Playing Both Sides: Russian State-Backed Media Coverage of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement

IF 4.1 1区 社会学 Q1 COMMUNICATION International Journal of Press-Politics Pub Date : 2022-02-28 DOI:10.1177/19401612221082052
Samantha Bradshaw, Renée DiResta, Carly Miller
{"title":"Playing Both Sides: Russian State-Backed Media Coverage of the #BlackLivesMatter Movement","authors":"Samantha Bradshaw, Renée DiResta, Carly Miller","doi":"10.1177/19401612221082052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Russian influence operations on social media have received significant attention following the 2016 US presidential elections. Here, scholarship has largely focused on the covert strategies of the Russia-based Internet Research Agency and the overt strategies of Russia's largest international broadcaster RT (Russia Today). But since 2017, a number of new news media providers linked to the Russian state have emerged, and less research has focused on these channels and how they may support contemporary influence operations. We conduct a qualitative content analysis of 2,014 Facebook posts about the #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) protests in the United States over the summer of 2020 to comparatively examine the overt propaganda strategies of six Russian-linked news organizations—RT, Ruptly, Soapbox, In The NOW, Sputnik, and Redfish. We found that RT and Sputnik diverged in their framing of the BLM movement from the newer media properties. RT and Sputnik primarily produced negative coverage of the BLM movement, painting protestors as violent, or discussed the hypocrisy of racial justice in America. In contrast, newer media properties like In The NOW, Soapbox, and Redfish supported the BLM movement with clickbait-style videos highlighting racism in America. Video footage bearing the Ruptly brandmark appears in both traditional and new media properties, to illustrate, in real time, civil unrest across the US. By focusing on overt propaganda from the broad array of Russian-affiliated media, our data allows us to further understand the “full spectrum” and “counter-hegemonic” strategies at play in contemporary information operations.","PeriodicalId":47605,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Press-Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Press-Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612221082052","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Russian influence operations on social media have received significant attention following the 2016 US presidential elections. Here, scholarship has largely focused on the covert strategies of the Russia-based Internet Research Agency and the overt strategies of Russia's largest international broadcaster RT (Russia Today). But since 2017, a number of new news media providers linked to the Russian state have emerged, and less research has focused on these channels and how they may support contemporary influence operations. We conduct a qualitative content analysis of 2,014 Facebook posts about the #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) protests in the United States over the summer of 2020 to comparatively examine the overt propaganda strategies of six Russian-linked news organizations—RT, Ruptly, Soapbox, In The NOW, Sputnik, and Redfish. We found that RT and Sputnik diverged in their framing of the BLM movement from the newer media properties. RT and Sputnik primarily produced negative coverage of the BLM movement, painting protestors as violent, or discussed the hypocrisy of racial justice in America. In contrast, newer media properties like In The NOW, Soapbox, and Redfish supported the BLM movement with clickbait-style videos highlighting racism in America. Video footage bearing the Ruptly brandmark appears in both traditional and new media properties, to illustrate, in real time, civil unrest across the US. By focusing on overt propaganda from the broad array of Russian-affiliated media, our data allows us to further understand the “full spectrum” and “counter-hegemonic” strategies at play in contemporary information operations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两面派:俄罗斯政府支持的媒体对#黑人生命也重要运动的报道
2016年美国总统大选后,俄罗斯在社交媒体上的影响力行动受到了极大关注。在这里,学术研究主要集中在俄罗斯互联网研究机构的秘密策略和俄罗斯最大的国际广播公司RT(今日俄罗斯)的公开策略。但自2017年以来,出现了一些与俄罗斯政府有关的新新闻媒体提供商,对这些渠道以及它们如何支持当代影响力运作的研究较少。我们对2020年夏天在Facebook上发布的2014条关于“黑人的生命也很重要”(BLM)抗议活动的帖子进行了定性内容分析,以比较研究六家与俄罗斯有关的新闻机构——rt、rurt、Soapbox、in the NOW、Sputnik和Redfish——的公开宣传策略。我们发现RT和Sputnik在对BLM运动的框架上与较新的媒体属性有所不同。RT和Sputnik主要对BLM运动进行负面报道,将抗议者描绘成暴力分子,或者讨论美国种族正义的虚伪。相比之下,较新的媒体,如In The NOW、Soapbox和Redfish,用点击诱饵式的视频来支持BLM运动,突出美国的种族主义。带有鲁普特利商标的视频片段出现在传统和新媒体财产中,以实时说明美国各地的内乱。通过关注俄罗斯附属媒体的公开宣传,我们的数据使我们能够进一步理解当代信息行动中发挥作用的“全方位”和“反霸权”战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Press/Politics is an interdisciplinary journal for the analysis and discussion of the role of the press and politics in a globalized world. The Journal is interested in theoretical and empirical research on the linkages between the news media and political processes and actors. Special attention is given to the following subjects: the press and political institutions (e.g. the state, government, political parties, social movements, unions, interest groups, business), the politics of media coverage of social and cultural issues (e.g. race, language, health, environment, gender, nationhood, migration, labor), the dynamics and effects of political communication.
期刊最新文献
Rejoinder to the Review of Inside the Local Campaign: Constituency Elections in Canada Interpreters as Spin Doctors: The Interactional Role of Interpreters in China’s Political Press Conferences Do News Frames Really Have Some Influence in the Real World? A Computational Analysis of Cumulative Framing Effects on Emotions and Opinions About Immigration Political Viewpoint Diversity in the News: Market and Ownership Conditions for a Pluralistic Media System “Everything is Biased”: Populist Supporters’ Folk Theories of Journalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1