Read on Twitter
Profoundly disappointing, but no longer surprising, to see @RUSI_org endorsing this deeply flawed hit piece on @EUvsDisinfo - so packed with straw men, misconceptions and implicit bias that it completely devalues any genuine findings it contains.
1/ https://twitter.com/ISS_RUSI/status/1247847548980727808
1/ https://twitter.com/ISS_RUSI/status/1247847548980727808
If there are flaws in @EUvsDisinfo reporting, they should be pointed out constructively and would surely be welcomed. Here, instead, is an attack on StratCom East overall based on highly selective selection not only from its own output, but also from Russian media as a whole.
2/
2/
To address their concern that @EUvsDisinfo may be "overgeneralising", the authors sample ONE bulletin from ONE Russian channel on ONE day - and then draw general conclusions from it. No further comment needed.
3/
3/
And I'll just leave this here for others to deal with:
"The apparent mirroring of western journalistic standards of transparency forms part of RT’s identity as a respectable international broadcaster."
4/
"The apparent mirroring of western journalistic standards of transparency forms part of RT’s identity as a respectable international broadcaster."
4/
To repeat, if @EUvsDisinfo gets it wrong, they should be told so - but not by disagreeing with ridiculous claims that StratCom East never made, giving Russia the benefit of the doubt at every opportunity, or suggesting a ludicrous equivalence between @IStatecraft and the IRA.
5/
5/
An aside: one of the biggest problems in focusing on RT, as this project does, is that it is only part - and a relatively insignificant part - of a much wider effort of malign influence using levers way beyond trad or social media. Close focus on RT means missing the point.
6/
6/
To return to point 1: why no surprise @RUSI_org endorses a misguided attack on an EU organisation seeking to counter Russian malign influence? Unfortunately it fits the recent pattern of RUSI inexplicably offering itself as an uncritical mouthpiece for Kremlin talking points-
7/
7/
- whether by offering its website as a platform for them with no caveat or commentary -
8/ https://rusi.org/commentary/we-should-exempt-africa-uk-russia-geopolitical-confrontation
8/ https://rusi.org/commentary/we-should-exempt-africa-uk-russia-geopolitical-confrontation
- or delivering them to us in joint efforts, funded - perversely - by @foreignoffice -
9/ https://rusi.org/event/uk-russia-security-dialogue-2019-2020-london-report-launch
9/ https://rusi.org/event/uk-russia-security-dialogue-2019-2020-london-report-launch
- or endorsing them by means of joint op-eds in @guardian.
/10 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/17/russia-uk-skripal-syria
/10 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/17/russia-uk-skripal-syria
To conclude: this is a plea for constructive, rather than destructive, engagement with @EUvsDisinfo and what it seeks to achieve. Where they could do better, let us help them, rather than by tearing them down, help the Kremlin and all others who wish us harm.
11 and end/
11 and end/
