Introduction

“Post-truth” policies (^{Keyes, 2004}; ^{Roberts, 2010}) have transcended borders and seem to have reached Latin America. On the continent, a systematic policy of disinformation and propaganda typical of low-intensity conflicts is proliferating (^{Thompson, 1989}). It has the appearance of an irregular war (^{Franco, 2001}) or a hybrid conflict (^{Fleming, 2011}; ^{Hoffman, 2009}; ^{Korybko, 2015}, ²⁰¹⁶), the development of which is not only military but also economic, psychological and propagandistic.

Beyond the press and television, information manipulation has reached the Internet and social media, and cyberattacks -among other strategies- are part of the confrontational logic. The Internet and digital platforms such as Facebook or Twitter have become a scene for ideological dispute and struggle where rumors, hoaxes, lies and falsehood are becoming an essential ingredient.

Fake news has always been a central element of political communication (^{McNair, 2017}). Now, in digital societies, where there is an overabundance of information and an increase in speed and immediacy, these lies are also proliferating (^{McNair, 2018}). Often, fake news is legitimized by citizen authorship (^{Alves & Oliveira, 2016}) and a fresh and direct rhetoric. At the same time, today, the value of information is more in question than ever (^{Marcos Recio et al., 2017}). The algorithms and filter bubbles (^{Pariser, 2011}) created by Facebook offer users what they want, and, consequently, end up generating more confidence in these digital platforms than in the cotent published in conventional media (^{Viner, 2016}). All this points to the fact that the traditional media system is changing.

In many countries, social media are the first source of information among young people. Such is the case in Spain, for example, as indicated by the Informe anual de la profesión periodística (Annual report of the journalistic profession) (^{Palacio, 2018}). The same is true for some Latin American countries like Brazil (^{Hootsuite, 2019}). Social media are becoming the preferred space for digital or computer propaganda, and therefore for disinformation and fake news.

The 2016 United States presidential election (^{Kollanyi et al., 2016}) and the United Kingdom referendum on Brexit (^{Howard & Kollanyi, 2016}) are two paradigmatic examples of these new forms of algorithmic manipulation in which automated accounts (bots) proliferate and fake news -among other practices- are spread on the Internet by corporations and governments (^{Woolley & Howard, 2017}). But also Latin America has been peppered by these phenomena. Thus, the 2016 plebiscite for peace in Colombia (^{Pauner Chulvi, 2018}) or the 2018 presidential election in Mexico (^{Magallón Rosa, 2019}; ^{Parra Valero & Oliveira, 2018}) have been marked by online disinformation campaigns. Hacking techniques, interception of phone calls or the attempt to symbolically annihilate the adversary are some of the strategies deployed by the dominant political actors in the virtual space. These techniques aim at eliminating opponents, bringing down any form of resistance or criminalizing all kinds of protest. A process that is accompanied with an increasing commodification of the newspaper industry, which depends on international financial capital.

Furthermore, in the system of imperial rule that governs Latin America, the informative discourse is often spectacular and “terroristic” (^{Sierra Caballero, 2019b}). For this reason, in a context of global communication, it is necessary to reflect on the work of traditional and social media to question whether they are supporting the peaceful resolution of local conflicts or whether, on the contrary, they are legitimizing and amplifying -through propaganda strategies- coup processes and regional or local interventions.

Firstly, this paper reflects on the concept of media coup in the context of the media system in Latin America, in relation to the United States propaganda model and attending to the logic of the so-called “information war” and disinformation. For this purpose, it analyzes the role of the media and, particularly, that of the social networks in the phenomenon of “media coups” (^{Sierra Caballero, 2016}) in Latin America.

Second, the dialectic between global communication and local interventions is explored through the analysis of four relevant cases of manipulation, disinformation and propaganda on digital networks in the region: those of Venezuela, Mexico, Brazil and Ecuador.

The main objectives of this research are: to explore the propaganda, disinformation and information manipulation strategies of the four selected cases; to analyze how media coups operate in the digital environment through the analysis of a sample of cases. In addition, a theoretical objective, stated in the following terms, is set forth: to propose lines of action aimed at avoiding media coups and their rapid spread on social media.

In keeping with these objectives, the questions that have guided this research are the following: Can propaganda, disinformation and manipulation strategies be observed in the cases studied? How did the four media coups studied operate in the digital environment? What measures could be taken to avoid media coups and their rapid spread through social media?

