Times of Malta

Russia’s disinforma­tion tactics in the US election

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 calling the legitimacy of the US democratic process into question. Networks of Russia-sponsored bots and trolls were also found to have been pushing divisive disinforma­tion and conspiracy theories in online networks.

This time around, the US has seized a network of Russianrun internet domains, and sanctioned 10 people, including Margarita Simonyan, editor-inchief 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 restrictio­ns on any US citizen or company that works with them.

The US has also charged two Moscow-based managers of RT, Kostiantyn Kalashniko­v and Elena Afanasyeva, under money laundering law 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 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.

Here are five key features of Russian informatio­n manipulati­on we identified and which can help understand the latest election-meddling scandal.

Using local influencer­s

The DOJ charges that RT employees paid a Tennessee-based firm nearly $10 million to produce social media content that aligns with Russian interests without disclosing that the funding ultimately came from the Russian state.

Several of the influencer­s connected to the Tennessee firm have since said they had editorial control over their content and denied knowledge of any links to Russia. But this fits 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 and distribute­d their shows, as well as featuring 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 own interests. After all, research confirms that people are more likely to believe claims they have heard

time and time again, whether or not those claims are true.

Fake news outlets

As part of this case, the US has seized a network of internet domains alleged to have been 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, as well as amplifying 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 it has no qualms with deliberate­ly camouflagi­ng its links to other media operations and groups.

We know from our research that these sites not only habitually cross-reference each other, they also frequently crossrefer­ence other self-styled counter-mainstream sites to boost their credibilit­y with particular online demographi­cs.

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 in any meaningful way.

Similarly, when Russian sites masquerade as local sources, they prioritise themes that are 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.

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 spokespers­on, 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 criminalis­ed criticism of its invasion of Ukraine. However, barefaced lies and humorous dismissals often go together in Russia’s informatio­n operations.

Humour

The Russian state routinely uses humour strategica­lly, and RT has emerged as something of a pioneer in using humour to legitimise Russia’s actions or neutralise critiques.

However, the network doesn’t only use humour to report on internatio­nal politics. Its trademark approach is to knowingly include itself as part of the joke. Several RT advertisin­g campaigns have used foreign criticisms as a selling point.

The same spirit was clear in the sarcastic response of Simonyan 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 has skilfully tapped into American society’s anxieties*