Abstract
Information—primarily digital—is an increasingly important commodity in the modern world and the ubiquitous use of smartphones has meant a change in the way people access information and communicate. The virtual information space has become the primary location for threats, aggression and even potentially foreign occupation. The number of electronic services with fluid lines between public and private, professional and amateur; an absence of physical borders; the 24-hour news cycle: this provides new opportunities for virtual attacks. The ancient tool of propaganda takes on a new importance. There is widespread agreement that Russia under Putin has lifted propaganda to new levels—or perhaps back to Soviet levels but with the ubiquity of modern media in addition. Through access to the information space via such a common device as the smartphone, everyone is affected by the new form of information aggression.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For further information, please see ‘20 years ago today, the World Wide Web opened to the public’.
https://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/08/06/20-years-ago-today-the-world-wide-web-opened-to-the-public/ (13/07/2020).
- 2.
For further information, please see ‘History of mobile phones’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_mobile_phones (13/07/2020).
- 3.
Prosecutor v Tadic, ICTY 7 May 1997.
- 4.
International human rights conventions do not contain a definition of propaganda although some provisions deal with aspects of it. Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) deals with propaganda for war in the same Article as the ban on incitement. However, the first paragraph of the Article that deals with propaganda only mentions propaganda for war. The Fourth Geneva Convention, Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Article 51, considers propaganda in a limited context by including a ban on an Occupying Power to compel protected persons to serve in its armed or auxiliary forces and makes it illegal to exercise pressure or propaganda which aims at securing voluntary enlistment.
- 5.
Oxford English Dictionary, https://www.oed.com/ (20/07/2020).
- 6.
The term is used widely to denote a return to ways and means of communicating that were common before the printing press was invented. The exact way in which the term is used varies depending on context. Mostly its first use is attributed to Lars Ove Sauerberg (2009) and the research project ‘The Gutenberg parenthesis—print, book and cognition’ at the University of Southern Denmark, https://www.sdu.dk/en/om_sdu/institutter_centre/ikv/forskning/forskningsprojekter/gutenberg_projekt (20/07/2020).
- 7.
On the inclusion of unnecessary and nuisance speech in protected expressions, Handyside v. UK (European Court of Human Rights), Application 5493/72, decided 1976.
- 8.
Lingens v. Austria (European Court on Human Rights), Application no. 9815/82, decided 1986.
- 9.
Gündüz v. Turkey (European Court on Human Rights), Application 35071/97, decided 2004.
- 10.
Oxford English Dictionary, https://www.oed.com/ (20/07/2020).
- 11.
News reports have been reported on cyberattacks against Ukrainian media but also against electricity systems, allegedly with the same malware. See P. Paganini ‘Hackers cause power outage with malware in Ukraine. Is it an Information warfare act?’ https://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/43321/hacking/ukraine-attack-caused-power-outage.html.
- 12.
Latvia has earlier come under criticism from the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media for closing a Russian news website https://www.osce.org/fom/230866. As often is the case with online media, the site moved to another jurisdiction and continued operating.
- 13.
Cases (from the European Court on Human Rights) include Jersild v. Denmark, Application No. 15890/89, decided in 1994; Purcell et. al. v. Ireland, Application No. 15404/89, decided in 1991 and Brind v. UK, Application 18714/91, decided in 1994.
- 14.
Burri makes the distinction that hate speech is prohibited but not criminalised under international criminal law.
- 15.
She mentions how even weather reports were banned as they could be useful for the enemy and chess problems (unless sent by perfectly reliable British nationals) as they could be hidden code, ibid. p. 116.
- 16.
Bland v. Roberts, No. 12-1671 (US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 4th Cir. 2013).
- 17.
Joined cases Refah I v. Turkey (Applications 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98, 41344/98) and Refah II (in the Grand Chamber), decided 2003.
- 18.
See, for example, ‘EU mulls response to Russia’s information war’. https://euobserver.com/foreign/127135.
- 19.
Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtsdurchsetzung in sozialen Netzwerken (Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz, NetzDG). In force 1 October 2017.
- 20.
Décision n° 2020-801 DC du 18 juin 2020: Loi visant à lutter contre les contenus haineux sur internet https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/2020/2020801DC.htm (24/07/2020).
References
Altheide, D. L., & Johnson, J. M. (1980/1995). Bureaucratic propaganda: The case of battle efficiency reports. In R. Jackall (Ed.) (1995), Propaganda (pp. 299–328). New York: New York University Press; Reprinted from reprinted from Altheide, D. L., & Johnson, J. M. Bureaucratic propaganda. Boston.
Barker, K. (2016). Virtual spaces and virtual layers—governing the ungovernable? Information and Communications Technology Law,25(1), 62–70.
Bundesministerium der Justiz und für Verbraucherschutz. (2020). Weiterentwicklung des Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetzes. Retrieved July 24, 2020, from https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Artikel/DE/2020/040120_NetzDG.html.
Burri, N. (2015). Bravery or Bravado? The protection of news providers in armed conflict. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
Dommering, E. J. (2008), Article 10 of the convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms: Freedom of expression. In O. Castendyk, E. J. Dommering, & A. Scheuer (Eds.), European media law (pp. 35–81). Alphen a d R: Kluwer.
Franklin, M. I. (2019). Human rights futures for the internet. In M. Kettemann, B. Wagner, & K. Vieth (Eds.), Research handbook on human rights and digital technology: Global politics, law and international relations. Cheltenham, UK/Northampton, Massachusetts, USA: Edward Elgar.
Giles, K. (2015). Russia and its neighbours: Old attitudes, new capabilities. In K. Geers (Ed.), Cyber war in perspective: Russian aggression against Ukraine (pp. 19–28). Tallinn: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence.
Haste, C. (1977/1995). The machinery of propaganda. In R. Jackall (Ed.) (1995), Propaganda (pp. 105–136). New York: New York University Press; Reprinted from Haste, C. (1977) Keep the home fires burning. London: Allen Lane.
Hern, A. (2020). US army retreats from Twitch as recruitment drive backfires. The Guardian. Retrieved July 24, 2020, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/23/us-military-tactically-withdraws-from-game-streaming-site-twitch.
Jonsson, A. (2011). Russia and Europe. In G. Gill, & J. Young (Eds.), Routledge handbook of Russian politics and society (pp. 444–453). London: Routledge.
Lange-Ionatamishvili, E., & Svetoka, S. (2015). Strategic communications and social media in the Russia Ukraine conflict. In K. Geers (Ed.), Cyber war in perspective: Russian aggression against Ukraine (pp. 103–111). Tallinn: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence.
Laswell, H. D. (1934/1995). Propaganda. In R. Jackall (Ed.) (1995), Propaganda (pp. 13–25). New York: New York University Press; Reprinted from E. R. A. Seligman (Ed.) (1934), Encyclopaedia of the social sciences. New York: Macmillan.
Levin Jaitner, M. (2015). Russian information warfare: Lessons from Ukraine. In K. Geers (Ed.), Cyber war in perspective: Russian aggression against Ukraine (pp. 87–94). Tallinn: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence.
Meister, S. (2016). The “Lisa case”: Germany as a target of Russian disinformation. NATO Review. Retrieved July 24, 2020, from https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2016/07/25/the-lisa-case-germany-as-a-target-of-russian-disinformation/index.html.
Mills, C. W. (1956/1995). The mass society. In R. Jackall (Ed.) (1995), Propaganda (pp. 74–101). New York: New York University Press; Reprinted from Mills, C. W. (1956). The power elite. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence - StratCom COE. (2019a). Responding to cognitive security challenges. Riga. NATO StratCom COE.
NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence - StratCom COE. (2019b). Robotrolling Issue 1.
Ramsay, M. (2012). The status of Hearers’ rights in freedom of expression. Legal Theory,18, 31–68.
Reporters Without Borders. (2020). Baltic countries: Misusing EU sanctions to ban Russian TV channels is not a legitimate tool for promoting reliable information. Retrieved July 20, 2020, from https://rsf.org/en/news/baltic-countries-misusing-eu-sanctions-ban-russian-tv-channels-not-legitimate-tool-promoting.
Richter, A. (2015). The relationship between freedom of expression and the ban on propaganda for war. In W. Benedek, F. Benoît-Rohmer, W. C. Kettemann, B. Kneihs & M. Nowak (Eds.), European yearbook on human rights (pp. 489–505). Antwerp: Intersentia.
Susskind, R. (2019). Online courts and the future of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Economic Times. (2020). India bans 59 Chinese apps including TikTok, WeChat, Helo. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/software/india-bans-59-chinese-apps-including-tiktok-helo-wechat/articleshow/76694814.cms.
Wirtz, J. J. (2015). Cyber war and strategic culture: The Russian integration of cyber power into grand strategy. In K. Geers (Ed.), Cyber war in perspective: Russian aggression against Ukraine (pp. 29–37). Tallinn: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence.
Ziolkowski, K. (Ed.). (2014). Peacetime regime for state activities in cyberspace. Tallinn: NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Metcalf, K.N. (2021). Information aggression—A Battlefield of Smartphones. In: Mölder, H., Sazonov, V., Chochia, A., Kerikmäe, T. (eds) The Russian Federation in Global Knowledge Warfare. Contributions to International Relations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73955-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73955-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-73954-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-73955-3
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)