Introduction
This essay examines the extent to which Freedman’s paradigms of chaos and control illuminate the rapid spread and contestation of information during the opening phase of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The analysis focuses on content circulated on TikTok and Telegram between late February and May 2022, platforms whose affordances facilitated both decentralised user-generated material and more centrally directed messaging. The discussion draws on established insights from strategic communications literature while acknowledging the limitations of applying any single theoretical framework to fluid digital environments.
Freedman’s Paradigms of Chaos and Control
Freedman’s work on contemporary conflict emphasises two contrasting strategic impulses in information environments. The control paradigm reflects efforts by state actors to shape narratives through disciplined messaging, selective disclosure and suppression of contradictory material. The chaos paradigm, by contrast, highlights the unpredictable consequences of multiple competing voices, algorithmic amplification and the rapid diffusion of unverified content. These ideas provide a useful lens for examining platform dynamics, yet they remain abstract constructs that require careful contextualisation when applied to specific social-media ecosystems.
Platform Affordances and Early Information Flows
TikTok’s short-video format and recommendation algorithm proved particularly conducive to chaotic information flows in the first weeks of the invasion. Users uploaded footage of air-raid sirens, destroyed vehicles and civilian evacuations, often without clear provenance. Such content spread beyond national audiences within hours, complicating Russian attempts to maintain a coherent narrative of a limited “special military operation.” Telegram channels, while also hosting user-generated material, offered a more mixed environment in which both official Ukrainian government updates and Russian state-affiliated outlets maintained dedicated channels with large follower counts. This combination of decentralised virality on TikTok and semi-structured channel networks on Telegram illustrates the simultaneous operation of chaotic and controlled dynamics rather than the dominance of either paradigm.
State and Non-State Actors’ Use of the Platforms
Ukrainian officials and military spokespersons actively cultivated Telegram channels to release time-stamped statements and verified imagery, an approach consistent with attempts at narrative control. Russian authorities, meanwhile, sought to limit domestic exposure to contrary information through platform restrictions and domestic legislation, yet faced significant leakage via VPNs and diaspora accounts. International audiences encountered competing content that blended verified reporting with emotionally charged clips whose authenticity was difficult to establish in real time. These developments demonstrate that control strategies were pursued but repeatedly undercut by the platforms’ structural openness to rapid, cross-border circulation of material.
Limitations of the Paradigms in Digital Contexts
Although Freedman’s framework usefully highlights tension between order and disorder, it offers limited guidance on the role of platform algorithms in shaping visibility. TikTok’s recommendation system, for instance, rewarded emotionally intense clips irrespective of their alignment with any state narrative, thereby amplifying content that originated outside formal information hierarchies. Consequently, the chaos observed on the platform cannot be attributed solely to deliberate strategic choice or state incapacity; it also reflected commercially driven design features. Similarly, Telegram’s weaker content-moderation regime allowed both authentic eyewitness reports and fabricated claims to coexist, a condition only partially captured by the control-chaos binary.
Conclusion
Freedman’s paradigms of chaos and control provide a partial but illuminating account of information dynamics on TikTok and Telegram during the opening months of the Russia-Ukraine war. They usefully foreground the contrast between state efforts at narrative management and the decentralising effects of user-generated content. However, the paradigms understate the independent influence of platform architectures and algorithmic curation. A fuller analysis therefore requires integration of strategic-communication theory with platform studies in order to capture the hybrid and evolving nature of contemporary conflict information environments.
References
- Freedman, L. (2017) The Future of War: A History. London: Allen Lane.
- Freedman, L. (2022) ‘The Ukraine conflict and the future of information warfare’, Survival, 64(3), pp. 7–28.
- Zeitzoff, T. (2017) ‘How social media is changing conflict’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(9), pp. 1970–1991.
