Thread by @DietmarPichler1

We need to talk about 'Agents of Influence' and 'useful idiots' when discussing foreign information interference. These individuals not only have a significant reach but also operate undetected by anti-disinformation measures that primarily focus on social media & troll farms🧵

Who are they? They can be parts of (in many cases, former) politics, diplomacy, journalism, activism, business, and academia. What unites them: They propagate (more or less subtly) the narratives of authoritarian regimes like Russia, China, Venezuela, Iran, and many others.

In some cases, they spread their narratives quite subtly; in other cases, it is obvious and ridiculous propaganda. In my opinion, the subtle propagandistic, anti-Western narratives are even more dangerous because they reach the center of society as well.

Are they paid? In most cases, we just don't know. Some have business interests in the autocratic countries they advocate for; others are "sponsored" In some cases, ideological views & a portion of naivety are sufficient to serve as a "useful" idiot for the dictators of the world

What also unites many of them is a quite thin skin when confronted with criticism. On one hand, they claim that they are "silenced" and "limited in their freedom of speech"; on the other hand, they tend to sue people who criticize, debunk, and expose them.

What makes them particularly valuable, for instance, for the Kremlin?

Their reputation, influence, reach, and the fact that they are not anonymous bots or trolls online give them an enormous impact on public opinion.

Their activities are less noticeable than coordinated troll networks or bot attacks to those observing foreign information interference. However, these networks frequently spread the content of these agents of influence and useful idiots on social media.

Another challenge regarding these kinds of propagandists is that traditional media literacy education does not protect societies from their propaganda. They are considered "experts" (if no context is given) and reach their audiences through traditional media, universities, events

How to identify them? It's not about one questionable statement. It's the constant one-sided view in favor of a certain regime, the repetition of long-debunked myths and fakes, and, importantly, what they don't say is just as crucial as what they do say.

For instance, when they propagate "negotiations with Russia," this is often combined with a twisted version of the events in 2014, justifying the Russian invasion. "I condemn the Russian invasion, but" then follows what they really want to communicate.

What they almost always leave out is the constant imperialistic and genocidal rhetoric by Russian politicians and the terror of the occupation regime. Their narrative is: It is about NATO and the "human rights of people in Donbas".

What is quite interesting is that the united anti-Western propaganda coalition seems to also have the same useful idiots/agents of influence.

There are individuals who advocate for Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela at the same time; there is a huge overlap of messages