Conspiracy Theories as a Russian Public Diplomacy Tool: The Case of Russia Today (RT)
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-9256.12097 |
| Published date | 01 November 2015 |
| Date | 01 November 2015 |
| Author | Ilya Yablokov |
| Subject Matter | Article |
bs_bs_banner
P O L I T I C S : 2 0 1 5 V O L 3 5 ( 3 - 4 ) , 3 0 1 – 3 1 5
doi: 10.1111/1467-9256.12097
Conspiracy Theories as a Russian Public
Diplomacy Tool: The Case of Russia Today (RT)
Ilya Yablokov
University of Leeds
This article explores the use of conspiracy theories by the Russian international television channel Russia Today
(RT). Based on Mark Fenster’s definition of conspiracy theory as a populist theory of power, the article studies
the process of how various conspiratorial notions in programmes broadcast by RT legitimise Russian domestic
and foreign policies and, in turn, delegitimise policies of the American government. It argues that the
conspiratorial component of RT’s broadcasting appears as a political instrument in the context of the post-Cold
War world and is applied to attract various global audiences with different political views.
Keywords: conspiracy theories; Russia Today (RT); public diplomacy; Russian foreign policy
Introduction
The Guardian newspaper has described Russia Today (RT) – an international television channel
sponsored by the Russian government – as ‘a view of the world, from conspiracy theories to
other, more worrying beliefs, that should give cause for concern’ (Bloomfield, 2014). Since
being established in 2005, the channel has gained a reputation for serving as the Kremlin’s
‘propaganda machine’, a repository of conspiracy theories and the source of news neglected
by the global media juggernauts, such as CNN or BBC World News.
RT’s image as the ‘mouthpiece’ of the Kremlin and its readiness to promote various con-
spiracy theorists has enabled scholars to overlook its potential as a tool of foreign policy of
the Russian government. It has thus far attracted largely journalistic attention (Bidder,
2013; Bullough, 2013; Pomerantsev and Weiss, 2014), with little academic analysis
(Strukov, 2014). In an attempt to fill this gap, this article outlines the political agenda
behind the channel and pays particular attention to the conspiratorial aspect of RT’s pro-
grammes in order to decipher the most controversial aspect of its broadcasting. The article
interprets the conspiracy theories that figure within RT’s news agenda as a specific tool of
Russian public diplomacy aimed at undermining the policies of the US government and, in
turn, defending Russia’s actions.
The first part of the article will outline a theoretical framework for analysing conspiracy
theories. The article will then briefly consider the international broadcasting component of
public diplomacy. It will then look at the history of RT and its news agenda, particularly
focusing on the political ideas produced by the pro-Putin intellectuals in the 2000s. The final
part will be devoted to an analysis of the conspiracy theories voiced in RT’s programmes and
the channel’s effectiveness as a public diplomacy tool.
© 2015 The Author. Politics © 2015 Political Studies Association
302
I LYA Y A B L O K O V
Understanding conspiracy theories
After decades of debates about the nature of conspiracy theories, scholars have concluded that
they are more than just a product of a ‘paranoid style’ of political thinking (Hofstadter, 1996).
The new approach, developed by Mark Fenster (2008), suggests that conspiracy theories can
become an important device for the reallocation of power between different political actors
and an efficient element in political strategies; they can expose the inequities of a political,
economic and social order. Since conspiracy theories are usually disseminated on a political
level through populist rhetoric, Fenster (2008, pp. 84–90) has concluded that a conspiracy
theory is a ‘populist theory of power’. Conspiracy theories possess an important communi-
cative function by helping to unite the audience as ‘the people’ against the imagined ‘Other’,
represented as a secretive ‘power bloc’.
Fenster’s argument is built on the broad interpretation of populism introduced by Francisco
Panizza and Ernesto Laclau who suggest that populism is ‘a mode of identification available
to any actor operating in a discursive field in which the notion of the sovereignty of the people
and its inevitable corollary, the conflict between the powerful and the powerless, are core
elements of its political imaginary’ (Panizza, 2005, p. 4). The important feature of this concept
is its antagonistic division of the social into two camps: between the ‘people’ and the ‘Other’
(Laclau, 2005a, pp. 83 and 224). ‘The people’, united on the basis of popular demand, oppose
the ‘Other’, the power bloc; this represents the typical – for conspiracy theories – juxtaposition
of ‘Us’ versus ‘Them’. In Laclau’s (2005b, pp. 37–38) words, the social is divided into two
camps: ‘the power’ and ‘the underdog’. The latter’s appeal is based on popular demands and
its role is to challenge the social order and gain power, thereby fulfilling popular demands.