Methodology

When dealing with manipulation, propaganda and disinformation strategies in the media and the digital environment, it is necessary to perform a prior contextual analysis of the cultural and political frameworks in which these phenomena emerge. The structure of the information system in question; the motivations and ideological interests of large information corporations and lobbies; the functioning of political systems and the interaction between the different actors (political parties, organizations and social movements); the citizens’ relationship with the institutional, political and economic powers; the forms of organization and citizen participation, and other issues, such as the corruption of transparency of the political system, are all elements that could play a fundamental role in the analysis of media coups.

Given the great complexity of these phenomena, it is necessary to question why they arise, how they work and which effects they have on society. In this sense, it is necessary to keep in mind and not lose sight of the place and the historical-political moment in which the media coup occurs. This is especially pertinent if the purpose is to delve into both the causes of its appearance and its modus operandi and consequences for democracy.

Since the main objectives of this research are to explore propaganda, manipulation and disinformation strategies and to analyze the operation of media coups in the digital environment, a small-number case study design has been chosen. This type of design allows delving into every unit in its entirety. In contrast with a variable-oriented approach that takes into account statistical logic, this method enables, first, to thoroughly understand the details and characteristics of each selected case, and, second, to qualitatively examine how they developed in the digital era.

The design of this research is result-focused to the extent that the objective is to obtain potential and thorough explanations that will subsequently allow predicting results. In other words, the first and the second objective of this research are combined to explore how media coups operate on the Internet and social media.

To this end, four relevant cases of manipulation, disinformation and propaganda on digital networks in the region have been selected: a) the hounding of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela; b) the misrepresentation of information in Mexico; c) the 2016 coup in Brazil; and d) the opposition against Rafael Correa in Ecuador.

In order to address these questions, a qualitative comparative methodology (QCA) was developed, which has allowed delving into the characteristics of the four selected media coups and describing the role of social networks in them.

Thus, a qualitative empirical analysis of the use of social networks in the four cases has been carried out. It is worth mentioning that retrospectively investigating propaganda uses on the Internet in each particular case is a complex task. This is mainly because there is no detailed record of the manipulation and disinformation actions carried out on the Internet because many of the websites have been removed. In addition, it is worth indicating that the media coups are ideologically or geographically fragmented. There are thousands of Facebook fanpages, Instagram pages, websites, blogs and Twitter accounts spreading fake news, rumors or hoaxes, in addition to thousands of videos on YouTube edited by collectives, participants or supporters of media coups.

However, thanks to the scientific literature and the records found on the Internet (traditional news, newspaper news, or more rudimentary pieces, such as blog posts), it has been possible to carry out an analysis of the main uses of social networks in each studied case. The qualitative empirical analysis of propaganda practices and manipulation and disinformation strategies has made it possible to understand the operation of media coups on the Internet through the study of twenty rhetorical-discursive strategies. These have been defined, questioned and analyzed in relation to the selected cases. The strategies are specified in Table 1:

Selection of cases

The four cases used for this comparative study have been selected on the basis of four criteria. The first of these is geographic: the four are Latin American cases. The second criterion is that the four countries have democratic systems that are internationally questioned or that are not considered full democracies;³ there is also a high level of ideological polarization in them, and a great number of geostrategic interests outside their borders. In addition, it is worth indicating that these four Latin American cases are paradigmatic insofar as they have had worldwide coverage. The third of the selection criteria is related to the media system of each country: all four have important information monopolies with a high level of business concentration. The fourth criterion concerns the strategic use of the Internet and social networks in favor of the media coup in all four cases.

Corpus

The main items analyzed in each case, which make up the corpus of analysis of this study, are now presented.⁴ The strategy has been adapted to each case using criteria of significance, which allows us to illustrate the main trends of media coups on the Internet.

Regarding the Venezuelan case, the Facebook and Twitter profiles of individuals or opposition groups against Hugo Chávez have been analyzed. Given that the universe was very wide, accounts with more than 50 000 followers have been taken as a reference, as for instance @LaDivinaDiva (56 700 followers) or @DonCorneliano2 (72 100 followers).

In the case of Mexico, the focus has been set on the Facebook accounts of newspapers such as El Diario de Oaxaca and Nación Unida, and on websites like www.elmexicanodigital.com and www.todoinforme.com. At the same time, an analysis of the Mexican politician Alfredo del Mazo’s activity on social networks during the 2017 election period has been carried out. Likewise, a study of the counter-hegemonic activity by the social movement #YoSoy132 has been incorporated (^{Sola-Morales, 2016}, ²⁰¹⁹).

As concerns Brazil, the network activity related to the accusation and trial of Dilma Rousseff, the covers of several newspapers, as well as their Facebook and Twitter accounts, and the activity of the Brasil Livre movement, have been analyzed.

