Making Sense of Emotions and Affective Investments in War: RT and the Syrian Conflict on YouTube

Abstract

Within the context of an ‘affective turn’ in media studies and the social sciences, this article explores the methodological challenges of researching emotions when studying online videos of conflict. Our study focuses on videos of the Syrian conflict shared on YouTube by the Russian state funded international broadcaster, RT. We propose that the concept of affective investment is a useful pivot between online videos of conflict and audience responses to them. Our study interrogates the role that affective investments play in 1) RT’s YouTube representations of the Syrian conflict, and 2) audience comments on these videos. We draw attention to the important intersections of RT’s representations of the conflict and audiences’ affective investments in those representations, and draw attention to the methodological issues raised. Our empirical focus is two critical junctures in the Syrian conflict: the commencement of Russia’s military intervention; and following the announcement of plans to withdraw Russian troops. We conclude by discussing the utility of affective investments in war when assessing online coverage of conflict, and suggesting avenues for further development.

Understanding RT’s Audiences: Exposure Not Endorsement for Twitter Followers of Russian State-Sponsored Media

“…Unsurprisingly, its viewers, like for most international news channels, tend to skew toward highly educated males” (Orrtung and Nelson 2019: 14). A study of YouTube comments made in response to RT videos about the Syrian conflict found that the sample of audiences analyzed tended to support the broadcaster’s characterization of the conflict and expressed support for Russia alongside anger and mistrust of the “West” (Chatterje-Doody and Crilley 2019a: 174). Richter (2017: 13) characterizes RT’s audience as comprised of people who support conspiracy theories because they are “distrustful” of “mainstream media.” Similarly, Birrell (2018) suggests that RT’s online audiences are vulnerable to the “malign force” of its media content, and are situated on the fringes of mainstream politics, attracted to niche interests and incendiary ideas, as well as anti-American and anti-“Western” discourse.…”

“…It can also be done without reciprocation, which means that it is not dependent upon anyone else (as with two-way ties on platforms such as Facebook). Twitter followers are not equivalent to a traditional broadcast audience, nor even to the engaged “active” audiences who comment on YouTube videos (Chatterje-Doody and Crilley 2019a; Crilley and Chatterje-Doody 2020a, 2020b). Indeed, a user might follow an account but never engage with it—and simply forget to unfollow it.…”

‘Russia isn’t a country of Putins!’: How RT bridged the credibility gap in Russian public diplomacy during the 2018 FIFA World Cup

“…Finally, the tendency to focus on viral, humorous, potentially controversial content, such as Pogba’s trolling of English fans and Maradona’s eccentric behaviour as well as Internet responses to it, extends RT’s usual practice of attempting to provoke an emotional reaction from audiences, thus boosting online discussion and viewership (Chatterje-Doody and Crilley, 2019; Miazhevich, 2018). RT journalists confirmed that the sports desk, both during the World Cup and beyond it, would aim not only to break the news to their audiences as quickly as possible, but also to ‘write our [stories] in a way that would get our audience to interact’ (Armstrong, 2020, Interview).…”

“Why attacking the Bureau of Industry and Commerce?”: news value flow to news comments on Chinese social media

“…Based on a contrast study of letters to tabloid and mainstream newspapers, Smith and Adendorff (2014) reveal readers’ affiliation around a bond with valuation concerning the topic of education. Chatterje-Doody and Crilley (2019), adopting the concept of “affective investments”, explore online audiences’ emotional reactions to media images of war. These studies provide a general picture of textual patterns or emotional tracks in relation to readers’ response to news.…”