Search results

Chapter 1: Introduction -- Part I. Russia's political communication ecosphere: the opposition, news media, and the Net -- Chapter 2: Non-systemic opposition: challenges and communication tactics -- Chapter 3: Journalism and news media: old risks and new formats -- Chapter 4: The "Sovereign Internet" and social media -- Part II. Digital resistances in non-democracies: tactics and aesthetics -- Chapter 5: Digital resistances in non-democracies -- Chapter 6: Populism and investigative journalism as tactics for digital resistance -- Chapter 7: Populist performance and the aesthetics of YouTube -- Part III. Case studies -- Chapter 8: Navalny's YouTube communication during the presidential campaign 2016-2018 -- Chapter 9: 2019 Moscow municipal election and the communication of political outsiders -- Chapter 10: Conclusion.

The rise of populist movements across the globe has instigated considerable research interest into populism, predominantly in Western democracies. Non-democratic Russia, however, is not exempt from this populist trend, and distinguishable populist rhetoric can be observed both inside and outside the establishment. Alexey Navalny, who regularly organises mass protests in Russia, is considered to be an outsider of systemic politics. Despite several unsuccessful attempts to be elected, his popularity continues to grow, largely due to digital instruments such as YouTube. In light of limited press freedom, YouTube has become one of the most trustworthy platforms for Navalny to publish his investigative documentaries about Russian corruption. In his videos, Navalny adopts a populist communication style to oppose himself to Putin's 'corrupt' elite. Different investigative journalism practices help Navalny to discredit the establishment, whereas his activist appeals may motivate his supporters to engage in political action. In this article, I explore how Navalny combines the practices of investigative journalism and civic activism in his populist communication on YouTube. Using the method of content analysis, I explore a case study of Navalny's YouTube communication and reveal four types of populism which play a special role in his narration. These are 'superficial,' 'investigative,' 'radical,' and 'advocacy' populisms. Advocacy populism, for instance, provides evidence of corruption elite crimes through journalism practices and in calling people to political action. The most visible concentration of these parts of narration was observed in YouTube videos released by the activist before and during anti-corruption protests of 2017.

The rise of populist movements across the globe has instigated considerable research interest into populism, predominantly in Western democracies. Non-democratic Russia, however, is not exempt from this populist trend, and distinguishable populist rhetoric can be observed both inside and outside the establishment. Alexey Navalny, who regularly organises mass protests in Russia, is considered to be an outsider of systemic politics. Despite several unsuccessful attempts to be elected, his popularity continues to grow, largely due to digital instruments such as YouTube. In light of limited press freedom, YouTube has become one of the most trustworthy platforms for Navalny to publish his investigative documentaries about Russian corruption. In his videos, Navalny adopts a populist communication style to oppose himself to Putin's 'corrupt' elite. Different investigative journalism practices help Navalny to discredit the establishment, whereas his activist appeals may motivate his supporters to engage in political action. In this article, I explore how Navalny combines the practices of investigative journalism and civic activism in his populist communication on YouTube. Using the method of content analysis, I explore a case study of Navalny's YouTube communication and reveal four types of populism which play a special role in his narration. These are 'superficial,' 'investigative,' 'radical,' and 'advocacy' populisms. Advocacy populism, for instance, provides evidence of corruption elite crimes through journalism practices and in calling people to political action. The most visible concentration of these parts of narration was observed in YouTube videos released by the activist before and during anti-corruption protests of 2017.

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia in 2022 has put the future of the Russian opposition further at stake. The new limitations towards political, internet, and press freedoms have led to a severe disintegration of the anti-regime movement in Russia, including its leaders like Alexey Navalny. Digital platforms had previously hosted anti-Kremlin narratives online and played a role in the facilitation of Russian anti-regime protests. The latest scalable anti-regime rallies to date were the Free Navalny protests, caused by the imprisonment of Navalny in 2021. Digital platforms strengthened the voice of the Russian regime critics; however, their growing visibility online caused further suppression in the country. To understand this paradox, we ask which main anti-regime communicators were influential in the protests' discussions on Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, and how platform features have facilitated their influence during the Free Navalny protests. We develop a multi-platform methodological workflow comprising network analysis, social media analytics, and qualitative methods to map the Russian anti-regime publics and identify its opinion leaders. We also evaluate the cultures of use of platforms and their features by various Russian anti-regime communicators seeking high visibility online. We distinguish between contextual and feature cultures of platform use that potentially aid the popularity of such actors and propose to cautiously confer the mobilisation and democratisation potential to digital platforms under growing authoritarianism.

Abstract
This article explores the strategic use of 'fake news' discourses in non-democratic contexts using a mixed-methods
approach grounded in social network analysis and discourse theory. In contexts such as Russia and Iran, where the opposition
generally does not have unrestricted access to the political public sphere, social media platforms serve to influence discourses.
Given the prevalence of fake news discourses, previous studies have already focused extensively on the political elite and their
use of this discourse within Western or Anglo-American contexts, and on the typologies of 'fake news'. Our findings address this
research gap and suggest that ordinary users in non-Western and non-democratic settings do not differentiate between 'fake news'
types. Rather, they employ the discourse as a means to strategically delegitimise and discredit their opponents.