Main narratives:
- Latvia is Russophobic.
Overview:
After intensive coverage of geopolitical events in August, pro-Kremlin Telegram channels reverted to their usual Russophobia in Latvia narratives, albeit with fewer posts compared to previous weeks.
The channels used the beginning of the school to characterize Latvian language education policies transitioning to education only in the Latvian language as discriminatory, using loaded terminology to describe policy discussions about language used for instruction in schools. The messaging also targets individual Latvian officials and public figures, using derogatory labels and making unfounded accusations.
The posts employ several rhetorical strategies typical of hostile information campaigns: they take legitimate policy discussions out of context, apply inflammatory labels to officials and citizens, and frame standard governmental functions as evidence of systematic problems. The language used is deliberately extreme, for example, calling people nazis, incorporating historical references, and provocative terminology designed to inflame rather than inform.
These examples illustrate how pro-Kremlin channels operate not by creating entirely false information, but by taking real events and policy discussions and recontextualizing them within hostile interpretive frameworks. The goal appears to be fostering negative perceptions of Latvian institutions and society among Russian-speaking audiences. The inflammatory nature of this messaging represents a clear example of how hostile narratives can be constructed around factual events through selective framing and provocative language choices.
