Authors

Discussion

RT France (Russia Today) is a transnational television channel financed by the Russian state. Launched in France in December 2017, it was banned in the European Union in early March 2022 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Often criticized by French authorities, media, and major tech platforms as a Russian disinformation and propaganda tool, RT has acquired quite a nefarious reputation in the country. Still, it had over a million followers on Facebook and YouTube before the ban. Even after the ban, some audiences have remained faithful to the channel, accessing it through VPNs or from countries outside the EU. In fact, some people have publicly supported the channel during the ban by using the hashtag #soutienRTFrance (“#supportRTFrance”) on Twitter (now X) or by signing petitions on Change.org.

This paper, based on doctoral research, focuses on these audiences to understand what draws them to RT. First, we examine the channel’s strategy. While functioning as a tool of Russian public diplomacy, RT presents itself as an alternative medium opposed to the “mainstream,” claiming to be a victim of “censorship” and “discrimination.” It benefits from this dual status in much the same way that Russia positions itself in the international arena as a “subaltern empire” (Morozov, 2013). Despite its imperial ambitions, Russia aligns itself with developing countries opposing Western “neocolonialism,” particularly in Africa.

Second, through an analysis of social media comments during the year following the channel’s ban and more than 60 interviews, we identify who these audiences are and what attracts them to RT. Some can be described as subaltern counterpublics (Fraser, 1990), people who feel excluded from the dominant public sphere, “marginalized,” and opposed to traditional media and authority figures. Consequently, the more the channel is criticized or restricted by traditional actors, the more these individuals place their trust in RT, perceiving its exclusion and struggles as similar to their own. In this way, audiences construct their own interpretations of messages intended to criticize or undermine RT. Their reception of such narratives is oppositional (Hall, 1980). As a result, a sentimental bond develops between the channel and its audiences, a bond that cannot easily be broken through a simple ban or accusations of spreading disinformation.

On a broader scale, this study underscores the importance of focusing not only on public diplomacy media content but also on its active reception by audiences, rather than dismissing them as passive or easily influenced. To effectively counter narratives aimed at undermining democratic regimes, it is essential to understand how such messages are received by audiences who feel that their grievances are overlooked by “traditional” or national media outlets.