The Italian pro-Russia digital ecosystem
on Telegram
1
The Cyber, Milano
2
ITSTIME, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Intern
These authors had equal contribution to this work
Publication date: 2023-10-31
Cybersecurity and Law 2023;10(2):299-317
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The dissemination of pro-Russia ideologies and associated visual motifs has become
widespread and transversal, encompassing various communities within the digital
ecosystem. This trend has been linked to the related cognitive warfare that targets public
opinion, manipulates information, and undermines the credibility of democratic institutions.
Regarding the Italian context, the period from 2019 to 2023 saw a dramatic increase
in the number of actors promoting pro-Russia narratives. They included members of the novax
and no-greenpass movements, conspiracy theorists, far-right organizations, neo-Nazi
groups, and ultras. Concurrently, the digital ecosystem has contributed the spread of violent
content and anti-establishment propaganda online. In order to identify and explore the
Italian digital ecosystem affected by pro-Russia ideologies, this study exploits a combination
of exponential discriminative snowball sampling and social network analysis techniques
on the Telegram instant messaging service. Through this approach, this research provides
insight into the organizational structure and dynamics of the network, identifying key actors
and their relationships, and the dissemination patterns of pro-Russia and anti-establishment
propaganda. This study proposes a new research methodology to study digital ecosystems
permeated by cognitive warfare campaigns and provides a deeper understanding of the
mechanisms through which such content is propagated, enabling the development of effective
strategies for countering disinformation and promoting fact-based discourse.
REFERENCES (46)
1.
Aieva I., Moffitt J.D., Carley K.M., How disinformation operations against Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny influence the international audience on Twitter, „Social Network Analysis and Mining” 2022, vol. 12, no. 1.
2.
Arif A., Stewart L.G., Starbird K., Acting the Part: Examining Information Operations Within #BlackLivesMatter Discourse, „Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction” 2018, vol. 2.
3.
Atkinson R., Flint J., Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball research strategies, „Social Research Update” 2021, vol. 33, no. 1.
4.
Badawy A., Ferrara E., Lerman K., Analyzing the Digital Traces of Political Manipulation: The 2016 Russian Interference Twitter Campaign [in:] IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), Lyon 2018.
5.
Baltar F., Brunet I., Social research 2.0: Virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook, „Internet Research” 2012, vol. 22, no. 1.
6.
Bastian M., Heymann S., Jacomy M., Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks, „Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media” 2009, vol. 3, no. 1.
7.
Blondel V.D., Guillaume J.L., Lambiotte R., Lefebvre E., Fast unfolding of communities in large networks, „Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment” 2008, no. 10.
8.
Bucher T., Helmond A., The Affordances of Social Media Platforms [in:] The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, eds. J. Burgess, A. Marwick, T. Poell, Thousand Oaks 2018.
9.
Can U., Alatas B., A new direction in social network analysis: Online social network analysis problems and applications, „Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications” 2019, vol. 535 (C).
10.
Cao K. et al., Countering cognitive warfare: Awareness and resilience, NATO Review, https://www.nato.int/docu/revi... [access: 20.05.2021].
11.
Cinciripini L., Borgonovo F., Zaliani M., Propaganda weaponisation: Lo sfruttamento della pandemia da parte di attori non statali, „Call for Papers #CASD 2020”, no. 1.
12.
Claverie B., Du Cluzel F., Cognitive Warfare: The Advent of the Concept of „Cognitics” in the Field of Warfare [in:] Cognitive Warfare: The Future of Cognitive Dominance, eds. B. Claverie, B. Prébot, N. Buchler, F. du Cluzel, Paris 2022.
13.
Doroshenko L., Lukito J., Trollfare: Russia’s disinformation campaign during military conflict in Ukraine, „International Journal of Communication” 2021, no. 15.
14.
Dosek T., Snowball Sampling and Facebook: How Social Media Can Help Access Hard-to-Reach Populations, „PS: Political Science & Politics” 2021, vol. 54, no. 4.
15.
Dutta U. et al., Analyzing Twitter Users’ Behavior Before and After Contact by the Russia’s Internet Research Agency, „Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction” 2021, no. 5 (CSCW1).
16.
Eady G. et al., Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign influence campaign on Twitter in the 2016 US election and its relationship to attitudes and voting behavior, „Nature Communications” 2023, vol. 14, no. 1.
17.
Etikan I., Comparision of Snowball Sampling and Sequential Sampling Technique, „Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal” 2016, vol. 3, no. 1.
18.
Ferrara E., Disinformation and Social Bot Operations in the Run Up to the 2017 French Presidential Election, https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV... [access: 26.04.2023].
