Online Library

For this study, the online milieu of radical right-wing and extreme right-wing actors was investigated with regard to linking to alternative platforms. The aim of the analysis was to make the cosmos of online platforms used by right-wing extremist and radical right-wing actors accessible to readers and researchers. As established social media such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube increasingly remove illegal and extremist content due to (self-)regulation and legal pressures, many extreme right-wing and radical right-wing actors find themselves forced to switch to alternative platforms. In order to show their subscribers on the established platforms where their content can be found, many of these actors link to alternative platforms. This dynamic is problematic because the discourses of anti-democratic activists takes place outside of public debates and transparent structures, allowing them to plan actions, expand their networks and spread incitement undisturbed and unchallenged.

“Signposts” provides background information on the publications of the project “Countering Radicalisation in Right-Wing Extremist Online Subcultures” funded by the Federal Ministry of Justice (BMJ).

In the first part of this report, a brief historical overview of right-wing extremist internet use in Germany is given. The report describes how, since the emergence of the internet, the extreme right in Germany has always found ways to utilise the latest technological and social developments, such as the emergence of Web 2.0, for their own purposes. The first part of the report also presents the state of research on the right-wing extremist online milieu and describes focal points of current research on right-wing extremism.

The second part of the report describes the conceptual preparatory work that preceded the analyses within the framework of the project. This includes, on the one hand, the development of a definition of right-wing extremism for the project. This is because a uniform definition of the term does not exist, but is necessary for concise and transparent research into the right-wing extremist online milieu. Furthermore, in preparation for data driven analyses in the project, interviews with right-wing extremism experts were conducted, which revealed current developments in right-wing extremist internet strategies.

The ISD Germany study on the extreme right-wing use of Telegram serves as a complementary text to the “Escape routes” report. In it, the research team examined links to other platforms, which were shared on the controversial messenger service and were disseminated in the channels of right-wing extremists, right-wing radicals and conspiracy ideologues in the German-speaking world. The main scope of this research was on smaller platforms that do not fall under the deletion obligation of the NetzDG. Links to larger platforms such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter were also analysed, given that the collected data set contained almost twice as many links to these platforms than to those not fully covered by the NetzDG.

For this report, the ISD research team collected 659,110 messages from 238 public channels from the extreme right, radical right, Reichsbürger:innen and conspiracy ideology spectrum between 1 January and 12 September 2021. From these messages, 371,988 links were extracted, leading to 8,252 domains. The ISD Germany researchers examined domains that were shared more than 15 times and identified social networks and platforms.

Since the beginning of 2021, ISD Germany has been researching right-wing extremist actors on alternative platforms on the internet. Three reports were published as part of the German Federal Ministry for Justice (BMJ)-funded project “Countering radicalisation in right-wing extremist online subcultures”. The last report in 2021, “Detours and Diversions – Online Strategies for the Dissemination of Right-Wing Extremist Content”, provides a summary of the projects central findings and presents them in a comparative manner.

This report thus combines the methodological and theoretical groundwork of the report “Wegweiser” with the results of the empirical research of the reports “Fluchtwege” and “Stützpfeiler Telegram”, and puts them into context. The report presents a comparison of data from established platforms and Telegram, and thus helps to gain a better understanding of the behaviour of far-right actors on the selected platforms. It also includes a comparative analysis of the strategies and linkages of far-right and radical right actors on established and alternative platforms. This research is based on the empirical data collected by the platforms. Given, that data collection is different for each platform, and given that this project also explores alternative platforms, it also furthers the exploration of data collection options, which are described in more detail in this report.

This report provides a summary of the expert conference “Im toten Winkel – Wie Rechtsextreme alternative Online-Plattformen zur Radikalisierung nutzen” (In the blind spot – How right-wing extremists use alternative online platforms for radicalisation), which was held as part of the project “Countering radicalisation in right-wing extremist online subcultures” funded by the German Federal Ministry of Justice (BMJ). The first annual conference of the project took place from 25 to 26 November 2021 in Berlin as a hybrid event. In addition to the approximately 50 participants who were present at the conference venue, invited guests were also able to follow the event via a closed livestream. The conference served to present current research projects from digital right-wing extremism research and to discuss diverse perspectives from research, regulation and law enforcement.

Due to recent rises in extremism across the globe (Dean et al. in J Polic Intell Count Terror 11:121–142, 2016; Le Roux in Responding to the rise in violent extremism in the Sahel. Africa Center For Strategic Studies, 2019, p. 26) and (Jones in Int Secur 32:7–40, 2008), governments and law enforcement organisations, such as the police, have looked to new strategies to counter violent extremism (Russell and Theodosiou in Counter-extremism: a decade on from 7/7. Quilliam Foundation, 2015). Specifically, there has been an expanse of the field now widely known as Countering Violent Extremism (CVE). CVE is a highly contested area; however, upon conducting a literature review, Inserra (Revisiting efforts to counter violent extremism: leadership needed. The Heritage Foundation, 2015, p. 2) helpfully reduced the term CVE down to descriptions of interventions intended to “stop individuals from radicalizing”. LaFree and Freilich (Annu Rev Criminol 2:383–404, 2019) distinguish counter-terrorism from CVE, they describe counter-terrorism as military responses (‘hard’) as opposed to non-military responses (‘soft’), referred to as countering violent extremism strategies. This chapter contends that, although counter narratives tend to lack academic standing, there does appear to be a widespread acceptance that narratives influence individuals’ beliefs. Therefore, in the absence of other more effective methods of CVE online, it is argued that counter-narratives (CN) should be used in informed ways by organisations such as the police (Monaghan in Crime Media Cult 18(1):21–39, 2020). This chapter will compare academic understandings of narrative and communication alongside examples of counter narratives issued against them. It will then assess the impact of such strategies and potential alternatives for CN.