Populism performs the function of gathering different elements of the social into a new
identity (Laclau, 2005a, pp. 93–101). Accordingly, this reading of populism does not deny its
presence in a democratic society; on the contrary, it can manifest a necessary challenge to the
existing democratic order when the it fails to address certain cutting-edge issues.
This reading of populism could be applied to the analysis of how conspiracy theories operate
on the public level. The invention of ‘the people’ requires a persuasive image of the ‘Other’
that can be provided by the conspiratorial narrative through the generation of a fear of
subversion. In addition, such discourses address concerns about the inequities of a social
system and occasionally pose a positive challenge to the existing social order (Fenster, 2008,
pp. 89–90). Hence, the usage of conspiracy theories on the political level helps the actor who
disseminates these theories undermine the position and reputation of another actor – the
powerful ‘Other’ who purportedly benefits from conspiring against ‘the people’.
In the Russian case, the ultimate ‘Other’, historically, has often been the West, imagined as ‘a
single undifferentiated entity ... regarded either as a positive model for Russia to emulate or
as a negative example to be rejected’, that has served to define the borders of national identity
and its place in world history (Tolz, 2001, p. 70). In this context, fears expressed through
anti-Western conspiracy in Russia arise as a part of the so-called ‘ressentiment’ that was born
from the recognition of the discrepancy between Russia and its ideal, the ‘West’, and which
operated to demonstrate Russia’s equality or superiority to it (Greenfield, 1992, p. 234). In the
mind of a Russian nationalist with anti-Western views, the West appears as an ultimate and
insidious ‘Other’ seeking to undermine the progress of the Russian nation towards its glorious
future.
© 2015 The Author. Politics © 2015 Political Studies Association
POLITICS: 2015 VOL 35(3-4)
C O N S P I R A C Y T H E O R I E S A S A R U S S I A N P U B L I C D I P L O M A C Y T O O L
303
This brief description of the theoretical approach to conspiracy theories enables us to abandon
traditional readings of conspiracy theories and explore their potential as a tool of foreign
policy. As Richard Sakwa (2012) has demonstrated, conspiracy theories could become a
‘distinctive mode of engagement’ in foreign policies. According to Sakwa (2012, pp. 581 and
590), the inability of Russia’s policy makers to efficiently embed conspiracy theories into
Russia’s foreign policy can explain its inefficiency in the post-Cold War era and especially
during the Russo-Georgia War in 2008. The conflict in Georgia indeed became a watershed in
Russian foreign policy and triggered rethinking of the country’s foreign policy, putting a
particular emphasis on international broadcasting as a way of influencing public attitudes on
the global scale.
International broadcasting as a public diplomacy tool
Defined as the international actor’s attempt to manage the international environment
through engagement with foreign publics, ‘public diplomacy’ includes several key compo-
nents that together help gather feedback, explain policy and increase the attractiveness of
a country among foreign publics (Cull, 2009). Public diplomacy is a way of engaging
foreign individuals, communities and governments in support of national objectives and
foreign policies of an international actor stimulated by the development of global commu-
nication (Show, 2009, p. 6). It helps increase awareness of the policies of the international
actor, establishing a positive image among international communities and thus increasing
its global influence in the world (see, e.g. Carter, 2005). Scholars at the Edward R. Murrow
Center (a leading American institute for the study of public diplomacy) see public diplo-
macy as an integral part of a foreign policy strategy that seeks to communicate with foreign
communities, individuals and governments through governmental and NGOs and so influ-
ence their opinions.1
As an integral element of public diplomacy, international broadcasting plays a crucial role in
promoting a country’s interests among international audiences. It helps deliver messages and
images about the country through various mediums, which increases trust and confidence in
an international actor (Gass and Seiter, 2009, pp. 154–165). The creation of a favourable news
agenda largely underlies public diplomacy strategies. It allows news events to be tailored to
the...
To continue reading
Request your trial