19.
Freeman L.C., Roeder D., Mulholland R.R., Centrality in social networks: ii. experimental results, „Social Networks” 1979, no. 2.
20.
Froio C., Ganesh B., The transnationalisation of far right discourse on Twitter: Issues and actors that cross borders in Western European democracies, „European Societies” 2019, vol. 24, no. 4.
21.
Garcia A.C., Standlee A.I., Bechkoff J., Cui Y., Ethnographic Approaches to the Internet and Computer-Mediated Communication, „Journal of Contemporary Ethnography” 2009, vol. 38, no. 1.
22.
Golovchenko Y., Measuring the scope of pro-Kremlin disinformation on Twitter, „Humanities and Social Sciences Communications” 2020, vol. 7, no. 1.
23.
Golovchenko Y., Hartmann M., Adler-Nissen R., State, media and civil society in the information warfare over Ukraine: Citizen curators of digital disinformation, „International Affairs” 2018, vol. 94, no. 5.
24.
Goodman L.A., Snowball Sampling, „The Annals of Mathematical Statistics” 1961, vol. 32, no. 1.
25.
Grčar M., Cherepnalkoski D., Mozetič I., Kralj Novak P., Stance and influence of Twitter users regarding the Brexit referendum, „Computational Social Networks” 2017, vol. 4, no. 1.
26.
Guess A.M., Nyhan B., Reifler J., Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election, „Nature Human Behaviour” 2020, vol. 4, no. 5.
27.
Hung T.C., Hung T.W., How China’s Cognitive Warfare Works: A Frontline Perspective of Taiwan’s Anti-Disinformation Wars, „Journal of Global Security Studies” 2022, vol. 7, no. 4.
28.
Klein O., Muis J., Online discontent: Comparing Western European far-right groups on Facebook, „European Societies” 2019, vol. 21, no. 4.
30.
Krona M., Mediating Islamic State\textbar Collaborative Media Practices and Interconnected Digital Strategies of Islamic State (IS) and Pro-IS Supporter Networks on Telegram, „International Journal of Communication” 2020, no. 14.
31.
Liadze I., Macchiarelli C., Mortimer-Lee P., Juanino P.S., The economic costs of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, London 2022.
32.
Luceri L., Giordano S., Ferrara E., Detecting Troll Behavior via Inverse Reinforcement Learning: A Case Study of Russian Trolls in the 2016 US Election, „Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media” 2020, no. 14.
33.
Morselli C., Giguère C., Petit K., The efficiency/security trade-off in criminal networks, „Social Networks” 2007, vol. 29, no. 1.
34.
O’Callaghan D. et al., An Analysis of Interactions within and between Extreme Right Communities in Social Media [in:] Ubiquitous Social Media Analysis, eds. M. Atzmueller, A. Chin, D. Helic, A. Hotho, Berlin; Heidelberg 2013.
35.
Ottewer P., Defining the Cognitive Domain, https://overthehorizonmdos.wpc... [access: 7.12.2020].
36.
Owen T., How Telegram Became White Nationalists’ Go-To Messaging Platform. In Vice, https://www.vice.com/en/articl... [access: 24.04.2023].
37.
Paul K., Waterson J., Facebook bans Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos and other far-right figures. „The Guardian”, https://www.theguardian.com/te... [access: 2.05.2019].
38.
Postill J., Pink S., Social Media Ethnography: The Digital Researcher in a Messy Web, „Media International Australia” 2012, no. 1.
39.
Rogers R., Deplatforming: Following extreme Internet celebrities to Telegram and alternative social media, „European Journal of Communication” 2020, vol. 35, no. 3.
40.
Sanovich S., Woolley S., Howard P., Computational propaganda in Russia: The origins of digital misinformation, „Working Paper” 2017, no. 3.
41.
Situation in Ukraine, Security Council, 7683th meeting, https://www.unmultimedia.org/a... [access: 28.04.2016].
42.
Sloane W., Putin cracks down on media, „British Journalism Review” 2022, vol. 33, no. 3.
44.
Urman A., Katz S., What they do in the shadows: Examining the far-right networks on Telegram, „Information, Communication & Society” 2022, vol. 25, no. 7.
45.
Wilson J., Gab: Alt-right’s social media alternative attracts users banned from Twitter, „The Guardian”, https://www.theguardian.com/me... [access: 17.11.2016].
46.
Yablokov I., Russian disinformation finds fertile ground in the West, „Nature Human Behaviour” 2022, vol. 6, no. 6.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| ISSN: | 2658-1493 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