In the case of Ecuador, the activity in social networks of groups and profiles contrary to Rafael Correa and connected to the opposition movement in June, 2015, and during the so-called “judicial plot” of 2018 -in response to the proposal of the Ley Orgánica para la Justicia Tributaria para la Redistribución de la Riqueza (Organic Law for Tax Justice for the Redistribution of Wealth)- has been studied.

Media Coups

The concept of media coup has been widely used in recent decades to refer to conflicts such as the “dirty war” against Nicaragua; the repression against popular movements in Colombia; the parliamentary coup against Fernando Lugo in Paraguay; the judicial persecution of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil, and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in Argentina, or the spurious judicial process against Rafael Correa in Ecuador; the impeachment against Dilma Rousseff in Brazil, or the manipulation of information against the elected governments of Bolivia and Venezuela (^{Britto García, 2008}; ^{Casado Gutiérrez, 2016}). The term alludes to the use of warfare by the media as part of an irregular intervention strategy carried out by the economic or political elites in order to regain hegemony in the region (^{González Cadalso et al., 2019}).

This strategy includes the ideological training of the army, the dominance and control of the judiciary, and, what is most relevant in the context of this work, the hegemony and control of the public media and digital networks. More specifically, this battle for information in the current virtual space is waged in the form of cyberwarfare, using hacking techniques and leaks, creating fake news, promoting disinformation and manipulation on digital networks. The media coup, or the “soft coup” as ^{Sharp called it (2011)}, is a phenomenon that uses political, economic, psychological and military power, in addition to resorting to the police and internal security forces, to prevent or reverse any process of social transformation contrary to the local hegemonic or elite geopolitical interests.

In general, these coups -orchestrated by right-wing political forces- seek to “domesticate governments and recolonize Latin America”, as Adolfo ^{Pérez Esquivel (2016, p. 99)} has indicated. If right-wing politics are not imposed through the ballot box, with the support of the United States, they will be forced through the illegal removal of presidents, the privatization of State companies, or the handing over of natural resources (^{Pérez Esquivel, 2016}).

Media globalization -achieved and maintained through the control exercised by transnational media lobbies- allows and encourages this type of interference and interventionism because it provides a political coverage that fits in with the strategic guidelines followed by or favoring the elites holding power. This is partly due to the concentration of ownership and the monopoly of the media industry in the region, coupled with the United States dominance over communications and mass culture, which, together with its technological leadership in telecommunications and the military industry, keeps the global power concentrated in the hands of a few. This dynamic can, therefore, block or reverse processes such as the new Latin American regionalism, the rise of the left, or that of the indigenous movements, which are unfavorable to interests of the United States.

In this sense, when exploring the so-called media coups, it is necessary to take into account the hegemonic control of the media and culture, which is precisely what prevents “another communication” (^{Alfaro, 1993}; ^{Maldonado Rivera et al., 2015}) in the region. Namely, a democratic, citizen, popular, participatory communication in favor of peace, development, social change and “good living” or “living well” (^{Contreras Baspineiro, 2014}), which should be the objectives of any communication policy.

Media System in Latin America

The region is characterized by the corporatist and underdeveloped structure of the public media system, as indicated by ^{UNESCO’S media development indicators (2019)} in matters of diversity, equality and pluralism. Given the concentration of ownership and the existence of an information oligarchy, most countries are found to have democratic deficits.

To analyze the media coups, it is therefore essential to keep in mind the Latin American context and the main characteristics of the media system in the region, which is characterized by: a) lack of plurality, due to high media concentration, which promotes the dominance of a monodiscourse and nullifies diversity and all alternative voices; b) job insecurity among journalists and reporters, who depend on oligarchies and media owners, and who, in addition, are mostly lacking in qualifications; c) censorship, imposed by the government and induced by the elites, lobbies and economic magnates; d) Anglo-Saxon colonialism of the journalistic profession models, imposed through media companies and press agencies; e) hyper-concentration of advertising and dominance of large national and transnational capitals; and f) absolute control in the hands of the elites (media power, governments, economic lobbies or transnational groups), united in a common goal. All these elements feed off one another and impede the development of a democratic system: plural, diverse and transparent.

In turn, it is important to note the growing importance of social media in the region. Up to 66% of the Latin American population is a regular user of social networks (^{Hootsuite, 2019}). Therefore, it is essential to consider these media when exploring the propaganda mechanisms used in media coups. The direct and immediate scope of these media -available through the personal cell phone of each individual- is what explains the large impact of media coups and what makes the propaganda model fit so well with the interests of the powers that be.

