Ethical assessment depends on the reasons you have for doing something. Comparing the reasons: The Kreml cut off the nation from state-independent media to deceive the people about what happens and spread misinformation that is uncontested. The west cut out Russian media channels because they are trying to spread misinformation and stir up chaos and confusion.
What the Kreml does is a blatant act of manipulation and lying to people. That’s morally highly objectionable. What the west does is trying to stop the spread of misinformation, which is generally a morally good thing.
So, yeah it’s morally correct under any standard you could apply unless it’s a very strange and fringe standard that nobody in their right minds agrees to.

Putin is literally threatening the world with nuclear warfare - he hasn't hit any buttons but has so many people around the world gripped with anxiety and stress. I'm sick of contrarians who seem to find it impossible to condemn Putin. There are innocent people being killed because of one man getting the hump when he was told that no, he cannot force the former Soviet bloc to submit to his will. Now is not the time to talk about contradictions or hypocrisies. You know Russia has secret police, yes? That they disappear people, yes? That Putin has poisoned people in the UK, yes? Putin couldn't be more cartoonishly villain if he tried and still, still people say ''but what about''.