Iran is the latest foreign government to make headlines for attempts to influence U.S. politics with emotionally charged “news” websites. Foundation for Defense of Democracies identified roughly twenty websites in a network of Iran-backed sites pretending to provide independent news and analysis while actually working to influence, and even manipulate, U.S. political discourse.
According to FDD, the sites share common servers and similar patterns for creating email addresses, among other indicators of shared ownership.
Some sites are left-wing and some are right-wing, but all focus on political opinions on controversial and emotional topics, including Puerto Rico status and Middle East conflicts. All are critical of the United States. All rely heavily on passionate presentations of misleading and false information.
Iran influence on Discourse about Puerto Rico
One such site, AfroMajority, published an article called “Condemning a History of Injustice: The Justice Department’s Repudiation of Racist Supreme Court Rulings” under the category of “Racism.” “In a groundbreaking move that marks a significant step towards rectifying a dark chapter in American legal history,” the article begins, “the Justice Department has unveiled plans to denounce a series of racist Supreme Court rulings from a century ago that perpetuated the systemic marginalization of individuals residing in U.S. territories.”
In fact, the Department of Justice did send a letter condemning the early 20th century Supreme Court decisions in the Insular Cases, but concern over the Insular Cases has persisted in the U.S. for many years and the Justice Department’s position on the matter was already well established. In past legal filings, the Department had already made clear that the Insular Cases contain reasoning and rhetoric that are “obviously anathema,” “indefensible and discredited,” and invoke “racist stereotypes” that are “indefensible and repugnant.” The letter may have been helpful reassurance, but cannot credibly claim to represent a “groundbreaking move,” newly “unveiled plans,” or “a significant step towards rectifying” the dark chapter in U.S. legal history.
The sensational tone and the Iranian coverage beg the question as to what the foreign nation is trying to accomplish and how likely Americans are to be influenced or manipulated by the Iranian campaign.
Another website, EvenPolitics, published “Puerto Ricans Are Calling for Change,” a pro-independence piece containing numerous factual errors, including an incorrect claim that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) said that statehood would be bad for Puerto Rico’s economy. As previously reported, the GAO did indeed do a report on the impact of statehood, but it made clear from the introduction to the report that it would not make policy recommendations. That was not its purpose. Its mission was to estimate how the Federal budget would have been different in a recent year if Puerto Rico had been a State.
The GAO report actually said that statehood would mean billions of dollars a year for Puerto Rico — and individual Puerto Ricans — but also billions for the Federal treasury.
Many of the statements on the Iran-linked “news” sites, such as EvenPolitics’s claims that polls show Puerto Rican voters prefer independence and “the PIP is the ideological group in Puerto Rico that has reliably raised money more than some other party,” are simply false. An analysis of donations by the Centro de Periodismo Investigativo, for example, found that the PIP received the least donations among political parties, and recent polls show that 73% of voters prefer statehood over independence. The factual falsehoods in the propaganda sites are all this easily debunked, but many readers do not make the effort to seek reliable information when offered a highly emotional opinion piece.
What’s the point?
Why should Iran try to influence American readers on the subject of Puerto Rico? Microsoft reported that these websites are an “effort to stir up controversy or sway voters” with future plans for “activities that are even more extreme, including intimidation or inciting violence against political figures or groups, with the ultimate goals of inciting chaos, undermining authorities, and sowing doubt about election integrity.”
Their report on these activities explains that Iranian groups worked in 2020 to sow discord and undermine trust in election legitimacy. By establishing apparent news and information websites ahead of national elections, the groups hope to influence – or manipulate – voters and the tenor of U.S. debate.
The sites similarly praise anti-Israel campus protests and, according the FDD’s review, criticize Israel, the United States, and Saudi Arabia while praising Iranian terrorist proxies such as Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
Why Puerto Rico?
The political status of Puerto Rico is an emotionally charged issue with the potential to be a divisive one. Many Americans have come to understand Puerto Rico’s colonial relationship with the United States and see how unfairly the residents of Puerto Rico are often treated. Calls to respond to these concerns that foster further division, and even violence, are disruptive to U.S. democracy. The Iranian strategy appears intended to cause these kinds of reactions.
“Disinformation actors use a variety of tactics,” says the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “Each of these tactics are designed to make disinformation actors’ messages more credible, or to manipulate their audience to a specific end. They often seek to polarize their target audience across contentious political or social divisions, making the audience more receptive to disinformation.”
Iran has made official demands at the United Nations for Puerto Rico’s independence, so it is possible that these websites are intended to support this outcome, swaying U.S. opinion to be more consistent with the Iranian position, as well as to interfere more generally in U.S. political discourse.
