We have done a review of methodological definitions of disinformation. Out of many, the best one is by Ben Nimmo. We have operationalized his framework and we suggest the working definition of pro-Kremlin disinformation as the following three-fold check:
1. The falsehood of the information
Practical use: The view doesn’t represent reality in a significant fashion. It skips important parts of context, doesn’t provide reliable source for such information, or, for example, presents an extreme view as an objective truth.
2. The intention to mislead
Practical use: Nobody can see into heads of disinformation multipliers; therefore, we suggest using the following pattern: If a story is proved not to be true and correct, and the multiplier is reminded of that yet still does not issue a correction and explanation of the mistake, we suggest deeming that the disinformation process was intentional. A lie is not an alternative opinion.
3. The story has direct or indirect objective to support policy of political regime of the Russian Federation
Practical use: The message of this story usually says that mainstream democratic institutions of the Western states are the “bad guys”, while Russian Federation is a good one, or at least equal in morality of its actions. Reflection of the Kremlin view doesn’t need to be present. The story usually fits into the current Kremlin narrative. For example: the European institutions and leaders are the intentional cause for migration crisis, and therefore their legitimacy should be questioned.
|