After Ukrainian drone attacks on data centers operated by the Russian technology company Yandex, claims began circulating online that the strikes had disrupted or even halted the activity of Russian propaganda bots. These accounts are often accused of spreading disinformation or artificially amplifying content on social media. During the Warsaw Security Forum, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also suggested that the attacks on Yandex data centers had disrupted bot activity, saying "there was less hate, less division, and fewer provocations [because] there were fewer bots." In response to BBC Verify, Zelenskyy's office said that, rather than referring to reduced bot activity, the president was "talking about the atmosphere on social media." The office added that it had seen "reports of fewer provocative and hateful comments" from many social media users.
So far, however, there is no clear evidence linking the attacks to a decline in bot activity. According to Josef Holnburger, managing director of the Center for Monitoring, Analysis and Strategy (CeMAS), there is currently "no decline in Russian disinformation activities that could be explained by the attack on Yandex data centers." CeMAS systematically monitors such campaigns. Nevertheless, a misleading graph has been circulated as supposed evidence.
It was shared, for example, by Czech Member of the European Parliament Tomáš Zdechovský. His post was viewed more than four million times on X. He suggested that the graph might demonstrate a decline in "online activity around AfD," although he did not specify what kind of activity he meant.
In reality, the graph most likely demonstrates nothing at all. The German-language graph is titled "Daily activity over 3 months." It appears to show activity remaining relatively stable before dropping sharply in early October, roughly coinciding with the attacks on Yandex data centers. However, nothing in the graph itself indicates that this relates to AfD-related online activity.
The same applies to the graph's underlying data. It is unclear which data were used. No source is provided, nor is there any explanation of the data collection process or calculation method for the alleged "activity," which initially ranges between 6,000 and 7,000 before falling below 3,000.
Particularly striking is that the graph extends to October 15. Its final data point appears to correspond to October 14 – a date that was still in the future when the graph first appeared online on October 11. Data for a future date cannot exist.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
