To analyse the Kremlin’s rhetoric on Telegram that has avoided the sanctions and how it poses questions on cyber warfare’s double standards, I have been following Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Ministry of International Affairs (MFA)(writes in Russian, over 500K subscribers), the Ministry of International Affairs (two accounts, one in Russian with 115K subscribers, the other is in English with 39K subscribers), and the Russian Embassy in London (in English, a little under 2K subscribers) on Telegram to see how they manage the dissemination of the Kremlin’s rhetoric. Surprisingly, from the point of view of analysing the Kremlin’s propaganda, reading these accounts has been more interesting than anticipated, as they differ a lot. I will not share the links to these accounts here in order not to give them more exposure but they are open accounts on Telegram.
These four accounts often use and re-share the same content, but all accounts do that differently, giving the impression that different people manage them. The Russian-speaking account of the MFA had almost twice the subscribers as the English-speaking account at the beginning of February 2023, but in one month’s time, following the anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine, their readership has increased to an impressive 115K. Such readership disparity explains why the Russian-speaking account of the MFA is slightly more active and uses more emotionally charged language. A lot of nuances and apparent “disdain” against the West are lost in translation from Russian to English, making the English-speaking account appear more neutral in how they convey their message.
While all three accounts are the vehicles for the Kremlin’s propaganda, they do it in different ways, from publishing more personal, emotional takes on the issues (Zakharova’s account) to mostly re-sharing materials from other sources (the Russian Embassy in London account). While the embassy’s account reads as a more business neutral take on events, Maria Zakharova does not limit her Telegram account just to business matters, sharing her travels and “love for the country” patriotism as she spends her vocations exploring Russia. The personal touch makes her Telegram account sound less like pure propaganda and more like someone who is an ultra-patriot, but nonetheless its primary purpose is to spread and reiterate the Krelin’s line.
The existence of these Telegram accounts and their popularity shows the shortcomings of the anti-Russian sanctions of the West, as the ban of known sources of state propaganda such as Russia Today or TASS, does not cover the expend of the Kremlin’s backed social media channels. The West’s desire to eradicate the Kremlin’s propaganda, or at least make it harder to consume, should provoke a desperately needed discussion on double standards in cyber warfare, as well as a genuine reflection on how far the West is prepared to go to limit the Kremlin’s cyber reach.