I’ve already alluded to my role as a so-called “early adopter” in social media, but for the argument over Mr. Putin’s alleged troll army it’s important to clarify my expertise. In the early days of what became known as “Web 2.0” I was as employed by several technology media companies to test, analyze, and to report on startups like Facebook, Twitter, and a multitude of others. The short version of the story of my technology blogging days is that PR companies and even startup CEOs individually, pursued tech writers like me to report on their developments. I ended up testing and analyzing just about every startup development worth mentioning right alongside world famous tech bloggers like Michael Arrington of TechCrunch, Pete Cashmore of Mashable, ReadWriteWeb founder Richard MacManus, and the small club of now famous tech gurus. As a natural progression from this work I was later asked to join social media networks, and to later create strategies for manipulating those communities for marketing and PR purposes. In short, I became one of the world’s most sought after social media experts. Later, when I joined my wife’s digital PR firm, my network of colleagues and my expertise melded with her own (SEO, social media, journalism). For the purpose here, over the course of the last decade we’ve learned a trick or two about social media campaigns. Now, here’s how this applies.
If Vladimir Putin really did organize a troll factory in St. Petersburg, Russia the Kremlin Trolls mentioned herein would have the most powerful Twitter and Facebook accounts in the world. My colleagues in Silicon Valley who helped Fortune 500 businesses leverage clients via social media will already know what I am about to tell you. For instance, a truly cohesive Twitter campaign aided by even 100 accounts can go viral in a matter of a few hours. This is particularly true if there is an ad budget behind. Now imagine my own Twitter feed the day we uncovered NATO servers being used to host a Ukraine “kill list”. Instead of the two retweets my tweet on 21st April 2015 received, I’d surely have had at least 200 if St. Petersburg were online. With even 100 “operatives” aimed at the Russia Insider article “What’s Behind the “Peacekeeper” Killings in Ukraine?”, my extended network would have made the story a trend on Twitter. A campaign like I describe would also leverage paid tweets and the other social networks working in unison. With even a couple hundred dollars in ad money, Vladimir Putin’s troll network could literally take over the message on any issue. All of this is proven marketing and PR strategy, and nothing new to the educated operator.
The pro-Russia message, much like the NATO message, is disjointed in the eyes of any expert in media manipulation. At best the efforts can be described as “grass roots” activism spurred by passive influencer efforts. The networks like RT do an expert job of maximizing their own stories, but ancillary support for other similar efforts is nonexistent just like western media outlets. Sputnik does not retweet RT stories any more than Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal retweets Fox News stories. Beyond the US State Department or Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia news releases, competition for viewers and readers dictate more than US or Russian presidents do. The “agendas” are supported, but neither side is truly expert at disseminating truly powerful propaganda campaigns. Most of the news the world reads is “spin” in reality. An agency or influencer puts out the narrative, and the subsidiaries reiterate or outright copy the tone of voice. As for clandestine networks, the nod there has to go to the US/NATO side for the sheer force of money being expended on their message.
When the truth of which “clandestine network” is illuminated it’s the NGOs backed by George Soros, the think tanks run by old Russophobes, and the entity known as the “deep state” that runs the most mechanized machine. On the opposing side, there is only Margarita Simonyan’s RT media in the ring against the biggest media heavyweights on the planet. Supported by the myriad “Kremlin fans” in independent media, RT has an unbelievably loud voice. But the connection in between is intangible and very informal. Also, contrary to the way western mainstream media parrots the official Washington, London, or Brussels narrative, Simonyan’s RT often picks up on independent media and journalism. Sputnik is a perfect example of this in the way reporters and writers there paraphrase and make use of analysis and information from outside sources. I’m intimately familiar with this Sputnik strategy because of calls on me for analysis, but also for the agency using reports by me at other media outlets for the purpose. Rather than simply paraphrasing or copy-pasting content, the Sputnik team creates direct news and commentary by consolidating ideas and facts.[35]
Once again, Putin’s supposed network of clandestine trolls has been widely used in the same way CNN was found to be boosting ratings with negative Putin news.[36] The media environment in the United States in particular show an unrepentant “fake news” ecosystem bent on traffic “no matter what”. Even with media outlet after media outlet being shown misinforming, editors and journalist keep right on parroting anti-Russia rhetoric. A Business Insider author named Natasha Bertrand caught my eye in July of 2016 when she decided to ride the wave with “It looks like Russia hired internet trolls to pose as pro-Trump Americans”, regurgitating Adrian Chen’s New York Times piece about the St. Petersburg “troll house”.[37] She also cites The Daily Beast’s Michael Weiss, who’s already shown is paid by not just by ousted oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, but George Soros as well.[38] The lead in her Bertrand’s article mimics all other anti-Russia diatribe I’ve seen in the last several years:
“Russia’s troll factories were, at one point, likely being paid by the Kremlin to spread pro-Trump propaganda on social media.”
Bertrand’s piece begins with a foregone conclusion, and the author’s story ends with a quote from that is as asinine as they come. Speaking of Vladimir Putin, another young lioness journalists named Julia Ioffe is cited for her “Putin expertise” with this.
“All he wants is for America to see him as a worthy adversary.”
Ioffe was fired by Politico for a tasteless Tweet targeting at then-president elect Donald Trump, then subsequently hired by the Atlantic. The daughter of Russian-Jewish immigrants to America, the firefly Ioffe has made a career of flaming controversy. A Fulbright Scholarship recipient, the young reporter pounds the “hate Putin beat” like a drum. In my humble opinion, she’s a poster child for the real clandestine media of Earth, the globalist budgeted cohorts coming from academia and the “funds” and foundations that boost journalistic and political careers.[39] Independent media has been on the case of “deep state” support for what has been termed the “Intelligence-University Complex, or a system that supports efforts like the Fulbright programs in order to create propaganda agents.[40], [41] Of course, it’s impossible to know whether these intelligence community targeted students are brainwashed or selected for their predisposition toward a “message” or mission, but these agencies do coerce college students to some extent is unarguable. As for Ioffe, if the NSA or CIA did not recruit the brilliant daughter of Russian Jews who left Moscow on account of alleged anti-Semitism, they missed a stellar chance. It matters not whether these Fulbright geniuses are agents or not, for they serve the same purpose independently. My point where the Kremlin’s agents in media is concerned is well made. Nobody can show the FSB funding educational opportunity for the most noted Kremlin Trolls in this book, except for my FSB Alpha Team friend, Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Stankevich, who offers his confession in a chapter to come. Conversely, it can be shown that the US intelligence community, along with NGOs like Soros’ Open Society Foundations, have sponsored academia, business, and politicians for some decades. If there is a Vladimir Putin network of trolls running amok, it’s the best hidden agency ever. From inside the pro-Russia ranks all we see is vehement defense and activism, combined with organic Russia media news against an obvious smear campaign waged against Russians.
35
36
37
39
Why Don’t We Hear About Soros’ Ties to Over 30 Major News Organizations? by Dan Gainor,
41