Kingdom of Trolls? Influence Operations in the Saudi Twittersphere
Open accessAbstract
Saudi Arabia has one of the highest rates of Twitter penetration in the world. Despite high levels of repression, the platform is frequently used to discuss political topics. Recent disclosures from Twitter have revealed state-backed attempts at distorting the online information environment through influence operations (IOs). A growing body of research has investigated online disinformation and foreign-sponsored IOs in the English-speaking world; but comparatively little is known about online disinformation in other contexts or about the domestic use of IOs. Using public releases of IO tweets, we investigate the extent of such activity in Saudi Arabia. Benchmarking these tweets to four samples of Saudi Twitter users, we find that engagement with IO accounts was lower than engagement with the average user, but equal to engagement with news accounts. Network analysis reveals that engagement with IO accounts was largely driven by a small number of influential accounts.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital repression is primarily observed during periods of heightened contention, but these do not seem to be the moments when repressive legal capacities are developed.
“While digital repression is primarily observed during periods of heightened contention, 97 these do not seem to be the moments when repressive legal capacities are developed.”
From Legalizing control: the rise of restrictive internet regulation in sub-Saharan Africa (2026) · cites this paper as [97]
The citation follows the first clause, so the attributed claim is that digital repression is primarily observed during periods of heightened contention. The Abstract mentions Saudi Arabia’s history of repressing online critics, but neither it nor the retrieved passages on influence operations address when digital repression is primarily observed (searched: heightened contention, repressive legal capacities). (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Fast unfolding of communities in large networks
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008) · Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment · doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008 · Cited by 21,424 · cited 1× · see citing works
“We also color sets of nodes and edges by modularity score, following the community-detection technique proposed by Blondel et al. (2008).”
MethodThe spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847 · cited 1× · see citing works
“This would be consistent with previous published findings that false news stories diffuse more rapidly than verifiable news stories (Vosoughi et al., 2018).”
ResultLess than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook
Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aau4586 · Cited by 1,652 · cited 2× · see citing works
“To that end, we take inspiration from recent research quantifying the likelihood of exposure to false, misleading or actively malicious forms of information (Allen et al., 2020; Guess et al., 2019).”
BackgroundMethodKING, G., PAN, J., & ROBERTS, M. E. (2017) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055417000144 · Cited by 1,028 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A key finding is that the objective of IOs inside China’s “Great Firewall” is, more than anything, to distort the online information environment through sheer volume (King et al., 2017; Roberts, 2018).”
BackgroundIs the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose
Morstatter, F., Pfeffer, J., Liu, H., & Carley, K. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14401 · Cited by 863 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recent research on the Twitter sampling API reveals that it is vulnerable to artificial distortion and may not represent an actual 1% random sample (Morstatter et al., 2013; Pfeffer et al., 2018).”
BackgroundTrends in the diffusion of misinformation on social media
Allcott, H., Gentzkow, M. A., & Yu, C. (2019) · Research & Politics · doi:10.1177/2053168019848554 · Cited by 680 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Our goal is to contribute to recent efforts aimed at providing descriptive analysis of the scale of online disinformation (Allen et al., 2020; Allcott et al., 2019).”
BackgroundEvaluating the fake news problem at the scale of the information ecosystem
Allen, J., Howland, B., Mobius, M., Rothschild, D., & Watts, D. J. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aay3539 · Cited by 528 · cited 5× · see citing works
“First, information is consumed across multiple platforms, meaning that even if inaccurate or malicious forms of information proliferate on one medium, it may yet constitute a small proportion of overall information diets when assessed across multiple media—at the level of the “information ecosystem” (Allen et al., 202…”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialComputational Research in the Post-API Age
Freelon, D. (2018) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2018.1477506 · Cited by 336 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Third, much of the information shared online remains proprietary, inaccessible to the public, and subject to unpredictable changes in terms of use (Freelon, 2018; Pasquetto et al., 2020).”
BackgroundThe Global Disinformation Order: 2019 Global Inventory of Organised Social Media Manipulation
Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019) · Lincoln (University of Nebraska) · Cited by 302 · see citing works
Automating power: Social bot interference in global politics
Woolley, S. (2016) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v21i4.6161 · Cited by 281 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Researchers have identified evidence of Saudi Arabia using computational propaganda to spread pro-government messages and discredit opposition since 2013 (Woolley, 2016).”
BackgroundBail, C. A., Guay, B., Maloney, E., Combs, A., Hillygus, D. S., Merhout, F., Freelon, D., & Volfovsky, A. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1906420116 · Cited by 224 · cited 5× · see citing works
“A first cause for skepticism is that engagement with false or unreliable information promoted by coordinated IO campaigns may not actually affect behaviour or attitudes (Guess et al., 2020; Bail et al., 2020).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialHow Saudi Crackdowns Fail to Silence Online Dissent
PAN, J., & SIEGEL, A. A. (2020) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055419000650 · Cited by 167 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Given the brutality of the Saudi regime offline, its history of repressing online critics (Pan and Siegel, 2020), and the apparent extent of its reach online, this conclusion is understandable.”