The propaganda model and the omnipresence of the United States media

It is necessary to question the role of the media in coup processes, such as those that have been taking place in recent decades in the Latin American region. For decades, the United States has held a hegemonic control of the media. From Hollywood to Netflix, this “invasion” reaches, as indicated by ^{Lima Rocha and Klein (2018)}, both the Internet -where there are links between cartoons, series, polemicists and humorists, to name a few examples- and subscription tv, where Latin Americans are exposed to a universal, hegemonic and monolithic symbolic universe: the North American one.

Back in ^{1988, Herman and Chomsky} discussed how the United States media industry promoted patterns of behavior and values that aimed at maintaining and reproducing the status quo within and outside the United States borders. The propaganda model proposed by these researchers allows explaining how the mass media worked in Latin America as vehicles for the transmission of messages, values and symbols that matched information manipulation strategies.

To illustrate the pertinence of such theoretical-methodological contribution when dealing with media coups, the strategies carried out by the United States for the development of the propaganda model are presented below.

The information and disinformation war

The dynamic of this war is based on the confrontation between opponents and its weapon is information. Information can ideologically support a government attacked by insurgent forces, or support an insurgent force seeking to break free from an antagonistic government.

The war can also be based on disinformation, i.e. manipulation or, as ^{Serrano (2009)} described it, speculation and spectacle. Thus, the omission, silencing and absence of coverage of any fact or action, however dramatic, can neutralize the opponent and, by not acknowledging their presence, annihilate them.

These logics are behind many conflicts in Latin America and have been used to stop popular movements, indigenous insurgencies or leftist governments. From the coup promoted in Chile in 1973 -assuming ^{Klein’s shock doctrine thesis (2007)} - to the experiences in Guatemala, Colombia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru or Venezuela, many are the processes of interference in which the media have played a decisive role in defending intervention strategies or the total abandonment of victims and civilians before the public opinion.

Information and its management have been used strategically for decades to reproduce the imperialist logic and to defend the United States of the supposed “hidden enemies” on duty -first the Russians, then the Chinese, later Iraq, Libya or North Korea, currently the entire third world (^{Collon, 1999, p. 378})-. Dissemination through the mass media of a paranoid discourse in the form of terror stories kindles the citizens’ fear of any possible threats posed by these enemies. These narrations, constantly repeated in the mass media, end up fostering a military escalation and a feeling of permanent conflict. Today, therefore, the concentration of geopolitical power, hegemonized by the United States, is the logical counterpart of economic globalization, which is doctrinally defined as decentralization on a planetary scale.

In short, this situation points to a global information and communication crisis that, in the words of Ramonet (1998), brings to light the democratic deficit that governs the expansion of global information networks according to the strategic and political-military interests of the “world-system” described and analyzed by ^{Wallerstein (2005)}. In this context, the new media, social networks and digital platforms emerge as the central axis of propaganda and disinformation policies against peace and the sovereignty of the people of the South.

Results

In order to illustrate the dynamics and functioning of the media coups and the propaganda and disinformation model inherent to such counterrevolutionary strategies, the results of the analysis of the four selected cases -Venezuela, Mexico, Brazil and Ecuador- are presented below.

Discussion

As a result of the comparative analysis of the propaganda, information manipulation and disinformation strategies of the four selected media coups, the following trends have been identified and observed in comparative terms.

Firstly, the four coups are characterized by the use of falsehoods or lies as a fundamental strategy, either through the circulation of hoaxes, false rumors or fake news or through the use of resources that enhance emotionality versus rationality. In addition, lying as a strategy is accompanied with the absence of sources and with anonymity, as a resource to avoid liability, as well as with the omission of data or key elements that would allow understanding the entire discourse.

Secondly, the Venezuelan, Brazilian and Ecuadorian cases all present a marked belligerent tone against the presidential figures of the respective countries. The media coup is aimed at them and has the purpose of discrediting and ending their presidency, which is why intense smear campaigns can be observed in all three cases, ranging from the demonization of Hugo Chávez to the media attacks or version war of the Brazilian case.

Third, in all cases there are automated profiles and false accounts, presence of bots, exponential distribution and large-scale viralization of opinions, generating an increase in the discussion of certain topics and promoting certain perspectives within the debate or conflict.

