乐鱼 体育

The United States and Europe continue to grapple with Russian efforts to influence Western elites and democratic processes. In the latest development, U.S. prosecutors two Russian nationals with paying a Tennessee-based firm $10 million to 鈥渃reate and distribute content to U.S. audiences with hidden Russian government messaging.鈥� A host of internet domains used in the Russian-directed influence campaign were seized.  

Reporters from , , and other outlets have identified the company in question, unnamed in the indictment, as Tenet Media. Operating for nearly a year, Tenet appears to be part of an ecosystem of conservative media resources, based on its list of contributors. The company has published content produced by several prominent conservative political commentators including Tim Pool, Benny Johnson, and Dave Rubin. , Tenet鈥檚 talent pool has a total of about six million subscribers on YouTube.

Since its public launch, the company has released nearly 2,000 videos, amassing over 16 million views on YouTube alone, . The prosecution argues that this operation was funded through a chain of transactions by RT, a Russian state-funded and state-run outlet with a global presence. The production company never disclosed to its contributors or viewers that it was financed and directed by RT, which means that the contributors were involved in the campaign unwittingly.

Russia鈥檚 Influence Tactics

The extent to which Tenet鈥檚 commentators tweaked their messaging based on guidelines provided from RT-linked handlers remains unclear. It is also uncertain how much influence these videos had on American voters. For the U.S. market, 16 million views is a relatively modest number. However, the operation might have been halted before it reached its full potential.

鈥淭here are several key factors to consider鈥� in measuring this campaign鈥檚 impact, says Lev Gershenzon, founder and CEO of The True Story, a Berlin-based, propaganda-free news aggregation service, in a conversation with The Russia File. 鈥淔irst, to fully assess the scope of the coverage, we need to account for how the content spreads organically鈥攃ounting all the reposts that emerged from the initial throw-in. Second, it is likely that the FBI has disclosed only the facts, for which they have solid evidence, meaning there are probably more facts out there,鈥� he said. 鈥淭hird,鈥� he continued, 鈥渋n highly polarized societies, an author seeking to influence the political situation does not need tens of millions of views. In the U.S., the outcome of the election may hinge on hundreds of thousands鈥攑erhaps even tens of thousands鈥攐f votes in swing states.鈥�

On a broader level, the operation uncovered by U.S. authorities offers a glimpse into Russian influence tactics, which are replicated in various campaigns worldwide, including in Africa and Latin America. The Kremlin and its propaganda chiefs have long understood that Russia鈥檚 soft power in the West is virtually nonexistent, likely limited to its historical high culture. Yet Moscow continues to rely on its , which includes leveraging local influencers, using controversial media outlets, and exploiting societal divisions.

This approach is on full display in one of the RT internal documents seized by FBI and attached to the as evidence. It is RT鈥檚 for a 鈥済uerilla media campaign in the U.S.鈥� The Department of Justice has translated the Russian document into English. The 鈥淐ontent of the campaign鈥� paragraph reads, in part: 鈥淭here is no point of justifying Russia and no one to justify it to. All American politicians and influencers are patriots and supporters of American supremacy.鈥� The paragraph continues: 鈥淗owever,鈥� people in 鈥淯.S. political party A [apparently Republican]鈥re dissatisfied of dramatic decline in the standard of living and large expenditures on offensive policy of the United States in Europe and Ukraine. They are afraid of losing the American way of life and the 鈥楢merican Dream.鈥� It is these sentiments that should be exploited in the course of an information campaign in/for the United States.鈥�

The authors of this document then offer their analysis of the American political landscape. They label 鈥淯.S. political party B鈥� (apparently, the Democratic party) as 鈥渇ar-left globalists who advocate for perversion of traditional moral and religious values,鈥� while they portray supporters of 鈥淯.S. political party A鈥� (apparently, Republicans) as 鈥渘ormal people whose priority is to preserve traditions of the American way of life.鈥�

Exploiting Divisions

Regardless of the effectiveness of this particular campaign, it reveals Russia鈥檚 interpretation of American politics and indicates that it will likely continue to exploit this narrative in future influence operations.

Rather than relying on traditional soft power, which has failed to gain traction in the West, the Kremlin is employing a more subversive strategy. By tapping into preexisting divides within Western societies, especially in highly polarized political environments, Russia can amplify discord and erode trust in democratic institutions without ever needing to justify its own actions. The focus is not on promoting Russia's image but on weakening the cohesion of its geopolitical rivals.

This strategy is not unique to the U.S. In Europe, Russia has used similar tactics to fuel nationalist movements, exploit dissatisfaction with immigration policies, and undermine support for NATO and the European Union. By aligning with far-right and far-left factions in different countries, Moscow tailors its messaging to resonate with localized grievances, all while remaining at arm鈥檚 length, often through opaque funding mechanisms and covert media campaigns.

What makes this approach particularly effective is that it does not require massive audiences to succeed. As Gershenzon pointed out, in a closely contested election, swaying even a small percentage of voters in key regions can shift outcomes. The real danger lies in the cumulative effect of such operations: they may not swing every election or influence every decision, but over time, they create an atmosphere of distrust and instability that weakens democratic resilience.

The opinions expressed in this article are those solely of the author and do not reflect the views of the Kennan Institute.