2020 has brought many challenges and with them - a large volume of #disinformation. Here’s our recap! (THREAD 1/20)

In late JANUARY we collected the first examples of pro-Kremlin disinformation spinning conspiracy theories about the origins of COVID-19. (2/20) https://t.co/iAbo00JH56
In FEBRUARY disinfo outlets kept amplifying conspiracy theories about COVID-19, no matter how ridiculous. The @WHO warned that the pandemic was accompanied by “infodemic”: an unprecedented flood of false or inaccurate information about coronavirus. (3/20) https://t.co/uJXJlyCWez
In MARCH Josep Borrell, the head of the European External Action Service, warned: “disinformation can kill”. https://t.co/9bZknYDtfX
In APRIL global activist network @Avaaz found that harmful misinformation on coronavirus was shared over 1.7 million times on Facebook and viewed an estimated 117 million times. (5/20) https://t.co/WTVAGknLb5
The eventual slowing down of infection rates in Europe decreased the volume of COVID-19 related disinformation. In MAY it was no longer cool to fuel anti-vaxx moods on Russian TVs. Oscar-winning film director N.Mikhalkov had to learn it the hard way. (6/20)https://t.co/nKGAhk87RP
Nonetheless, Disinformation narrative about “secret labs”, an old darling of pro-Kremlin disinformation, found new prominence, as it was increasingly adopted by Chinese sources. (7/20) https://t.co/Yk49cJgjFB
In JUNE, as the racial justice protests spread in the US, pro-Kremlin pundits could hardly contain their glee. (8/20) https://t.co/6HzATiDvds
In JULY, following the spurious voting process to adopt amendments to the Russian constitution, the Kremlin intensified crack down on independent journalism. (9/20) https://t.co/FXhufoLq8e
Disinformation campaign aiming to obfuscate the Kremlin’s responsibility for downing flight #MH17 continued into 6th year. As more and more evidence of Russia’s direct involvement came to light, pro-Kremlin disinformation began grasping at straws. (10/20) https://t.co/tF2rWkGGlD
In AUGUST protests against the results of rigged presidential election began in Belarus. To aid the embattled dictator, Russian media “specialists” were soon dispatched to the country. (11/20)
https://t.co/U0cC6Byygs
A Botched assassination attempt at Alexei #Navalny put pro-Kremlin media in a crisis management mode. In a striking case of déjà vu, disinformation outlets sought to muddy the waters just like they did in 2018 after Salisbury attack. (12/20)
In SEPTEMBER our research showed, that pro-Kremlin disinformation on #Navalny poisoning has found a fertile ground in Germany. (13/20)
https://t.co/XNPwY7GUtU
Throughout the autumn the pro-Kremlin media were busy promoting Sputnik V vaccine to global audiences. Particular attention was paid to Latin America. (14/20) https://t.co/6THHJK5VZB
In OCTOBER, as renewed fighting in Nagorno Karabakh continued, pro-Kremlin outlets presented pictures from the video game as authentic war footage. (15/20) https://t.co/qnnuYdrOqG
In NOVEMBER as protracted tally of the votes followed the #USElections2020, the pro-Kremlin media amplified conspiracy theories alleging election fraud. (16/20) https://t.co/HkNOJ37Vz8
Presidential election in Moldova were also a target, in particular Moldova's president elect Maia #Sandu. (17/20) https://t.co/OEo4dgxLNE
As the challenging year came to the end, DECEMBER brought silver linings: @bellingcat investigations shed light on FSB officers implicated in the poisoning of #Navalny. (18/20) https://t.co/DatqpY2Sgg and https://t.co/YUt3GwLVkP
Belarusian opposition received the #SakharovPrize for Freedom of Thought, the highest tribute paid by the European Union to human rights work (19/20) https://t.co/tRnOzNWnxP
And the EU took further steps to strengthen its response to disinformation! (20/20) https://t.co/pZDL0EgbSq

More from Society

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?