Fourth, in the cases of Venezuela and Brazil there is, in addition, a tendency to politicize the discourse. Furthermore, the accusatory tone that is found, for instance, in the campaign against Rafael Correa is in those countries complemented by the ideological polarization and confrontation of the different social groups on one side and the other of the political spectrum, reducing the positions to only two: either in favor of or against Dilma Rousseff, either Chavista or anti-Chavista.

Fifth, the typical sensationalism and spectacularization of traditional mass media, particularly television, are easily fed back into social networks. In fact, many of the Facebook profiles and Twitter accounts analyzed echoed the television coverage orchestrated by large groups and corporations that implicitly supported the coups. Thus, it is necessary to underline that the media coups conducted on the Internet are nothing more than an amplification of the hegemonic journalistic and television debate. Most Facebook and Twitter publications are in fact news copied from the mainstream media, retweets of journalists’ comments or televised videos, as well as opinions supported by the conglomerates holding power. This is especially significant in the Brazilian and Ecuadorian cases.

Sixth, in the case of Mexico, some different trends are observed, despite the fact that the country’s media system is characterized by great business concentration and a tremendous absence of pluralism and diversity of information. The persecution of journalists, the omission of human rights violations or the concealment of relevant information are the fundamental axes of the disinformation strategy developed in the country. However, this strategy has obtained an important response from the citizens who created the #YoSoy132 movement in favor of truth and a democratic, transparent and plural information system, a fact that clearly makes the Mexican case distinct.

Conclusions

Reflecting on communication in Latin America at a time marked by asymmetric conflicts and irregular wars, such as those illustrated here, is, without a doubt, a challenge for research in information and communication.

Studies on propaganda and conflict news coverage focused on “soft” or media coups do not have the tradition they deserve in the academic field, considering the importance that some propaganda processes attained in dictatorships such as the Chilean or Colombian ones or in recent election or political processes in Mexico, Brazil and other countries.

In relation to the first research question concerning propaganda, disinformation and manipulation strategies in the four studied cases, the following can be concluded: The media coups of the last decades in the region, rather than hinting at a counter-revolutionary war -which, undoubtedly, exists and prevents the development of the forces of the South-, manifest a “climate of total war”, which is constant and affects the entire population. This climate is created and fueled by information manipulation and disinformation.

Regarding the second question about the way these media coups operate, the conclusion is that, as long as the mainstream media is in the hands of a few and the media systems is subject to the logic of the elites and to transnational interests, the dirty war will continue to rampage, preventing any democratic development and the citizenry’s well-being. The observation of the disinformation processes and media dynamics developed in the form of media coups in Venezuela, Mexico, Brazil or Ecuador accounts for a vigorous and integrated application of totalizing efforts at the political, social, economic, communicative and psychological levels in favor of the dominant economic and geopolitical interests. It is, therefore, useful to reflect on media coups as an essential element of a new political-military doctrine present in today’s digital societies. In this sense, both the traditional media, concentrated in the hands of companies or families, and the digital social networks and platforms orchestrated by lobbies and elites, as well as by the citizenry -who is increasingly active and involved, but also less critical-, play a key role in endorsing and promoting public intervention strategies, whether at the regional or global level.

As a result, the continuous discourse about “communist” threats, the “dangers” to democracy and other terrors, or the fake news persistently disseminated by the right and by United States media -from their headquarters in the region or via WhatsApp- have become resources for those strategies that prevent democratic advancement and development in the region, nullifying plurality, diversity and transparency.

Furthermore, those strategies legitimize the surveillance carried out by the new digital information systems, and condemn any form of action or mobilization contrary to the hegemonically imposed values. Although there are more than 150 “fact-checking” or “data verification” initiatives worldwide devoted to curbing fake news (such as Verificado in Mexico, to mention one), which is an interesting way of preventing disinformation, the truth is that there is still no consensus on the matter and there are legal gaps concerning the creation of false profiles or blogs for the purpose of spreading fake news or making them go viral (^{Fregoso, 2018}).

For all these reasons, and in relation to the third question of this research work focused on the measures that should be taken to prevent media coups and their rapid spread in digital environments, it is possible to conclude that there is a need for social movements and citizens to question the meaning of the Internet as a common good. In addition, it is time to demand public policies aimed at democratizing the telecommunications system in order to avoid concentration logics, the absence of control and regulation, and the unlimited proliferation of fake news. Starting by monitoring every intelligence action, video surveillance and human rights violation that lobbies, local governments and the transnational financial capital are carrying out, as ^{Morozov (2011)} has warned.

In short, it is necessary and urgent to promote the regulation of the traditional and digital media systems since both are at the root of harmonious coexistence and peace, and their democratic functioning is one of the keys to end or prevent new media coups.