2. Communication as a new battlefield in this diplomatic crisis
Like a product of its time, this conflict had one of its battlefields in cyberspace, where
cyberattacks, disinformation, the use of bots and campaigns in social media were carried
out in favour and against the countries involved. When reviewing the literature related
to communication management by official bodies during this crisis, it becomes apparent
that there are not many studies published, and that qualitative analyses of
communications in social media are predominant though with two different focus.
The first group studies the content of the messages of public bodies in social media as a
DD tool, while the second group focuses on analysing the hashtags of the most popular
tweets during the first months of the crisis. Among the first group, (Mitchell, 2019) does
an outstanding qualitative and quantitative analysis of the digital discourse in the six
countries of the GCC during the diplomatic crisis, which is centred around sensitive topics
such as the FIFA World Cup in 2022, the role of women, and the demarcation of borders.
This author concludes that “the politicisation of the online public sphere in the region
does not represent a fundamental change in the diplomacy of the region but rather a
new battleground for old regional rivalries.”
One of the most complete studies was carried out by (Al-Mansouri, Al-Mohannadi &
Feroun, 2021) that analysed the communications on Twitter by the ministers and the
ministries of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of the four GCC countries involved in the crisis during
the period between the 5
th
of June and the 13
th
of September 2017. The study is limited
to messages in Arabic and on Twitter, since it considers it the only social media platform
used by the Gulf States for their PD activities addressed to the public in the region. These
authors note that the minister and the MFA of Qatar are the second most active in the
number of tweets published, and that the predominating subject is the visits and
meetings with their counterparts from other countries, followed by terrorism. The focus
on the latter is radically different from the rest of the countries involved in the conflict,
since it always highlights Qatar's commitment to fighting international terrorism. These
authors compare their conclusions with the analysis carried out by (Akdenizli, 2018)
based on the tweets in English published by the government bodies in the Gulf. According
to these authors, there are differences in the frequency, wording of the statements,
target audience and subjects discussed.
In addition to the above-mentioned analyses, (Jones, 2017) studies the use of bots and
considers it proven that 20% of the Twitter accounts posting anti-Qatar content were
bots. The same author expands the scope of his research (Jones, 2019) and highlights
the anti-Qatar propaganda using tweets with tags against the emir and his “regime”,
against Al Jazeera, and those linking Qatar with terrorist groups or with Iran. This author
casts doubt on the use of Twitter “as a tool to generate valid discussions about public
opinion, even though it is a very important tool for sharing news”. In a similar way,
(Leber & Abrahams, 2019), consider proven the manipulation of discourse on the internet
and the mass production of messages using bots with the goal of earning supporters.
The second group of analysis focuses more on the topics that support people to people
communications, among which (Allagui & Akdenizli, 2019) should be highlighted, which
studies the information war and the role played by media and new technologies as tools
to divide people and propagate the crisis. The authors conclude that “either voluntarily
or by force, social media users backed the positions of their governments”. This backing