BackgroundSelf-citationTampering with Twitter’s Sample API
Pfeffer, J., Mayer, K., & Morstatter, F. (2018) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-018-0178-0 · Cited by 135 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Recent research on the Twitter sampling API reveals that it is vulnerable to artificial distortion and may not represent an actual 1% random sample (Morstatter et al., 2013; Pfeffer et al., 2018).”
BackgroundSocial Media, Sentiment and Public Opinions: Evidence from #Brexit and #USElection
Gorodnichenko, Y., Pham, T., & Talavera, O. (2018) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w24631 · Cited by 115 · cited 2× · see citing works
“2 Some have argued that consumption of false or malicious information affected voting outcomes in both the US and UK (Gorodnichenko et al., 2018; Gunther et al., 2019).”
BackgroundCharacterizing the 2016 Russian IRA influence campaign
Badawy, A., Addawood, A., Lerman, K., & Ferrara, E. (2019) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-019-0578-6 · Cited by 109 · cited 2× · see citing works
“2Fake news is a phenomenon distinct from IO activity, but IO campaigns have also participated in the dissemination of fake news (Badawy et al., 2019; Martin et al., 2020).”
BackgroundPan, J. (2017) · Problems of Post-Communism · doi:10.1080/10758216.2016.1181525 · Cited by 92 · cited 1× · see citing works
“It is worth noting, however, that findings from China may be unlikely to generalize to other authoritarian contexts given that China’s ability to shape domestic social media is—at least in part—a function of the dominance of domestic firms in China’s market for Internet content (Pan, 2017).”
BackgroundContent-based features predict social media influence operations
Alizadeh, M., Shapiro, J. N., Buntain, C., & Tucker, J. A. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abb5824 · Cited by 90 · cited 1× · see citing works
“3For an exception see Alizadeh et al. 2020.”
BackgroundTackling misinformation: What researchers could do with social media data
Pasquetto, I. V., Swire‐Thompson, B., & Amazeen, M. A. (2020) · Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review · doi:10.37016/mr-2020-49 · Cited by 86 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Third, much of the information shared online remains proprietary, inaccessible to the public, and subject to unpredictable changes in terms of use (Freelon, 2018; Pasquetto et al., 2020).”
BackgroundGuess, A. M., Lockett, D., Lyons, B., Montgomery, J. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2020) · Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review · doi:10.37016/mr-2020-004 · Cited by 69 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A first cause for skepticism is that engagement with false or unreliable information promoted by coordinated IO campaigns may not actually affect behaviour or attitudes (Guess et al., 2020; Bail et al., 2020).”
Background“Fake news” and the defection of 2012 Obama voters in the 2016 presidential election
Gunther, R., Beck, P. A., & Nisbet, E. C. (2019) · Electoral Studies · doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2019.03.006 · Cited by 61 · cited 2× · see citing works
“2 Some have argued that consumption of false or malicious information affected voting outcomes in both the US and UK (Gorodnichenko et al., 2018; Gunther et al., 2019).”
BackgroundStudying human attention on the Internet
Lazer, D. M. J. (2019) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1919348117 · Cited by 38 · cited 3× · see citing works
“Second, we lack good measures of human attention on the Internet (Lazer, 2020), meaning that we do not know whether and how individuals actually engage with particular forms of information.”
BackgroundInfluentialA Storm of Tweets: Social Media Manipulation During the Gulf Crisis
Leber, A. M., & Abrahams, A. (2019) · Review of Middle East Studies · doi:10.1017/rms.2019.45 · Cited by 32 · cited 1× · see citing works
“AlQahtani had been leading an organized effort aimed at distorting the information environment to the benefit of the Saudi regime (Leber and Abrahams, 2019).”
BackgroundEngagement with news on Twitter: insights from Australia and Korea
Ackland, R., O’Neil, M., & Park, S. (2018) · Asian Journal of Communication · doi:10.1080/01292986.2018.1462393 · Cited by 14 · cited 1× · see citing works
“These accounts nonetheless receive often only limited engagement in the form of likes and retweets (Ackland et al., 2019).”
BackgroundGrossman, S., Khadija, H., DiResta, R., et al. (2022) · Stanford Digital Repository · doi:10.25740/wp281db2531 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
DiResta, R., Grossman, S., H, K., et al. (2022) · Stanford Digital Repository · doi:10.25740/bm566gp1810 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Grossman, S., Khadija, H., Ross, E., et al. (2022) · Stanford Digital Repository · doi:10.25740/hp643wc2962 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Abrahams, A. and Leber, A. (2020). Electronic Armies or Cyber Knights? The Sources of Pro- Authoritarian Discourse on Middle East Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 14:1-29.
- Bradshaw, S. and Howard, P. N. (2018). Challenging Truth and Trust: A Global Inventory of Organized Social Media Manipulation. Technical report, Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford, UK.
