Listen to the article
Russian and Chinese media outlets have seized upon the assassination of Charlie Kirk to spread divisive narratives, though experts say the impact on American audiences appears limited.
“We have bots from Russia, China all over the world that are trying to instill misinformation and encourage violence,” Utah Governor Spencer Cox warned following last week’s shooting of the conservative activist at Utah Valley University.
However, specialists monitoring foreign disinformation campaigns suggest a more nuanced situation is unfolding. While foreign-paid influencers and state-run media are indeed discussing the assassination, researchers have found little evidence these messages are significantly reaching or influencing American audiences.
“I wish it were the Russians,” said Darren Linvill, co-director of the Media Forensics Hub at Clemson University. “It’s not the Russians, it’s us.” According to Linvill, the toxic discourse surrounding Kirk’s death is primarily homegrown rather than foreign-orchestrated.
Linvill’s investigation of social media following the shooting confirmed that foreign-paid influencers were discussing the event. One example is Irish journalist Chay Bowes, who works for Russia’s state-run RT news service. Bowes posted a six-minute video on X (formerly Twitter) discussing Kirk’s death while criticizing British media and the Israeli government – two frequent targets of Russian propaganda.
Despite potential efforts to inflame tensions, Bowes’ video garnered just 46,000 views in a week – a fraction of the 780,000 views that a single video from American conservative influencer Benny Johnson received during the same period.
Even automated Russian bot networks failed to gain significant traction despite spreading inflammatory false claims about the shooting. “When a single conversation takes up all the oxygen in the room, and everyone on social media is talking about it, the foreign influence can’t really break through,” Linvill explained.
Though their impact may be minimal, foreign state-controlled media outlets have certainly taken notice of Kirk’s assassination. McKenzie Sadeghi, an editor at media watchdog NewsGuard, reported that state media in Russia, China, and Iran have mentioned the killing more than 6,000 times, each tailoring the narrative to serve their geopolitical interests.
“In Russian state media, a lot of the coverage we’ve seen is blaming Ukraine for the assassination,” Sadeghi said. Iranian outlets have pointed to Israel as the culprit, while Chinese state media has used the incident “to sort of mock the U.S. as being unstable and out of control and divided.”
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted on X that “China condemns all unlawful and violent acts” and denied spreading disinformation. Sadeghi noted that these messages are primarily crafted for domestic audiences rather than American consumption.
Despite the limited impact of foreign influence in this case, experts warn that the United States has become increasingly vulnerable to such operations. Since January, when President Trump returned to office, groups tracking foreign influence at the State Department, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and Office of the Director of National Intelligence have all been disbanded.
“There’s been a systematic dismantling of every part of the U.S. government that was tasked with countering foreign malign influence,” said Bret Schafer, a senior fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy at the German Marshall Fund of the U.S.
Linvill echoed this concern, warning that the defunding of these monitoring efforts “leaves us on the back foot” when it comes to identifying and countering foreign disinformation campaigns during politically sensitive events.
The situation highlights a troubling paradox: while foreign actors continue attempting to amplify divisions in American society, their efforts on this particular incident have been overshadowed by domestic polarization – yet the country’s ability to monitor such threats has been significantly diminished.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
Interesting to see the nuance in the reporting here. While foreign actors are involved, the core issue appears to be the existing divisiveness within the US. Addressing that underlying toxicity in public discourse should be the priority, not just pointing fingers at outside influences.
You make a good point. Shifting the blame entirely to foreign powers risks overlooking the deeper societal issues at play. Sustainable solutions will need to grapple with the root causes of this divisive rhetoric, not just the external amplification of it.
This is a complex issue with a lot of moving parts. It’s concerning to see foreign powers potentially exploiting this tragedy for their own gain. However, the reporting suggests the real toxicity is coming from within, not outside actors. We need to focus on addressing the root causes of this divisive discourse.
It’s concerning to see foreign powers trying to exploit this situation, but the reporting suggests the root of the problem lies in the toxic, divisive rhetoric already present in the US. Addressing that fundamental issue should be the focus, not just pointing fingers at outside influences.
Tragic that this event is being used to spread disinformation. While foreign influence is worrying, the core problem seems to be the divisive, hostile rhetoric already present in the US. Addressing that fundamental issue should be the priority, not just blaming outside actors.
I agree, the homegrown nature of this discourse is the real concern here. Outsiders may try to amplify it, but the toxicity is originating domestically. Tackling that systemic problem should be the focus, not just scapegoating foreign powers.
This is a concerning situation, with foreign powers seemingly trying to exploit the tragedy for their own agendas. However, the reporting suggests the real problem is the toxic discourse already present in the US, not just outside interference. Addressing that fundamental issue should be the priority.
While foreign disinformation is worrying, the core problem here seems to be the divisive, hostile rhetoric already present in American public discourse. Tackling that underlying toxicity should be the main focus, not just scapegoating outside actors. A nuanced approach is needed.
Tragic to see this tragedy being used to spread further disinformation. The reporting indicates the real issue is the existing divisiveness within the US, not just foreign interference. Addressing that systemic problem in public discourse should be the priority, not just blaming outsiders.