Abstract
AbstractThe 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine received widespread international condemnation. In Slovakia, the invasion became a subject of much political discussion with large number of MPs openly advocating Russian interests. This study investigates Slovak political discourse on Facebook in the weeks before and after the invasion began. We examine the discourse through the lens of Discourse Network Analysis, combining qualitative content analysis of MPs’ Facebook posts with quantitative bipartite social network analysis. During the two weeks, we retrieved all (n = 1880) posts from all (n = 117) MPs who had an active public Facebook page. We manually coded all posts and created a bipartite discourse network consisting of MPs connected to each other via shared discourse codes in two timepoints. We performed a series of exploratory analyses that identified the content of the political discourse, the structure of the political discourse network, and the mechanisms driving the change of the political discourse network. Our results show that the invasion dramatically changed political discourse in Slovakia, with the domestic coalition-opposition struggles losing prominence among the invasion-related topics. The structure of the political discourse network showed a strong coalition-opposition split. While coalition MPs had largely pro-Ukrainian sentiments, opposition MPs largely communicated pro-Russian propaganda. A cluster of opposition MPs consistently spread conspiracy theories both before and after the invasion began, supporting a “conspiracy singularity” theory—the tendency of actors to spread multiple different conspiracy theories and interconnect various conspiracy theories into one overarching narrative. The change of the discourse network at the beginning of the invasion was largely driven by the agenda setting of several parties, agenda reinforcement, and increasing political polarization. We discuss our findings in relation to the previous research on the spread of conspiracy theories among politicians and the polarization of political discourse during the invasion, and we suggest implications for future research.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,General Psychology,General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference83 articles.
1. Albertazzi D, Favero A, Hatakka N, Sijstermans J (2022) Siding with the underdog: Explaining the populist radical right’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) blog. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2022/03/15/siding-with-the-underdog-explaining-the-populist-radical-rights-response-to-russias-invasion-of-ukraine/
2. Alieva I, Ng LHX, Carley KM (2022) Investigating the spread of Russian disinformation about biolabs in Ukraine on Twitter using social network analysis. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Osaka, Japan p 1770-1775. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData55660.2022.10020223
3. Bastian M, Heymann S, Jacomy M (2009) Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, San Jose California. https://gephi.org/publications/gephi-bastian-feb09.pdf
4. Bordignon F, Diamanti I, Turato F (2022) Rally ‘round the Ukrainian flag. The Russian attack and the (temporary?) suspension of geopolitical polarization in Italy. Contemporary Italian Politics 14(3):370–386. https://doi.org/10.1080/23248823.2022.2060171
5. Bowen GA (2009) Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal 9(2):27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027