TOW #16 - Lithuanian Elves Combat Russian Influence Online (Liudas Dapkus)

In his political commentary published in The Washington Post, Liudas Dapkus describes Lithuanian citizens’ attempts to prevent pro-Russian propaganda accounts from controlling social media. Although biased in favor of the Lithuanians, Dapkus’s credibility is intact, as he has written political pieces for newspapers throughout the world. In this article, he hopes to prove that pro-Russian accounts on social media need to be stopped. He accomplishes this purpose by using direct quotations from Lithuanian and Russian sources, clear and concise diction, and connections to America. The three devices are tailored to his primary audience - Americans concerned with Russia’s growing influence. Dapkus uses direct quotations from multiple sources to show both sides of the story and establish trust with the audience. For example, Dapkus cites both Nerijus Maliukevicius, researcher for Vilnius University’s Institute of International Relations, and Alexander Udaltsov, Russian ambassador to Lithuania. In order for his readers to fully trust his viewpoint that Russia is the aggressor, they must be allowed to understand both sides of the conflict. Additionally, Dapkus uses clear and concise diction to clarify a complicated topic. The author recognizes that most Americans are unfamiliar with the relationship between Lithuania and Russia. As a result, the author uses straightforward language so as not to confuse them with details. Dapkus writes, “On a busy day, Savukynas said that fellow elves report as many as 10 or 20 to get them removed.” Dapkus uses professional, yet uncomplicated language to resonate with his audience. Finally, Dapkus connects the conflict between Lithuania and Russia to Americans in an attempt to call his audience to action. He explains that Americans are also suffering from Russian interference in their media. Dapkus writes, “Talk of Russian interference is bubbling on both sides of the Atlantic in the wake of the recent U.S. election.” This was shared because it offered a deeper connection with the audience who, recognizing that the Russians need to be stopped, would be more sympathetic to Lithuanians in their plight. Ultimately, Dapkus did a wonderful job recognizing his audience and employing rhetorical devices accordingly. His call to action is extremely well-executed.