The Georgian Government Knows Well How to Manipulate Public Opinion

What messages are the Georgian authorities and opposition forces circulating on social media? How actively is social media used to influence public opinion in Georgia? Who is winning the competition for influence, and do social media play a crucial role as a channel of communication in the country? These are the questions we discuss in our interview with TAMAR KINTSURASHVILI, Executive Director of the Media Development Foundation (MDF).

- Which social media platforms are most widely used by residents of Georgia? And what factors influence people’s choice of these platforms?

T.K - Facebook is the most popular social media platform in Georgia. Mainstream media and different actors are developing their platforms on Facebook. Some of them are transparent, where you can see who stands behind them. But usually, either Russia-affiliated actors or domestic government-affiliated actors, sometimes the opposition as well, but their resources are not equal, develop anonymous pages to influence public opinion on critical topics or reach audience. This is in general.

But among youth, we see a tendency that shows that they are consuming more TikTok or Instagram, more entertainment-type short videos rather than Facebook content, which is different from those platforms.

- Who is currently winning the competition for public attention: traditional media (television, online/print media) or social networks? Which communication channels do the government, opposition groups, and civil society representatives prefer to use when addressing the public, especially during critical periods such as elections, political and other crises, or when sharing urgent news?

T.K - According to opinion polls, TV still remains the main source of information. But most popular TV channels are controlled by the government. Opposition-affiliated TV channels are lacking resources.

And it's difficult to balance the power of the government, which is not only about controlling mainstream media but also about using different channels on social media. They are also abusing administrative resources for influencing public opinion.

Opposition-affiliated Facebook pages are relatively limited. They also have their own channels of communication, of course. But it's about an equal distribution of resources between the ruling party and local stakeholders, local opposition. Russia-affiliated actors are mostly conservative parties and their media platforms.

But they are discredited because being openly pro-Russian is not popular, while the same messages spread through government channels are popular because they don't pretend to advocate for a closer relationship with Russia, but rather to protect Georgian identity from the threats coming from the divided West. So, conservative versus liberal, etc.

- Which groups (government officials, political party leaders, civil society organizations) are the most active users of social media in your country? For whom has social media become a primary tool of communication?

T.K. - All of them are using these resources because it's cheaper.

And when you have limited access to TV channels controlled by different political groups, it's easier to use social media for this purpose. Your previous question was who is winning this information war, I would say the government, because they have more resources and diverse resources to reach different audiences. And their messages and modus operandi are more, I would say, their strategy of communication relies on public opinion, and they know quite well how to manipulate public opinion.

For instance, instead of saying that we are leading the country towards Russia, they are saying we are still moving towards Europe with dignity and peace, while they are isolating the country from the West because they abandoned the EU accession agenda several years ago. And they are not following any commitments, which is a precondition of membership. It's easier to manipulate public opinion for more resourceful actors, and the government is clearly better resourced.

And this is the main problem here. We are not talking about FIMI, which is also a problem. Russian information interference is also happening right now.

We're talking about domestic informational autocracy, which is more misleading to understand the harm coming from these messages.

- And do the officials in Georgia directly use Facebook or other social networks?

T.K. - Yes, politicians and high-level political officials are using social media.

We're not talking only about official channels of communication. There are government-controlled mainstream TV media outlets and their social media accounts, as well as fake accounts mimicking some news media outlets to mislead the public. They use some journalist-related terms in their headlines, pretending to be news media while they are not transparent and are connected to different actors.

Besides this, we identified four cases when fake accounts stealing the identities of different people were quoted in mainstream pro-government media as real people to manipulate public opinion. So, this is a combination of everything. And when you have rich resources and there are no red lines in how you operate, you can take everything in control.

And, besides this, the government's strategy from the beginning was to create parallel institutions to legitimate institutions, like their own fact-checking platform and their own media self-regulation body, to discredit independent institutions and to mimic democratic processes.

- How does your country experience Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI) and other forms of public opinion manipulation in practice? What role do social networks play in these hybrid attacks and in efforts to counter them?

T.K. - The Georgian Dream ruling party became openly anti-Western, and it started after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Russia-affiliated actors were using Facebook media for broadcasting and spreading news, mostly focusing on the discourse related to conservative West versus Orthodox Russia and advocating for a closer military relationship with Russia.

These people were backed by Alexander Dugin, an ideologist of the Eurasian Union. But since their openly declared goal was to bring Georgia closer to Russia, they were less popular. And now the government took over the information space.
I am talking about Russian proxies, conservative movement Alt-info, and their Facebook page.

These are groups affiliated with Dugin, and Dugin was supporting the pogrom in 2020 (this refers to the violence against protesters who were demonstrating against the results of the 2020 autumn parliamentary elections — Ed.), when people and journalists were beaten. The Facebook pages of the conservative movement and Alexander Dugin were very active against this gathering.

During the elections, they used different methods through Telegram channels and Facebook pages. But the Russia-affiliated media ecosystem is more fragmented, unlike government-controlled channels.

There is also some Chinese influence on our media ecosystem. The Chinese embassy provides funding for some Russia-affiliated TV channels to produce programs, but Chinese influence is less visible compared to other actors as well. And the Iranian embassy became very active over the last year. The ambassador personally uses a Facebook page to communicate with Georgian audiences in Georgian and in their own language, in response to criticism of how the Georgian government supports local Iranian religious groups.

This video was produced with the financial support of the European Union and the German Marshall Fund of the United States Transatlantic Foundation (GMF TF). Its contents are the sole responsibility of the “Region” Research Center and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union or the GMF TF.