The news story about the "Narva People's Republic" group on social media has by now snowballed and become a major topic. It is especially popular among foreign journalists and bloggers. Narva Mayor Katri Raik has complained on social media that the pressure from foreign journalists is becoming unpleasant and is interfering with her work. She says these reports should not be given additional weight. Now that some time has passed, how do you assess the impact of the coverage of this issue?

The interest from foreign journalists has been disproportionately large and has taken up a great deal of my time because I have had to explain to them that this isolated phenomenon cannot in any way be linked to a sudden increase in the Russian threat to Estonia. That is the actual situation.

As for the accusations that Propastop improperly amplified the issue, I strongly disagree. As a niche channel focused on such topics, Propastop must notice and report on developments like this — which is exactly what we did. We did so in a way that was neither inflammatory nor panic-inducing. We pointed out that it was in its early stages and had few followers. However, the issue must be addressed and monitored further because the narrative behind it was aggressive, calling for the dismantling of the Estonian state and for separatism, and such a narrative has not appeared very often before.

That was precisely one of the reasons why our channel needed to cover it. Looking at what has taken place in Estonia's Russian-language social media over the years, it is quite clear that this marker indicated there is no natural internal demand within our Russian-speaking diaspora for such a narrative. There were indications that it was orchestrated from elsewhere.

Regarding amplification, Propastop is neither powerful nor large enough to automatically end up on the radar of major global media outlets. The amplification came from Estonian media itself. Propastop did not go out to conduct street interviews in Narva or widely promote the story. Nor can Propastop dictate to editorial offices what they should cover or whether they should further disseminate the findings it has published. Ultimately, if there is an elephant in the room and everyone sees it but no one talks about it, does that make the elephant any less real?

As I understand it, in this case there was no elephant because there was no actual movement to create a "Narva People's Republic" in the way it happened in Donetsk.

As we discussed, this is an information operation. It is Propastop's role to identify such operations and expose them.

In your assessment, why did various social media accounts, including some linked to Ukraine, start amplifying this and at times fueling hysteria? They combined it with earlier warnings about an imminent Russian invasion of the Baltic states, including reports by the German outlet Bild. They also added Russia's plans to create new military units and weapons systems in its western region and by putting all this together, created an exaggerated and inaccurate picture of the threat. Why was this done?

Yes, I have also responded to questions from several Ukrainian outlets and I have emphasized very clearly and repeatedly that this issue must not be overestimated or overexploited under any circumstances. It does not indicate any real increase in military threat from Russia toward Estonia or the Baltic region. Before a military threat materializes, a range of clear indicators typically emerge — and none of those are currently present; in fact, quite the opposite.

As for why Ukraine may see it as necessary to amplify this as part of its own information operations, one can reasonably assume that the aim is to consolidate Western support against Russia and to portray the Russian threat as greater than it is in order to secure more assistance. But that, in one way or another, is also an information operation.

There is a huge amount of information and information flow nowadays, especially in the context of war, and social media is full of fake news and various groups, including things similar to the "Narva People's Republic" topic. How do you at Propastop assess all of this? Do you sometimes face difficult judgment calls about what to cover and what not to? How do you weigh these decisions?

Yes, absolutely. We weigh these decisions very carefully and we monitored this channel or these channels for several weeks. As the topic developed, its nature and narrative became increasingly aggressive, to the point where there were calls to action and attempts to find people who would distribute leaflets locally. You never know — perhaps someone might have gone along with it, which could have brought the issue into the physical world and potentially created even more confusion.

So yes, of course we consider these things very carefully. Because we tracked and observed how the topic was evolving, we ultimately decided it was necessary to cover it at a stage when it was still as early as possible and did not yet pose a significant risk of escalation.

But can it be said in this case that the outcome you set as your goal — to signal and bring such sentiments to public attention — backfired and the issue got out of your control?

It did not get out of our control. We wrote about it in a relatively calm and restrained manner. Whether other outlets with greater influence and larger audiences pick it up and write about it is no longer within our control. A small niche channel like Propastop is not capable of amplifying such issues on its own.

You are not responsible if outlets like Delfi or Postimees pick it up from your information stream? It no longer concerns you?

How could we be responsible for that? These are major media organizations with many professional editors, editors-in-chief and news managers on staff — it is up to them how they respond to such matters. We cannot control the media and it is entirely up to each outlet to decide how it covers a story.

So you still maintain that the way this story was published by you was entirely appropriate and correct?

Yes, of course. It was appropriate and correct. And that is exactly what Propastop does.

How is Propastop connected to the Estonian Defense League?

Yes, this initiative was created more than 10 years ago by members of the Defense League and other volunteers, after Russia annexed Crimea and fueled that same separatism in eastern Ukraine. At that time, both within the Defense League and among like-minded people elsewhere, we analyzed the situation and concluded that we should create a channel for Estonia's information space where these issues could be addressed and written about. And that is what we have been doing.

Today, this circle includes not only Defense League members but is much broader. However, it is very clearly an initiative that originated with Defense League members and remains connected to them to this day.

Does Propastop officially fall under the Defense League in any way?

Formally, we have established a separate non-profit organization in order to apply for various project-based grants. That makes things significantly easier.

Where has your main funding come from and where does it come from now?

We have applied for funding from the Government Office, the Ministry of Defense, as well as from foreign embassies and various foundations. However, Propastop is independent in its editorial decisions. We have not entered into any project or funding agreements that would allow a funder to dictate what we write about and what we do not.

So you are the head of Propastop?

You could say I am one of the leaders. We have an editorial group that manages and coordinates our activities.

Who else is involved alongside you?

We have kept this circle anonymous for various reasons. The first is security. We all operate from our homes, using our personal networks and computers, alongside our families — and given that, as an outlet, we have been subject to cyberattacks and knowing the practices elsewhere where individuals exposing such issues can themselves become targets of cyber or other online attacks, this is the main reason why we keep the group anonymous.

The second idea is that what matters is that the cat catches mice, not what color it is. Behind the work we do are people who are professionals in their fields: former journalists, communications specialists, marketing professionals, historians, sociologists and others. They recognize the importance of contributing to this area and have been willing to do so.

What is your message to the Estonian public? There is an especially large volume of information right now — very diverse, including different kinds of propaganda, even from our own politicians who may want to use the situation for political purposes. How should people process this information, navigate this sea of content and keep a cool head?

Yes, that is the key question — how to stay level-headed. Politicians should not exploit such issues to promote or implement their own political agendas in ways that could deepen divisions in society or irresponsibly amplify certain narratives.

What we at Propastop have tried to cultivate is a broader understanding of propaganda — its nature, the techniques used and how it affects people. The goal is to give people the knowledge they need to keep a clear head: to understand whether a given topic is being framed in the interests of a hostile narrative or not.

We know that such topics typically appeal to emotions and emotions are a powerful trigger for reactions — whether it's speaking out on social media or sharing things that perhaps should not be shared. As a society, we need to grow more resilient to such propaganda attacks and be able to assess them more appropriately. Through its articles, Propastop provides a kind of weekly "inoculation" toward that goal. Anyone interested in this topic can find material on our site on how to recognize propaganda and how to navigate and withstand the confusion of today's information environment.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!