Analyzing the role of media orchestration in conducting disinformation campaigns on blogs

Social media is undoubtedly a widely used communication platform that affords easier sharing and access to information. Even though social media is used for benevolent purposes, a few use this platform for deviant activities such as cyberbullying, cyber warfare or propaganda, disinformation and fake news dissemination to influence the masses. With the availability of inexpensive and ubiquitous mass communication tools like social media, disseminating false information and propaganda is both convenient and effective. Social media in general and blogs in particular act as virtual spaces where narratives are framed. In order to generate discourse, web traffic needs to be driven to these virtual spaces. Social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and other websites are therefore used as vehicles to disseminate the content. This link between blogs and social media platforms is vital to examine disinformation campaigns. In this research, we examine the role of media orchestration strategies, more specifically, cross-media and mix-media strategies in conducting disinformation campaigns. The paper presents an in-depth examination of the information networks using social network analysis and cyber forensic-based methodology, to identify prominent information actors and leading coordinators of the disinformation campaigns. Using the developed research methodology, the study reveals a massive disinformation coordination campaign pertaining to the Baltic region conducted primarily on blogs but strategically linking to a variety of other social media platforms, e.g., Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, VKontakte, among others.

[1]  Jordi Serra-Ruiz,et al.  Digital Forensic Analysis of Cybercrimes: Best Practices and Methodologies , 2017, Int. J. Inf. Secur. Priv..

[2]  M. Gentzkow,et al.  Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election , 2017 .

[3]  S. Macdonald Propaganda and Information Warfare in the Twenty-First Century: Altered Images and Deception Operations , 2006 .

[4]  Digambar Povar,et al.  Forensic Data Carving , 2010, ICDF2C.

[5]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Disinformation on the Web: Impact, Characteristics, and Detection of Wikipedia Hoaxes , 2016, WWW.

[6]  Patric R. Spence,et al.  That Is So Gross and I Have to Post About It: Exemplification Effects and User Comments on a News Story , 2017 .

[7]  Jean-Loup Guillaume,et al.  Fast unfolding of communities in large networks , 2008, 0803.0476.

[8]  Philip S. Yu,et al.  Identifying the influential bloggers in a community , 2008, WSDM '08.

[9]  Ibrahim M. Baggili,et al.  A cyber forensics needs analysis survey: Revisiting the domain's needs a decade later , 2016, Comput. Secur..

[10]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  User-Generated Ratings and the Evaluation of Credibility and Product Quality in Ecommerce Transactions , 2011, 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[11]  Nitin Agarwal,et al.  Focal structures analysis: identifying influential sets of individuals in a social network , 2016, Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[12]  Jonathan Bright,et al.  Explaining the emergence of echo chambers on social media: the role of ideology and extremism , 2016, ArXiv.

[13]  Emilio Ferrara,et al.  Measuring social spam and the effect of bots on information diffusion in social media , 2017, ArXiv.

[14]  N. Agarwal,et al.  Examining the use of botnets and their evolution in propaganda dissemination. , 2017 .

[15]  David C. DeAndrea,et al.  The Influence of Online Comments on Perceptions of Antimarijuana Public Service Announcements on YouTube , 2010 .

[16]  M E J Newman,et al.  Community structure in social and biological networks , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  Dolf Zillmann,et al.  Exemplification Theory of Media Influence , 2002 .