The article starts with the assumption that this a conspiracy and the charges cannot possibly be true, and then goes from there to make sweeping indictments. No evidence for the assumptions is given.
This is typical for English language journalism on Russia.
You said it. There are some facts in the article but these are frivolously interpreted. Generally by Russian legal definition pornography should involve ‘graphic portrayal of genitals in process of sexual act’.
There are also a number of legal articles criminalizing traffic of less than pornographic private photos.
For example you can’t put someone’s nude photo on the Internet without that person’s consent.
If indeed you do and there is complain there would be federal charges.
I agree all of the above might have something to do with the article or not but there is not enough information for conclusion.
I can’t imagine why a grave digger might be’ politically repressed’ even imagine that the political repression still exists.