The White House’s recent exposure of Russian attempts to influence this year’s US presidential election will come as little surprise to anyone who followed disinformation tactics during the last US election.
During the 2020 campaign, the Kremlin used its state-sponsored media outlets, the international television channel RT and the news website and radio station Sputnik, to pump out a raft of content questioning the legitimacy of the US democratic process. Networks of Russia-sponsored bots and trolls were also found to have been pushing divisive disinformation and conspiracy theories in online networks.
This time, the US seized a network of Russian-run internet domains and sanctioned ten people, including Margarita Simonyan, editor-in-chief of RT (formerly Russia Today), for “activities that aim to deteriorate public trust in our institutions.” Sanctions include freezing any property or assets in the US and potentially restricting any US citizen or company that works with them.
Under money laundering law, the US has also charged two Moscow-based managers of RT, Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, with paying US content creators to push out “pro-Russia propaganda and disinformation” in the US.
US Attorney General Merrick Garland said Russia was looking to create its “preferred outcome” in the upcoming presidential election and undermine US support for Ukraine in the war.
The practices alleged by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) closely match what my co-authors and I have identified in our new book, Russia, Disinformation and the Liberal Order, as having become standard practice in Russian attempts to influence international audiences.
We identified five key features of Russian information manipulation that can help us understand the latest election-meddling scandal.
1. Using local influencers
The DOJ charges that RT employees paid a Tennessee-based firm nearly US$10 million (£7.5 million) to produce social media content that aligns with Russian interests without disclosing that the funding ultimately came from the Russian state.
Several influencers connected to the Tennessee firm have since said they had editorial control over their content and denied knowledge of any links to Russia. However, this fits the patterns identified in our research.
First, RT has long worked with the populist right-wing media space and often mimics the style and practices of US right-wing populist media. It frequently links to their pieces on its website and has promoted right-wing media personalities, distributed their shows, and featured them on its own platforms.
Building on this, RT has often given a platform, financing, and free rein to media personalities from the states they are targeting, whose genuinely held beliefs suit Russia’s interests. After all, research confirms that people are more likely to believe claims they have heard repeatedly, whether or not they are true.
2. Fake news outlets
As part of this case, the US has seized a network of internet domains allegedly used to promote false information targeted at specific subsets of the US population. Masquerading as local sites, their content tends to tap into the specific social concerns and controversies that resonate with particular target groups and amplify core Russian talking points.
We have seen this in the past when the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency set up a fake left-wing news site and conned unwitting freelancers into contributing content for Russian information operations. RT’s past activities show no qualms with deliberately camouflaging its links to other media operations and groups.
Our research shows that these sites not only habitually cross-reference each other but also frequently cross-reference other self-styled counter-mainstream sites to boost their credibility with particular online demographics.
3. Adding fuel to the fire
Another common tactic for keeping content believable is linking it to the fears and concerns that are already important in any society. For example, Russia did not bring the culture war to the US, but it has skilfully tapped into American society’s anxieties around the topic. Russian media operations have brought these to the fore without engaging with them meaningfully.
Similarly, when Russian sites masquerade as local sources, they prioritize themes familiar to their target audiences. Usually, though, divisive topics are embellished with a patchwork of real and fabricated information. Audiences find it hard to pick them apart, and their starting assumptions mean they often aren’t motivated to try.
4. Flipping the script
Moscow has repeatedly denied any involvement in influence campaigns, just as it did in 2018 when the UK accused the Russian state of a series of Novichok poisonings in Salisbury. Back then, Russian politicians and media boosted a complex web of conspiracy theories that mirrored the accusations back at the UK and US security services.
We have seen the “flipped script” response from Russia’s representatives again this time around. Moscow’s ambassador to Washington, Anatoly Antonov, dismissed US allegations as a product of “Russophobia” – the same term used by the Russian embassy following the Salisbury poisonings.
And Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, has repeated her favourite theme of recent years, accusing the US of becoming a “totalitarian neoliberal dictatorship”. This might seem laughable from the representative of a state that has criminalized criticism of its invasion of Ukraine. However, bare-faced lies and humorous dismissals often go together in Russia’s information operations.
5. Humor
The Russian state routinely uses humor strategically, and RT has emerged as something of a pioneer in using humor to legitimize Russia’s actions or neutralize critiques.
However, the network doesn’t only use humor to report on international politics. Its trademark approach is to include itself as part of the joke knowingly. Several RT advertising campaigns have used foreign criticisms as a selling point.
The same spirit was clear in Simonyan’s sarcastic response to the latest allegations. In comments posted to Telegram and gleefully reproduced by RT, the editor-in-chief dismissed the charges as US scaremongering “about the almighty RT.” Her words are a perfect example of how RT revels in its status as a “populist pariah.”
Russia continues to refine its efforts to influence agendas outside its borders, and there’s no suggestion that this will stop soon.
Editor’s note. The opinions expressed in our Opinion section belong to their authors. Euromaidan Press’ editorial team may or may not share them.
Submit an opinion to Euromaidan Press
Copyright: The Conversation. This article was published by The Conversation and has been republished by Euromaidan Press with permission.
Read more:
- West needs to catch up with Ukraine on fighting Russian disinformation
- US Department of Justice uncovers Russian AI-powered disinformation network on X
- Disinformation on current Russia-Ukraine conflict: 7 myths debunked
