Blaming it on NATO? Framing the role of NATO in the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine on Twitter

IF 2.3 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Lara Kobilke, A. Kulichkina, Ani Baghumyan, Christian Pipal
{"title":"Blaming it on NATO? Framing the role of NATO in the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine on Twitter","authors":"Lara Kobilke, A. Kulichkina, Ani Baghumyan, Christian Pipal","doi":"10.3389/fpos.2023.1122439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Since social media has become a significant tool for conflict communication amid the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, researchers have grown more interested in the digital content citizens are exposed to. Methods To further investigate the role of social media in the ongoing invasion, we conducted a manual content analysis to examine tweets in English, Russian, and German that explicitly mentioned NATO in the context of the full-scale invasion during February to May 2022. Our analysis explored how these language-specific Twitter communities framed NATO's role in the conflict. Results We found that English-speaking tweeters were more likely to hold NATO responsible for finding a solution and least likely to blame NATO for the war compared to German and Russian speakers. We also observed that the Russian-speaking Twitter community exhibits a comparatively lower tendency to hold NATO accountable for the ongoing war as compared to their German-speaking counterparts, and they are also notably the least likely to expect NATO to bring an end to the war. Finally, English-speaking Twitter users who attribute blame to NATO for the ongoing war tend to adhere to a preconceived notion, rather than arriving at an interpretation based on the situation at hand. This is in contrast to the Russian-speaking community, where the opposite is true. German-speaking users fall somewhere in between these two perspectives. Discussion Our research contributes to the literature by providing a novel integration of conceptual and methodological perspectives on the framing and stance-taking of social media users during wartime, addressing known research gaps in the comparative analysis of these discussions, i.e., adding “non-English” perspectives. It also highlights the importance of cultural and linguistic sensitivity when addressing responsibility in armed conflicts and the need to consider the diverse perspectives derived from divergent problem definitions and evaluative standards.","PeriodicalId":34431,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Political Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1122439","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Since social media has become a significant tool for conflict communication amid the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, researchers have grown more interested in the digital content citizens are exposed to. Methods To further investigate the role of social media in the ongoing invasion, we conducted a manual content analysis to examine tweets in English, Russian, and German that explicitly mentioned NATO in the context of the full-scale invasion during February to May 2022. Our analysis explored how these language-specific Twitter communities framed NATO's role in the conflict. Results We found that English-speaking tweeters were more likely to hold NATO responsible for finding a solution and least likely to blame NATO for the war compared to German and Russian speakers. We also observed that the Russian-speaking Twitter community exhibits a comparatively lower tendency to hold NATO accountable for the ongoing war as compared to their German-speaking counterparts, and they are also notably the least likely to expect NATO to bring an end to the war. Finally, English-speaking Twitter users who attribute blame to NATO for the ongoing war tend to adhere to a preconceived notion, rather than arriving at an interpretation based on the situation at hand. This is in contrast to the Russian-speaking community, where the opposite is true. German-speaking users fall somewhere in between these two perspectives. Discussion Our research contributes to the literature by providing a novel integration of conceptual and methodological perspectives on the framing and stance-taking of social media users during wartime, addressing known research gaps in the comparative analysis of these discussions, i.e., adding “non-English” perspectives. It also highlights the importance of cultural and linguistic sensitivity when addressing responsibility in armed conflicts and the need to consider the diverse perspectives derived from divergent problem definitions and evaluative standards.
把它归咎于北约?在推特上阐述北约在俄罗斯全面入侵乌克兰中的作用
引言由于在俄罗斯全面入侵乌克兰期间,社交媒体已成为冲突沟通的重要工具,研究人员对公民接触到的数字内容越来越感兴趣,德国在2022年2月至5月全面入侵的背景下明确提到了北约。我们的分析探讨了这些特定语言的推特社区是如何构成北约在冲突中的角色的。结果我们发现,与讲德语和俄语的人相比,讲英语的推特用户更有可能认为北约有责任找到解决方案,而不太可能将战争归咎于北约。我们还观察到,与德语社区相比,讲俄语的推特社区要求北约对正在进行的战争负责的倾向相对较低,而且他们也最不可能期望北约结束战争。最后,说英语的推特用户将正在进行的战争归咎于北约,他们倾向于坚持一种先入为主的观念,而不是根据当前局势做出解释。这与俄语社区形成了鲜明对比,后者的情况正好相反。德语使用者介于这两种观点之间。讨论我们的研究通过对战时社交媒体用户的框架和立场提供概念和方法论视角的新颖整合,解决了这些讨论的比较分析中已知的研究空白,即添加了“非英语”视角,为文献做出了贡献。它还强调了在处理武装冲突中的责任时文化和语言敏感性的重要性,以及考虑从不同的问题定义和评价标准中得出的不同观点的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Political Science
Frontiers in Political Science Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
135
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信