Diversity of the Internet in Russia’s Regions: Towards an Alternative Research Agenda

  • Polina KolozaridiEmail author
  • Olga Dovbysh
Part of the Societies and Political Orders in Transition book series (SOCPOT)


Today, the internet has become a very fragmented research object that can be understood differently depending on contexts, research goals and methods. However, the internet [in this text, we write “internet” with a lower case “i”, following the process of decapitalisation of this term. The logic behind this process is that we understand internet as “computer network connecting a number of smaller networks” rather than as “the global network that evolved out of ARPANET, the early Pentagon network” (Herring S. Should you be capitalizing the word “internet”? Wired, 2015)] of a particular country is often treated by researchers as an umbrella term combining heterogeneous phenomena and practices. In this chapter we propose an alternative way of analysing the internet in Russia’s regions. Contrary to the concept of RuNet as common space, we explore diversity of what the internet is in different localities in Russia. The cases of five cities aim to illustrate the variety of histories and usage patterns of the internet in particular locations, such as in cities in Russia’s regions. Qualitative data consisting of interviews, observations, digital ethnography and archival documents have paved an additional (to more conventional quantitative data) way to explore the internet as a complex phenomenon rooted in previous development, local cultural and societal norms and political and economic situations. In particular, we stress the significance of the early internet, the diversity of basic and alternative platforms, the access and infrastructure divide as objects that are important to understand the development of the internet in a particular location.


Internet development Internet history Internet usage Qualitative methods Russia’s regions 


  1. Alexanyan, K., Barash, V., Etling, B., et al. (2012). Exploring Russian cyberspace: Digitally-mediated collective action and the networked public sphere. Berkman Center Research Publication, no. 2012-2. Retrieved March 12, 2019, from
  2. DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2001). From the “digital divide” to “digital inequality”: Studying internet use as penetration increases. Princeton, NJ: Center for Arts and Cultural Policy Studies, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University.Google Scholar
  3. Dutton, W. H. (Ed.). (2013). The Oxford handbook of internet studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Ekonomika Runeta. (2018). Runet economics. Report by RAEC. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
  5. Federal State Statistics Service. (2018). Retrieved March 12, 2019, from
  6. Firmstone, J., & Coleman, S. (2015). Public engagement in local government: The voice and influence of citizens in online communicative spaces. Information, Communication & Society, 18(6), 680–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goggin, G., & McLelland, M. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge companion to global internet histories. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  8. Graham, L. R. (1993). The ghost of the executed engineer: Technology and the fall of the Soviet Union (No. 87). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hongladarom, S. (2000). Negotiating the global and the local: How Thai culture co-opts the internet. First Monday, 5(8).Google Scholar
  10. Krylova, I., Orekhov, B., Stepanova, E., & Zaydelman, L. (2015, August). Languages of Russia: Using social networks to collect texts. In Russian summer school in information retrieval (pp. 179–185). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Kuznetsov, S. (2004). Oshchupyvaia slona. Zametki po istorii russkogo interneta [Thouching the elephant. Notes on the history of Russian internet]. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie: Moscow.Google Scholar
  12. Lipskiy, A., & Polukhin, A. (2014). Natalia Zubarevich: Chetyre Rossii otmenyautsya [Natalia Zubarevich: Four Russians are cancelled]. Novaya Gazeta. Retrieved May 12, 2019, from
  13. Mailland, J., & Driscoll, K. (2017). Minitel: Welcome to the internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mesto v Instagrame: Grozny [The place in Instagram: Grozny]. (2015). Tjournal. Retrieved May 12, 2019, from
  15. Miller, D., Costa, E., Haynes, N., McDonald, T., Nicolescu, R., Sinanan, J., Spyer, J., Venkatraman, S., & Wang, X. (2016). How the world changed social media (Vol. 1). London: UCL press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nagirnaya, A. V. (2015). Development of the internet in Russian regions. Regional Research of Russia, 5(2), 128–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Orekhov, B. V., & Reshetnikov, K. Y. (2014). K otsenke Vikipedii kak lingvisticheskogo istochnika: sravnitelnoe issledovanie. Sovremenniy russkiy yazyk v internete. [Assessing Wikipedia as linguistic source: Comparative study. Contemporary Russian language in internet]. Moscow: Languages of Slavonic culture.Google Scholar
  18. Perfilyev, Y. (2003). Rossiyskoye internet-prostranstvo: razvitie i struktura [The Russian internet-space: Development and structure]. Moscow: Gardariki.Google Scholar
  19. Peters, B. (2016). How not to network a nation: The uneasy history of the Soviet internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rainee, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Boston: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Razvitie interneta v regionakh Rossii [Internet development in Russian regions]. (2016). Report by Yandex corporation. Retrieved March 25, 2019, from
  22. Regions of Russia. Socio-economic indicators. Statistical collection by Rosstat. (2016). Moscow. p. 1326.Google Scholar
  23. Sandvig, C. (2013). The internet as infrastructure. In The Oxford handbook of internet studies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Schmidt, H., & Teubener, K. (2006). Our RuNet. Cultural identity and media usage. In H. Schmidt, K. Teubener, & N. Konradov (Eds.), Control+ shift: Public and private usages of the Russian internet (pp. 4–20). Norderstedt: Books on Demand.Google Scholar
  25. Tomskiy Internet kak phenomen [Tomsky internet as phenomenon]. (2004). Retrieved March 12, 2019, from
  26. Van Dijk, J., & Hacker, K. (2003). The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Van Oost, E., Verhaegh, S., & Oudshoorn, N. (2009). From innovation community to community innovation: User-initiated innovation in wireless Leiden. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 34(2), 182–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vasiliev, Y. (2016). Takoy vot “Batsaap” odnako… [Well, this is the “Batsaap” we have…]. Retrieved March 12, 2019, from
  29. Zubarevich, N. (2013). Four Russians: Human potential and social differentiation of Russian regions and cities. In Russia 2025 (pp. 67–85). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Higher School of EconomicsNational Research University, Club for Internet and Society EnthusiastsMoscowRussia
  2. 2.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations