How Russia's Election Interference Campaign Took Advantage of the Decline of Journalism
How Russia's Election Interference Campaign Took Advantage of the Decline of Journalism
Russia is going to keep interfering in Western elections. A stronger media would inoculate against Kremlin schemes.
On September 4, the Justice Department announced indictments against Russian persons and entities as part of an effort against foreign influence in the 2024 election. Russia undertook influence campaigns in the 2016 and 2020 elections. In 2024, U.S. intelligence has again assessed that Russia wants Donald Trump back in the White House because he has voiced skepticism over military aid to Ukraine. Additionally, other hostile foreign powers, notably Iran, have been trying to influence the 2024 election.
What was notable in the two Justice Department indictments was how much of Russia's alleged plan was made possible by the decline of media in the United States. By media decline, I mean massive layoffs in the news industry in recent years, as well as opinion polling showing trust in the mass media at record lows. Partisan influencers on streaming platforms like YouTube and sensational articles telling audiences what they want to hear have moved to fill the void left by the decline of journalism.
The first indictment alleges that a U.S. media company linked to six right-wing influencers -- including well-known figures like Tim Pool and Benny Johnson -- was secretly funded by employees of Russian state media for nearly $10 million. The Justice Department said that the outlet's "videos are often consistent with the Government of Russia's interest in amplifying U.S. domestic divisions in order to weaken U.S. opposition…[to the] ongoing war in Ukraine." According to the indictment, the Russian state media employees tried to insert Kremlin messaging into these videos. For example, one Russian state media employee wanted a "U.S./Ukraine angle" to a video on a March 22, 2024 terrorist attack on a Moscow concert hall, which ISIS publicly claimed responsibility for. An unnamed founder of the company wrote back that one of his commentators was "happy to cover it." The Justice Department said that the outlet's nearly 2,000 videos got over 16 million views on YouTube. On September 5, YouTube deleted the channel of Tenet Media, the company which matches the details of the indictment.
The indictment does not allege any wrongdoing on the part of the influencers. It also said that the Russian employees gave the commentators false information about the source of the funding. The influencers were paid well, with one contract stipulating monthly fees of $400,000 as well as a $100,000 signing bonus and an additional performance bonus. On social media, Pool said, "We still do not know what is true as these are only allegations,” adding that “Putin is a scumbag.” Johnson said he had been asked to provide content to a “media startup,” adding that his attorneys negotiated a “standard, arms length deal, which was later terminated.”
Russian state media employees were savvy to target partisan influencers, and not actual journalists. Few Republicans trust the mainstream media: according to a 2023 Gallup survey, just 11 percent of Republicans trust the media to report the news accurately and fairly, and many have moved to partisan sources. From 2018 to 2023, Democrats' trust in the media fell from 78 to 56 percent. According to the Pew Research Center, in 2020, about a quarter of Republicans and Democrats got news solely from sources that align with their partisan views. Another 48 percent of Republicans said they got their news from right-wing and mixed sources, while 34 percent of Democrats got news from left-wing and mixed sources.
The second Justice Department indictment alleges a Russian disinformation scheme called Doppelganger, which spoofed 32 domain names of news websites. For example, washingtonpost.pm was registered to mimic washingtonpost.com. The fake Washington Post website was nearly identical to the real one. However, the site's articles on Russia and Ukraine had headlines like: "White House Miscalculated: Conflict with Ukraine Strengthens Russia.” The article, purportedly written by a Post reporter, said U.S. support for Ukraine was a "mistake" and "the Biden administration should just make a peace agreement and move on." Other websites mimicked news outlets like Fox News, BBC, and Der Spiegel.
In isolation, it's easy to see how ridiculous the stories about Ukraine were. But the inclusion of other partisan clickbait stories made the Ukraine ones more believable. On the fake Fox News websites, there were headlines calling the national debt a "pyramid scheme" and warning that your "neighbors will decide who your spouse will be." (Whatever that means.) In these partisan echo chambers, a sensational headline like "Zelensky Loses in War and Diplomacy" is more plausible. The Russian clone websites exemplified what New York Times columnist David Brooks warned of in a recent article: "many outlets have found they can generate clicks by telling partisan viewers how right they are about everything."
For the foreseeable future, Russia is likely to continue interfering in Western elections -- and, so long as Trump is on the political stage, it will try to get him back in the White House. It's also unlikely that very many people will be brought to justice for spreading disinformation, as they reside in Russia. However, its schemes might be less effective in a stronger media environment. There are things that the federal government can do to bring this about, like legislation forcing tech companies to pay news sites or competitive grants funding local news. But these are not likely to happen anytime soon. In the meantime, the Russian government is shelling out big money to spread disinformation -- so a good bet is to pay for the news yourself.