The Unfairness in Russian Election

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/world/europe/observers-detail-flaws-in-russian-election.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russian-election-skewed-for-putin-observers-say/2012/03/05/gIQAykbXsR_story.html?hpid=z1

I find both Newyork Times and Washington have news about Russian election. And overall, they both show a negative view towards the election.

Is Russian presidential election unfair? European points out the victory of Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin was preordained, giving the reasons that a tilt was obvious before the election. However, what I feel confused is that even though there was a bias, does people's favor of Putin mean unfairness? As far as I am concerned, the logos proof here doesn't make too much sense. Foreign observers also critique it is the use of government money and the control of media that play a partial role in support of Putin's campaign. This seems to be a fact claim, but the claim needs more details and evidences to back up. On the other hand, the Russia's Central Election Commission spent almost 45o million dollars to install some 180000 Web cameras at polling station and used glass ballot boxes in order to make the election transparency. The above information acts as a fact claim, which serves to prove the fairness of the election.

The American-Russian relation is of tension now. And the article also mentioned Mr. Putin's rhetoric in the campaign somehow expressed an anti-American attitude. If that is true, the position in U.S. press is kind of doubtful. They may criticize with a bias to some extent.