Information Warfare, Virtual Politics, and Narrative Dominance

 

By Lilian H. Hill

As the Internet becomes more advanced, it is giving rise to new challenges for democracy. Social media platforms sort users into like-minded groups, forming echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs. Pariser (2011) states that in a world shaped by personalization, we are shown news that aligns with our preferences and reinforces our existing beliefs. Because these filters operate invisibly, we may remain unaware of what information is excluded. This dynamic contributes to the growing disconnect between individuals with differing political views, making mutual understanding more difficult. It also enables extremist groups to harness these platforms for harmful purposes. While diverse opinions are inherent to politics, social media has created a fast-paced, ever-evolving space where political discord is continuously generated (De’Alba, 2024).

Information warfare is the strategic use of information to influence, disrupt, or manipulate public opinion, decision-making, or infrastructure, often in service of political, military, or economic goals. Instead of physical force, information warfare targets the cognitive and informational environments of adversaries. Pai (2024) comments that information warfare has become central to international politics in the Information Age in which society is shaped by the creation, use, and impact of information. According to Rid (2020), information warfare aims to undermine trust between individuals and institutions. It includes tactics like propaganda, disinformation, cyberattacks, and psychological operations. In today’s digital era, state and non-state actors use social media, news platforms, and digital technologies to conduct disinformation campaigns, often blurring the lines between truth and manipulation (Pomerantsev, 2019).

Virtual politics refers to the strategic use of digital technologies, including social media, artificial intelligence, and data analytics, to manipulate political perceptions, simulate democratic engagement, and manipulate public opinion. Originally coined in the post-Soviet context, the term captured how political elites created fake parties, opposition figures, and civil society groups to manufacture the illusion of pluralism and democratic process (Krastev, 2006). Contemporary virtual politics functions through multiple mechanisms. One tactic is the creation of simulated political actors and events, where governments or interest groups establish fake NGOs, social movements, or social media accounts to fragment opposition or feign civic engagement. These simulations create an illusion of public discourse while neutralizing dissent (Krastev, 2006). A contemporary example is Russia’s promotion of fake social media accounts and organizations during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Russian operatives created false personas, Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, and even staged events that appeared to be organized by grassroots American groups (Mueller, 2019).

Another core feature is the widespread use of disinformation and memetic warfare. Ascott (2020) notes that while internet memes may appear harmless, memetic warfare involves the deliberate circulation of false or misleading content to polarize populations or erode trust in institutions (Marwick & Lewis, 2017). A popular meme, Pepe the Frog is a green anthropomorphic frog usually portrayed with a humanoid body wearing a blue T-shirt. Originally apolitical, it expressed simple emotions like sadness and joy. The symbol was appropriated by the alt-right (alternate-right), a far-right white nationalist movement. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, some alt-right and white nationalist groups co-opted Pepe for propaganda, using edited versions to spread hateful or extremist messages. Another common meme, the NPC Wojak is an expressionless, grey-headed figure with a blank stare, a triangular nose, and a neutral mouth. NPC is an acronym for non-player characters, a term derived from video games. The NPC Wojak meme first appeared in 2018 to mock groups seen as conformist. The NPC meme gained traction before the 2018 U.S. midterm elections amid right-wing outrage over alleged social media censorship. Conservatives used it to portray liberals as unthinking “bots,” meaning individuals who lack internal monologue, unquestioningly accept authority, engage in groupthink, or adopt positions that reflect conformity and obedience.

The most insidious aspect of virtual politics lies in data-driven psychological manipulation. Social media and other platforms collect vast amounts of personal data that is used for targeted marketing and psychological persuasion. This shift from persuasion to manipulation erodes the foundation of informed democratic decision-making. Moreover, the performative nature of online political engagement often reduces participation to reactive, emotionally charged interactions, such as likes, shares, and outrage, instead of reasoned deliberation or civic dialogue (Sunstein, 2017).

 

Narrative Dominance and Virtual Politics

Narrative dominance refers to the phenomenon in which a particular storyline, interpretation, or framework becomes the prevailing lens through which events and realities are understood and perceived. It reflects the power to shape meaning, frame discourse, and control the perceived legitimacy of knowledge or truth. A contemporary example of narrative dominance is China’s global media campaign to reshape global perception of its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, deflect blame, criticize Western failures, spread alternative origin theories, and suppress dissenting domestic narratives (Zhou & Zhang, 2021).

 

In media, politics, and culture, dominant narratives can marginalize alternative viewpoints and solidify ideological control. In the digital age, virtual politics is a key arena in which narrative dominance is exercised and contested. Virtual politics involves the creation and circulation of curated realities that prioritize perception over policy or truth and thrive on controlling emotional responses and engagement.

 

Virtual Politics and Democracy

The consequences of information warfare, virtual politics, and narrative dominance for democracy are profound. Together, they result in diminished trust in public institutions and blur distinctions between reality and fiction. As digital platforms become the dominant venue for political communication, traditional forms of accountability —such as investigative journalism, public debate, and civic literacy —are weakened. In authoritarian regimes, virtual politics serve as a tool for controlling dissent while projecting a false image of openness. Even in democratic societies, the same tools sway elections, fragment publics, and distort political will (Bennett & Livingston, 2018). The challenge for democratic societies, then, is to develop regulatory, technological, and civic strategies to counteract the manipulative aspects of virtual politics without undermining legitimate political speech.

 

Narrative dominance in virtual politics involves creating an environment in which alternative realities are delegitimized or neglected. Narrative dominance reflects a shift from a politics of substance to a politics of spectacle and emotional resonance. Understanding this dynamic is essential for analyzing contemporary media landscapes, political behavior, and the challenges of democratic resilience in the digital era. Virtual politics is not merely about politics taking place online; it represents a fundamental transformation in how political reality is constructed, experienced, and contested. Because public life is mediated by screens, algorithms, and data, understanding the mechanics of virtual politics is critical to preserving democratic integrity and fostering genuine political engagement.

 

References

Ascott, T. (2020, February 16). How memes are becoming the new frontier of information warfare. The Strategist. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/how-memes-are-becoming-the-new-frontier-of-information-warfare/

Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317

De’Alba, L. M. (2024, April 15). The virtual realities of politics: Entrenched narratives and political entertainment in the age of social media. Uttryck Magazine. https://www.uttryckmagazine.com/2024/04/15/the-virtual-realities-of-politics-entrenched-narratives-and-political-entertainment-in-the-age-of-social-media/

Gerbaudo, P. (2018). The digital party: Political organisation and online democracy. Pluto Press.

Isaak, J., & Hanna, M. J. (2018). User data privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and privacy protection. Computer, 51(8), 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268

Krastev, I. (2006). Virtual politics: Faking democracy in the post-Soviet world. In Post-Soviet Affairs, 22(1), 63–67.

Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Research Institute. https://datasociety.net/library/media-manipulation-and-disinfo-online/

Mueller, R. S. (2019). Report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. U.S. Department of Justice.

Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin.

Pomerantsev, P. (2019). This is not propaganda: Adventures in the war against reality. PublicAffairs.

Rid, T. (2020). Active measures: The secret history of disinformation and political warfare. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.

Zhou, L., & Zhang, Y. (2021). China’s global propaganda push: COVID-19 and the strategic use of narrative. Journal of Contemporary China, 30(130), 611–628.