- Elswah, M., Howard, P. N., and Narayanan, V. (2019). Iranian Digital Interference in the Arab World. COMPROP DATA MEMO, Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford, UK.
- Jones, M. O. (2019). Propaganda, Fake News, and Fake Trends: The Weaponization of Twitter Bots in the Gulf Crisis. International Journal of Communication, 13:1389-1415.
- Martin, D. A., Shapiro, J. N., and Ilhardt, J. G. (2020). Trends in Online Influence Efforts. Working paper, pages 1-107.
- Martin, D. A., Shapiro, J. N., and Nedashkovskaya, M. (2019). Recent Trends in Online Foreign Influence Efforts. Journal of Information Warfare, 18(3):15-48.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Coordination patterns reveal online political astroturfing across the world
Schoch, D., Keller, F. B., Stier, S., & Yang, J. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-08404-9 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Political Coalitions and Social Media: Evidence from Pakistan
Mir, A., Mitts, T., & Staniland, P. (2022) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592722001931 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“These coalitional con fl icts can stretch out across multiple political systems, as we see in the case of pro-Saudi “ in fl uencers ” in the Middle East (Abrahams and Leber 2021; Barrie and Siegel 2021).”
BackgroundOpinion manipulation on Farsi Twitter
Farzam, A., Moradi, P., Mohammadi, S., Padar, Z., & Siegel, A. A. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-26921-5 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“The use of inauthentic accounts by domestic actors to influence domestic politics is particularly understudied (though see [15] for an exception).”
BackgroundSelf-citationWijayanto, Berenschot, W., Sastramidjaja, Y., & Ruijgrok, K. (2024) · The International Journal of Press/Politics · doi:10.1177/19401612241297832 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
“Addressing this limitation, the term “influence operations” is gaining ground as an alternative (e.g., Alizadeh et al. 2020; Barrie and Siegel 2021; Bergh 2020; Bradshaw 2020; Gaw et al. 2023), referring more broadly to coordinated campaigns to influence public opinion.”
Attributing coordinated social media manipulation: A theoretical model and typology
Thiele, D., Milzner, M., Heft, A., Gong, B., & Pfetsch, B. (2025) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448251350100 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“Most of the ground truth data studies relied on datasets released by Twitter (e.g., Barrie and Siegel, 2021; Linvill and Warren, 2020; Luceri et al., 2024; Schoch et al., 2022).”
InfluentialTwitter Propaganda Operations: Analyzing Sociopolitical Issues in Saudi Arabia
Albert, C. D., AlEroud, A. F., Yang, Y., Melhem, A., & Rutland, J. (2023) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051231216964 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“For example, two Twitter employees were charged with spying for Saudi Arabia on U.S. soil in November 2019 (Barrie & Siegel, 2021), and hashtags such as “Agents of the Embassies” have been used by the Saudi state on social media to resist influence from the Western world (Abrahams & Leber, 2021a).”
BackgroundCollaborative authoritarianism and its unintended consequences
Schmidt-Feuerheerd, B. (2024) · Democratization · doi:10.1080/13510347.2024.2432018 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Legalizing control: the rise of restrictive internet regulation in sub-Saharan Africa
Schumann, M. P. (2026) · Democratization · doi:10.1080/13510347.2025.2503370 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Casas, A. (2024) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2024.2306503 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Governments can leverage social media for various geopolitical purposes, such as conducting foreign surveillance (Gray, 2021), promoting their own narratives (Barrie & Siegel, 2021; Stukal et al., 2022; Golovchenko et al., 2020), and suppressing opposing viewpoints (Golovchenko, 2022).”
Text-as-Data Methods to Study Mass-Media Manipulations in Autocracies
Lova, L. L. (2025) · Communist and Post-Communist Studies · doi:10.1525/cpcs.2025.2638313 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Just the tip of the iceberg? State of the art of coordinated social media manipulation research
Milzner, M., Thiele, D., & Gong, B. (2025) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2025.2596873
“Interestingly enough, exposure to and engagement with CSMM content is typically minimal (Barrie & Siegel, 2021; Eady et al., 2023; Urman & Makhortykh, 2025).”
Gohdes, A., Koh, A., & Schumann, M. P. (2025) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783111298559-005
- Authors
- Barrie, C., & Siegel, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media
- Published
- 2021-04-26
- Volume
- 1
- ISSN
- 2673-8813 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3160431485
- Semantic Scholar
- b16e3f366784c1b522493c3a739cad4fd39734d1
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 2.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Quantitative Description Digital Media (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- HOPE (Hauptbibliothek Open Publishing Environment) (University of Zurich) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1248077)
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
- Rita Allen Foundation
- Intel Corporation
- William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
- John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
- Craig Newmark Philanthropies
- York University
- Faculty of Arts and Sciences
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Keywords
- influence operations, Saudi Arabia, Twitter, disinformation, state-sponsored disinformation, political participation, internet environment, influential accounts, network analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review