Impersonated Propaganda and Use of Queer and Muslim Identities by the Internet Research Agency
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Speaking in stolen voices: Impersonated propaganda and use of Queer and Muslim identities by the Internet Research Agency by Sarah-May Strange B.A., Simon Fraser University, 2015 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the School of Criminology Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences © Sarah-May Strange 2020 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Fall 2020 Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation. Declaration of Committee Name: Sarah-May Strange Degree: Master of Arts Title: Speaking in stolen voices: Impersonated propaganda and use of Queer and Muslim identities by the Internet Research Agency Committee: Chair: Bryan Kinney Associate Professor, Criminology Richard Frank Supervisor Associate Professor, Criminology Sheri Fabian Committee Member University Lecturer, Criminology Jen Marchbank Examiner Professor, Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies ii Abstract As part of Russia’s ongoing foreign interference campaign, The Internet Research Agency (IRA) appropriated marginalised identities and created impersonated propaganda, including the Facebook groups LGBT United and United Muslims. Guided by critical theory and informed by feminist, queer, and postcolonial perspectives, this study examined 500 posts from LGBT United and 500 posts from United Muslims, to explore the groups’ content, purpose, and use of marginalised identities. Qualitative content analysis revealed several themes, including (Attempted) Identity Theft (efforts to appear legitimate), A Call to Inaction (discouragement of political engagement), “Us” Against the World (encouraging isolation and anger), and That’s the Thing I’m Sensitive About! (potentially generating antagonism towards the marginalised community). Findings discuss the possibility that these posts are multitarget (intended to influence not only the impersonated community, but groups hostile to it), explore potential danger to marginalised groups, recommend consideration of proactive strategies, and encourage community partnership. Keywords: Internet Research Agency; IRA; propaganda; social media; Muslim; queer; iii Dedication Dedicated to my Grama. Thankyou for caring for me, and teaching me to care about others. You dragged me through school as a kid, and then supported my serpentine wending through university. Thankyou for your love, your sacrifices, your shoulder to cry on, your decades-long encouragement of my curiosity and willingness to help me find the answers to my questions. Thankyou for your example of compassion, and hard work, and your stubbornness (that you passed on, and that we’ve honed into a virtue). Thankyou for feeding me toast when I was in literature-reading fugue, and combatting my imposter syndrome, and putting up with hours and hours and hours of me rambling about disinformation on social media when you’d really rather have been reading. Also, to my cat, Penny Dreadful, for keeping me somewhat sane. iv Acknowledgements While completing this thesis I suffered the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. So many people have helped me, and I thank them from the bottom of my heart. I am unendingly grateful for the incredible support I’ve received from my senior supervisor, Dr. Richard Frank, who went fathoms above and beyond the call of duty. His guidance, expertise, patience, and support made this thesis actually exist. Thankyou for being a mentor, a fantastic scholar, and a ridiculously kind person. Dr. Sheri Fabian, my supervisor, has been a mentor and guide throughout my MA. From developing my qualitative skills, to helping me find my way through moral dilemmas and interesting events – she has always gone to bat for me, and been such an example. She has encouraged me to go to bat for others, and stick up for what is right. Thankyou for being a champion, and such an embodiment of a compassionate academic. My gratitude to my external examiner, Dr. Jen Marchbank, whose expertise and experience are appreciated. Thankyou for giving me your time and knowledge amidst this chaotic period. To all my committee – thankyou for your accommodation and care during a very difficult time. You’ve all gone out of your way to help me succeed. My thanks as well to Dr. Barry Cartwright, who helped bring me into this area of research, and provided his knowledge and experience. I’ve met so many people I admire, so many people whose support has been indispensable, and whose scholarship – and actions – impacted me. In particular, Dr. Stephanie Wiley, Dr. Danielle Murdoch, and Dr. Tamara O’Doherty, you have inspired and driven me. Thankyou to my loved ones: my family, my friends (especially my sister-in-heart, Hiral). Every one of you – your strength is an inspiration, and your love is a blessing. Grama, I’m sorry about spreading thousands of pages of research all over your house and ranting about the history of Islamophobia; James, I’m sorry for the walls of surely very boring text messages about my research. Thankyou all for enduring. v Table of Contents Declaration of Committee ................................................................................................ ii Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iii Dedication ...................................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ................................................................................................................. viii List of Figures................................................................................................................. ix List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................. x Glossary ......................................................................................................................... xi Chapter 1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 1.1. The threat .............................................................................................................. 2 1.2. Relevance to criminology ....................................................................................... 3 1.3. The current study ................................................................................................... 5 1.3.1. LGBT United and United Muslims: IRA-controlled ......................................... 5 1.3.2. Research questions ....................................................................................... 6 Chapter 2. Literature Review ..................................................................................... 7 2.1. Muslim and queer communities as marginalised groups ........................................ 7 2.1.1. White evangelical conservative Christians ..................................................... 9 2.2. Marginalised people on social media ................................................................... 11 2.2.1. Use of social media by the queer community ............................................... 12 2.2.2. Use of social media by the Muslim community ............................................. 13 2.3. Queer and Muslim communities in Russia ........................................................... 14 2.3.1. Russian propaganda use of these communities ........................................... 16 2.4. The Internet Research Agency ............................................................................ 17 2.5. Gaps in the literature ........................................................................................... 20 Chapter 3. Methods .................................................................................................. 22 3.1. Qualitative content analysis of social media posts ............................................... 22 3.2. Data collection and sampling ............................................................................... 23 3.3. Coding and analysis ............................................................................................ 24 3.4. Rigour .................................................................................................................. 25 3.5. Positionality and perspective ............................................................................... 26 Chapter 4. Results .................................................................................................... 31 4.1. Content ................................................................................................................ 31 4.1.1. “Tells”: Format and patterns ......................................................................... 36 4.2. (Attempted) identity theft ...................................................................................... 37 4.2.1. Playing a part .............................................................................................. 37 4.2.2. Use of non-textual media ............................................................................. 40 4.2.3. Bad imitations .............................................................................................