Russian-Backed Chemical & Biological Weapons Disinformation Resurges Ahead of 2024 Election
New Today: Exploring the resurgence of Russian-backed online disinformation. Plus, a look at how social media reacted to the first 2024 debate
Welcome to Detect, Decipher, Defend with PeakMetrics—your go-to resource for navigating reputation challenges. Explore recent case studies and learn how to detect, decipher, and defend against emerging narrative threats to win the week. Let’s dive in!
Resurgent Summer for Biological and Chemical Weapons Disinformation
Recycled, repackaged, and recirculating — Russian-backed online misinformation and disinformation related to chemical and biological weapons found new life this summer. Although versions of these zombie mis/disinformation falsehoods have been repeatedly fact-checked and debunked, each new circulation of these falsehoods exposes a potentially new audience to these recycled narratives. Particularly in the lead-up to the U.S. presidential election in November, narratives related to chemical/biological weapons have the potential to ignite into a firestorm overnight.
Even in their latest developments, these campaigns largely tread well-worn paths related to three key allegations pushed directly from the Russian government:
Chemical weapons in Ukraine
U.S. bioweapons laboratories
U.S. medical experimentation on Black people
Each of these narratives, previously ignited during the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak in 2020 and Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, reared their heads in new articles and social media posts during summer 2024. In the past month alone, PeakMetrics found approximately 86,000 posts on X (Twitter), in English and Russian, referencing Ukraine and biological/chemical weapons.
Our “Detect. Decipher. Defend.” Framework
Detect:
The narrative publicized by the Russian government that the U.S. is supplying chemical weapons to Ukraine drove the biggest spike in X (Twitter) posts in the last month, on August 25th.
Underscoring the recurrent narrative of this narrative, the original Russian news agency article that sparked this surge describes the U.S. as “remains the main supplier” of chemical weapons substances to the Ukrainian military. A post debunking this article, from a Russia watcher, was actually a key driver of the August 25th spike.
This post was viewed approximately 55,000 times and drew nearly 1,000 reposts. In some cases, this viral post was shared by users advancing the Russian narrative on U.S. chemical weapons that the author was attempting to refute — highlighting the risks that debunking some false narratives may inadvertently amplify them.
Decipher:
At the same time, PeakMetrics detected a counter-narrative from the Ukrainian side, calling out Western allies for their alleged silence and complicity on Russia’s use of chemical weapons on Ukrainian troops.
This narrative was sparked by a Kyiv Independent English-language news article, ‘Silent killer’: Russia boosts grinding Donbas advance with chemical warfare. PeakMetrics found that the article was reposted or linked more than 3,500 times on X (Twitter) since its publication on August 30th. A key social media post framing the article in the context of alleged silence from Ukraine’s Western allies was reposted more than 1,000 times and received upwards of 120,000 views.
Defend:
Weaving together recurring disinformation themes around U.S. “biolabs” and the history of medical exploitation of African-Americans, PeakMetrics detected the resurgence of a narrative alleging the relocation of U.S. bioweapons laboratories from Ukraine to Africa.
The timing of this narrative’s resurgence appears calculated to build on fears surrounding the World Health Organization declaration of a global health emergency for monkeypox — in response to the resurgence of cases in Africa.
Back in 2023, a senior Russian government official alleged that the U.S. moved part of its "unfinished" Ukrainian projects researching biological weapons to African nations including Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, and Uganda.
In June 2024, that narrative was recycled by the same Russian senior official, Igor Kirillov, and spread in an article by Russian state-owned RT and by the Russian embassy in South Africa in a post on X (Twitter). Notably, a video of Kirillov making this claim was posted on X (Twitter) by account called @AfricanHub_ and viewed more than 37,000 times. The account, which describes itself as “telling the African stories to the world,” intersperses African interest stories and videos with content that is anti-U.S. and pro-Russian.
As the monkeypox health emergency evolves, this threatening narrative has the potential to accelerate.
Bonus: From Conspiracy Theories to Celebrity Endorsements: How Social Media Reacted to the First 2024 Debate
The first 2024 presidential debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris sparked major online discussions on X (formerly Twitter). From fact-checking to conspiracy theories, users quickly weighed in. PeakMetrics analyzed the conversation, highlighting how moderators, conspiracy theories, and celebrity endorsements shaped the broader discussion. Let’s explore the key narratives from the debate.
Moderation & Fact-Checking:
During the debate, from 9:00 PM to 11:00 PM ET, PeakMetrics detected about 5.8 million posts related to the event on X. Among these, approximately 16% of the posts specifically referenced the ABC News debate’s moderation or fact-checking. There were 950,000 posts that highlighted moderators and their active role in enforcing the debate rules, a significant increase compared to the previous debates moderated by CNN. The heightened focus on fact-checking and rule enforcement drew praise from several users, indicating a growing demand for transparency and accountability in these high-stakes political events.
The "Haitians Eating Pets" Conspiracy Theory:
PeakMetrics found that the conspiracy theory, amplified by VP candidate JD Vance, that Haitian migrants were eating pets in Ohio was mentioned in a sustained number of X (Twitter) posts in the lead-up to the debate — hovering between 40,000 and 20,000 posts per hour from September 9th into the hour the debate began on September 10th.
While this theory gained momentum online in the lead-up to the debate, former President Trump’s reference to the theory during the debate appeared to flip the script and opened the theory to online mockery. The number of posts mentioning the language specifically used by former President Trump to reference this theory during the debate — including “they’re eating the pets” — was 83% higher than the number of posts more specifically describing the conspiracy and mentioning Haitians, immigrants, and migrants. Posts quoting former President Trump were largely mocking his reference to the theory using his own language.
During the debate, there were approximately 121,000 posts referencing the conspiracy theory in the language that had previously gained traction online — mentioning pets and animals being eaten by Haitians, migrants, or immigrants. In response to a question about immigration, former President Trump referenced the theory saying, "They're eating the dogs, the people that came in, they're eating the cats.” During the debate, X (Twitter) posts using Trump’s language — “they’re eating the pets/dogs/cats” — soared to approximately 223,000 posts.
Taylor Swift Endorsement:
Taylor Swift's endorsement of Kamala Harris added a cultural twist to the political conversation. After Swift endorsed Harris with the phrase “childless cat lady,” posts referencing "childless cat ladies" skyrocketed by 17,000% within the hour following her endorsement. The number of posts jumped from just 300 to over 53,000 between 10:00 PM and 12:00 AM EST.
Meanwhile, PeakMetrics found the number of X (Twitter) posts mentioning variations of “Swifties for Trump” were on the decline in the lead-up to Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris late on September 10th. Posts peaked on August 19th — when former President Trump posted AI generated images of Taylor Swift and Swifties — falsely suggesting her support for his campaign. Compared to this peak 81,000 posts), the number of posts mentioning “Swifties for Trump” on September 9th were 96% percent lower (2,800 posts).
In the hour following Taylor Swift’s endorsement of the Harris-Walz campaign post-debate, posts mentioning “Swifties for Kamala/Harris” were ~370% higher than posts mentioning “Swifties for Trump”.
As the election season unfolds, it’s clear that social media will continue to shape and spread political narratives, and platforms like PeakMetrics will be key in tracking and understanding the impact of these digital conversations on public perception.
The latest news & insights from the PeakMetrics team: