New frontier in Ukraine-Russia crisis: Facebook

Perhaps his press officer was having the weekend off, but in recent days Ukraine’s interior minister Arsen Avakov has communicated with the world almost entirely via his Facebook page.

He updated people on the fate of a local police chief, rumoured to have been captured by pro-Russian separatists, on Facebook (“He is with us!”).

He announced the launch of Ukraine’s “anti-terror operation” – a crackdown on the separatists – on Facebook.

And he sent a message to Russia, describing the mini-uprisings in towns across east Ukraine as an “act of aggression by Russia”, on Facebook.

Of course, governments taking to social media is nothing new. Nearly 40 million people follow Barack Obama on Facebook. UK Prime Minister David Cameron has a Twitter account (despite his early thoughts about social media). Even Iranian president Hassan Rouhani has a Facebook page – despite the fact that Facebook, and indeed, occasionally, the internet, is banned for most ordinary Iranians.

Claire Wardle, a digital consultant who has worked with Storyful and the UNHRC, told Channel 4 News: “If you look around the globe, there are lots of interesting examples of other politicians using Facebook.

“I think in the UK, because we have traditional media forms, there’s a sense that social media is ‘the other’, less serious somehow – but actually in many places it has a role for the state and for governments when they don’t necessarily have the media space we have. It’s a space for governments to talk directly to the people.”

Tool of conflict

The difference here is the way Facebook is being used for live updates in a fast-moving and volatile situation – and one where it is hard to get the full picture.

Channel 4 News International Editor Lindsey Hilsum is in east Ukraine, where she says there is a sense of “smoke and mirrors”.

Most dangerous moment yet as #Ukraine ‘anti-terror’ forces try to retake airfield at #Kramatorsk. Rumour and misinformation flying.

— Lindsey Hilsum (@lindseyhilsum) April 15, 2014

Neither Russian sources nor pro-Maidan reliable on action in eastern #Ukraine. @ASLuhn is in #Kramatrosk reporting as eyewitness.

— Lindsey Hilsum (@lindseyhilsum) April 15, 2014

On the one hand, there are the “pro-Russian separatists”. They are considered by many, including the United States, UK and Nato, to be little more than Russian agents posing as Ukrainian protesters.

Whoever they are, the separatists are so keen to get their side of the story across that they wanted two camera crews to film them when Channel 4 News encountered some of them near Slaviansk: one film crew to film another.

Then there is the Ukrainian government. It is equally keen to get its side of the story across, as Mr Avakov’s Facebook page shows. And they are similarly keen, apparently, on euphemism to describe their forces and their activities: branding the latest clashes as “anti-terror” operations.

But its spokespeople can be as problematic in their messages as the separatists, regardless of where they are delivering said messages. Mr Avakov and acting president Oleksander Turchynov have given a string of deadlines to protesters to lay down their arms or leave the buildings they have occupied. When these deadlines pass, action has not always been taken.

Who to trust?

Even more interesting is the fact that Mr Avakov has chosen Facebook to put out his messages. They are written in Ukrainian, but as well as the local populace, there is no doubt he has more than half an eye on the international community. In Ukraine, by far the most popular social network is Russian-owned VK, not Facebook: 61 per cent of web users are on VK, while Facebook’s market penetration there is apparently less than 10 per cent.

In some cases, social media in Ukraine has become the place to find out what the various sides really think, as the Guardian’s Moscow Correspondent Shaun Walker recently wrote.

“There was a time when working out what countries really thought required parsing texts and reading between the lines to get to the point, hidden behind a myriad of diplomatic niceties. No longer – at least when it comes to Ukraine,” he wrote, detailing an incident when the US embassy in Moscow misspelled a place name in Russian while needling Russia over the national identity of the separatists.

In Syria, there are Go Pro cameras on Assad’s tanks – it’s no longer just in the hands of the protesters. Claire Wardle, digital consultant

This was the response on the Russian foreign ministry’s official Facebook page: “Dear colleagues, before spreading your spam, it might be a good idea to learn how to spell the name of the country in which you are working. We will be happy to consult you if in future when preparing your agitational material you have any questions or doubts.”

It is no surprise that governments have woken up to the power of social media after watching it, in some countries, work against them.

“Back in 2009, journalists in Iran were saying it’s great that we can get this but there’s nothing from the other side [the government],” said Ms Wardle. “But now, think of the Israel-Palestine conflict, it’s all playing out in real time on competing social networks on both sides. Or in Syria, there are Go Pro cameras on Assad’s tanks – it’s no longer just in the hands of protesters.

“These are sophisticated operations and people on both sides recognise that social media is a tool they have to use.”

For Ukraine’s interim government, there’s an even closer link with social media, which should make it no surprise that its ministers are using social media to get their message across. It’s natural to them and their supporters: bear in mind this government was born on the streets, in the protests, born of #EuroMaidan.

What is more of a concern for international observers is that verification and trust, those perennial problems for social media, are now spilling over into the real world in eastern Ukraine as the situation unravels. The use of the microphones of social media could only muddy the waters yet further.