“Many #Ukrainians still remember the good ol’ days, when #Soviet Ukraine was the #USSR’s breadbasket,” tweeted @Russia, a government-run Twitter account, posting a series of pictures of cheerful old-time Soviet scenes. “A lot of that, and much more, is available in #Russia’s #Crimea today.” An hour later @Ukraine responded to Russia’s message with the suggestion that it had been posted by a “toxic ex”.
This exchange, in 2020, was a warm-up for a social-media war that has continued even as actual war breaks out on the ground. Ukrainian officials from the president down have posted and promoted viral content designed to attract the attention of international as well as domestic audiences. The graphics and gags may seem frivolous. But the battle for online likes and shares is part of a strategy to shape the views of Western voters—and their governments.
Even before the outbreak of fighting Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, was one of the most followed heads of state. His 13.5m-strong (and rising) Instagram following is the fifth-biggest of any world leader (the top four are the heads of India, Indonesia, Brazil and America, countries with populations between five and 30 times as large as Ukraine’s). Mr Zelensky posts dozens of tweets most days, in Ukrainian and English, tagging other national leaders and getting retweets from their followers.
Mr Zelensky, a former actor whose roles included an ordinary man who became president by accident, ran his election campaign almost entirely online in 2019, causing journalists to complain about his lack of availability for interviews. His rolling series of YouTube videos that treated the campaign like a reality-TV documentary left some wondering if he was ready for the job. In fact his honing of accessible, shareable clips has turned out to be an ideal preparation for what has followed.
Ukrainian government officials have followed Mr Zelensky’s lead. On February 26th Mykhailo Fedorov, the vice prime minister, tweeted a direct request to Elon Musk, a billionaire entrepreneur, to set up his Starlink internet service in Ukraine. The same day Mr Musk replied that the service was now active; two days later Mr Fedorov tweeted an image of new Starlink terminals arriving by truck.
The pinned tweet on @Ukraine’s account asks, in English, for crypto-currency donations, of which it had received more than $25m as of March 1st, according to Elliptic, a firm of analysts. Previously the government had directed visitors to an account on Patreon, a fundraising website more commonly used by struggling artists, where donors could sponsor the country at different “membership levels” with names such as “bullet” and “bomb”. Shortly after the invasion Patreon suspended the account, citing a rule against buying weapons. Ukraine’s lively online presence contrasts with @Russia’s more staid posts, which as war raged included a retweet of “four of the most beautiful railway stations in Russia”. Recent posts by the account have hundreds of hostile replies.
Ukraine’s active presence on social media has been helped by an abundance of dramatic “content” unlike that seen in any previous war. Although Ukraine is one of Europe’s poorest and least-connected countries, three-quarters of Ukrainians aged over 13 are active on social media, according to Kepios, a research firm. Most get online using smartphones. These have generated the videos that make up the raw material of viral content, from unarmed pensioners yelling abuse at Russian soldiers to a Ukrainian motorist asking a group of stranded tank-drivers if he could tow them back to Russia. Previously, it took extraordinary luck for a camera crew to capture a moment such as the Tiananmen Square “tank man” filmed by CNN in 1989. The Ukraine conflict has already generated dozens of similarly dramatic moments, nearly all filmed by citizens with phones.
Social media have also helped Ukraine’s international supporters to co-ordinate their actions. Synchronised protest marches around the world on February 27th attracted hundreds of thousands of participants. Following the announcement by the Ukrainian government of an “international legion” of volunteer fighters, amateur soldiers have posted pictures of themselves bidding farewell to loved ones at airports. A forum on Reddit called VolunteersForUkraine allows would-be fighters to swap tips on how to get involved. “I just arrived in Lviv, thanks to this [forum]”, posted one man on February 28th, with a picture of himself in a yellow anorak and tracksuit trousers, holding an assault rifle.
The swing in public opinion since the beginning of hostilities has been stark. Western countries were always bound to support Ukraine rather than Russia, the aggressor. But polling suggests that public opinion has hardened since the fighting began. Polling in Britain by YouGov on February 22nd-23rd, just before the invasion, found that 69% were in favour of tougher sanctions on Russia. Two days later, after images of Russia’s attack had gone around the world, the share had risen to 77%. Those in favour of sending weapons to Ukraine rose from 46% to 60%. There is also an increased willingness to make sacrifices. Before the invasion, only 35% of Britons approved of sanctions that would increase the cost of living at home. Within two days that had increased to 45%.
Opinion has also turned in other countries. Germans now approve of sending weapons to Ukraine by 45% to 37%, finds YouGov. The French are in favour by around the same margin.
Public outcry has translated into policy change. On February 27th Germany announced that it would increase its defence budget to more than 2% of GDP, up from around 1.5% in 2021. Even Switzerland has found it impossible to maintain its neutrality in the face of strong public opinion. It announced on February 28th that it would freeze Russian financial assets in the country, which are reckoned to total some $11bn. Companies are also paying attention to public opinion. Disney, Sony and Warner Bros announced on February 28th that they would suspend their new cinematic releases in Russia.
Social media are hardly the only causes of the turn in public opinion. But their ability to transmit first-hand accounts from ordinary people in the thick of it may make them particularly affecting, suggests Simon Kemp of Kepios. He cites Ukrainian Instagram influencers whose updates have abruptly changed from baking and make-up tips to desperate scenes of evacuation.
Social networks also have the unique property that, as well as spreading information, they encourage members of the “audience” to form and express their own views, turning them more easily into participants rather than simply passive viewers. The way in which social-media users quickly coalesce around a point of view increases the pressure on their leaders to act, notes Ben Thompson, author of Stratechery, a newsletter on technology.
This may make citizens, and their leaders, quicker to get involved in other countries’ problems. America waded into faraway conflicts after incidents such as the Pearl Harbour bombing or the 9/11 attacks, notes Mr Thompson. Yet in the case of Ukraine, “a similar level of outrage and demands for action are being mounted without the previously needed component of there being a specific national connection.” As social media turn consumers of news into activists, their governments may in turn become more active.■
Our recent coverage of the Ukraine crisis can be found here