their application. Housing in the elite area of the capital in the meantime was re-registered to a resident of St. Petersburg, who introduced herself as their relative.