After Russia Attacked Ukrainian Ships, These Twitter Accounts Joined the Battle

In the last several weeks, social media profiles linked to propaganda efforts have shifted focus.

A patrol boat on duty in the Kerch Strait Sergei Malgavko/TASS/ZUMA Press

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In late November, after Russian vessels opened fire and seized three Ukranian ships near the Crimean peninsula, researchers said internet trolls with a history of sharing Russian propaganda targeted at Western audiences shifted their focus to the crisis near Russia’s own borders.

Hamilton68, which tracks profiles it believes are Russian-linked, showed accounts posting a high frequency of tweets about Ukraine and the naval conflict in the Kerch Strait last week. While Hamilton68 and its parent organization, the Alliance for Securing Democracy, have been criticized for a lack of transparency about the accounts they follow, other researchers not affiliated with the group say theyā€™ve also noticed the shift.

Dr. Steve Kramer, a social media researcher and founder and head of Paragon Science, a firm that spots bots and irregular social media trends, said that his own analysis of 52 accounts he believes are of Russian origin shows they are exhibiting similar patterns to Hamilton68ā€™s findings. The accounts’ tweets reached a collective audience of 60,429 followers, according to Kramer’s data.

Nineteen of the accounts, which in the last several months had been tweeting about hot-button American topics like the Texas Senate race, the migrant caravan, George Soros, and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, switched to tweeting about the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian naval conflict in the Kerch Strait.

Kramer focused on the accounts because of their history of sharing Russian propaganda, particularly from Russian sites like RT.com and Sputnik, and because of behavior he says strongly suggests theyā€™re at least partially automated. While there are real Americans who agree with the Kremlin and pump out its messaging on social media, Kramer looks for accounts acting in a way that suggests they could be bots. Such accounts are often vague about the userā€™s true identity and tweet at volumes higher than possible for a human being. Kramer also examines the timing between posts and sequences of words within tweets. People have more complex and less predictable behaviors, which can help identify automated accounts.

“What we canā€™t say for sure is who behind the accounts,” Kramer qualified.

“Russian control is difficult to prove, especially on Twitter. But at first glance, I think these [initial] findings give credence to an assertion that these are pro-Kremlin accounts,” he added, emphasizing that the accounts might not be under direct government control.

This isn’t the first time analysts have noted accounts abruptly switching their focus from high-profile internal US matters to policy issues more clearly related to Russia.

Around the time of the 2017 chemical weapon attacks in Syria, for example, Russian troll accounts pushed the narrative that the chemical attacks had been staged, going so far as to establish the groundwork for this claim months before the attack. After Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine, Russian Twitter trolls began focusing on the crash.

“We know that the Russian troll farm got told, ‘Drop everything and post everything about this,'” said social media researcher Ben Nimmo, a fellow at the Atlantic Councilā€™s Digital Forensics Lab who closely tracked the MH17 tweets.

Although Nimmo cautions he has not specifically researched suspected Russian accounts’ recent activity regarding the Kerch Strait, he says such a shift after “a potentially serious geopolitical situation…would fit the pattern that weā€™ve seen.ā€ 

Though the troll accounts’ occasional focus on Russian issues is often overlooked in US media, Nimmo says itā€™s a reminder that people in Eastern Europe have been dealing with social media manipulation long before the 2016 American presidential election: “One thing a lot of people forget is that Russians were the first victims.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate