Chapter 1: The Information Landscape During Conflict

The effects of information warfare on everyday consumers of news are often overlooked in discussions about global conflicts. Much like in World War II, the significance of propaganda and misinformation in today's world remains critical.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 highlighted a notable aspect: the Russian government seemed ill-equipped for the information battle. The Kremlin relied heavily on brute military force, a choice that proved to be a strategic miscalculation. Contrary to expectations, Kyiv did not surrender after mere weeks or even months, nor did the Zelensky administration abandon the capital. Interestingly, Ukrainian and Western societies, previously fragmented by political divides, united in response to Putin's aggression. This unity came as a harsh awakening for Russia, revealing that both its elites and ordinary citizens were unprepared for such a backlash.

The year 2022 witnessed a profound "disconnect" globally between individuals, nations, brands, and information consumers, resulting in the breakdown of established patterns of communication and human interaction. The ongoing military conflict has altered perceptions of information dissemination, shaping opinions and influencing behaviors. The communication landscape faced a rigorous examination regarding meanings, message tones, information channels, and trustworthiness of sources.

Isolation emerged as a significant consequence of these conflicts. The interplay of warfare cultivates a strong group identity while heightening fears of exclusion. This environment diminishes tolerance for alternative viewpoints and internal dissent. Consequently, information perception becomes increasingly biased, with decisions often swayed not by logical arguments but by social cues and groupthink.

In this polarized atmosphere, the echo chamber effect thrives. Long-held beliefs are reinforced through constant repetition by state and social media, stifling the influx of fresh ideas. Algorithms on platforms like Facebook and YouTube exacerbate this issue, trapping users in a cycle of their own stereotypes and emotional reactions. It is disheartening to encounter comments suggesting, “you can google…” followed by verbose directives on what to search. Individuals should cultivate their own informed perspectives rather than relying on pre-packaged opinions delivered by algorithms. As long as libraries and books exist, the opportunity for independent thought remains.

Within such a "circle," where a single viewpoint predominates, individuals hesitate to express doubts. The choice of information sources also reflects this isolating tendency.

Despite this, I often encounter sentiments like, “I don’t trust any source of information; I have no faith in the U.S. media.” This illustrates that the media's influence has its limits. While indoctrination may be effective in times of societal mobilization, such phases are not sustainable. The "partial mobilization" declared by the Russian government is a rare exception, yet even in this scenario, indoctrination struggles against the harsh realities on the ground.

A key communicative characteristic of the ongoing conflict is the mutual deprivation of subjectivity. Rhetoric has taken on a moralistic tone, with opponents portrayed as lacking an independent stance or moral compass—either misled or compromised. This strategy of shaming results in continual escalation, as perceived attacks unify groups further. Without a genuine understanding of the opponent's position, meaningful negotiations become nearly impossible.

The role of experts has also evolved significantly. Those with expert status often find themselves swept up in emotional solidarity. Their forecasts and analyses tend to mirror prevailing attitudes. This trend has been evident in Russia long before February 24, 2022, with government-aligned experts perpetuating narratives that comfort the authorities and pacify their suspicions. The onset of the "special military operation" in Ukraine exposed the profound incompetence of Russian leaders, military personnel, and intelligence agencies. The reality of Russia’s military capabilities, once presented as formidable, was merely a façade—an illusion maintained by glowing reports and military showcases.

The information space became rife with euphemisms designed to mask military setbacks faced by Putin's forces: terms like regrouping, goodwill gestures, and redeployment to “more favorable positions” obscured the truth. The erosion of trust in official narratives stands as a primary outcome of the authorities' unsuccessful attempts to justify ongoing events.

This crisis of trust permeates both elite circles and the general populace. Elites, preoccupied with self-preservation strategies, have become more cohesive, with moderate dissenters having already left the country. Meanwhile, the Russian public appears confused, willing to endorse any presidential decision, whether it involves escalating military actions or pursuing peace talks.

In times of uncertainty, individuals seek clarity while yearning to stay connected with their immediate circles. This dynamic creates fertile ground for the proliferation of rumors and misinformation, particularly when official communications fall short.

Ultimately, the paradox of abundant yet scarce information prevails. Much of today's news fails to address pressing questions, leaving people in the dark—much like during the pandemic, where uncertainty loomed large.

The public craves reliable and authoritative information, yet such trust is eroded by the unpredictable nature of the situation. Distrust has accumulated since the pandemic due to inconsistencies and a lack of clear guidance from authorities. Each new announcement tends to heighten confusion and skepticism.

To avoid leaving questions unanswered often results in bewilderment, while providing answers risks errors and future distrust. This was a key factor behind the cancellation of Vladimir Putin's major press conference in 2022. The central challenge for politicians lies in how to communicate effectively amid uncertainty.

A growing divide exists between unofficial narratives and official reports, fostering a sense of information seclusion. Many information consumers lament, “The truth is being concealed from us,” which resonates with the reality of information warfare.

The first video titled "Evanna Hu. What is Information Warfare?" delves into the intricacies of information warfare, exploring its implications in modern conflicts.

The second video, "2022 AFA Warfare Symposium: ISR/Remote Sensing," discusses the role of intelligence, surveillance, and remote sensing in contemporary warfare.

Thank you for your attention. For unlimited access to all that Medium has to offer, consider becoming a member through this link to support my writing.