UCLA

In my dissertation, I examine how states strategically use messaging to convey intentions, influence behavior, and shape perceptions across various audiences, including foreign governments, the international public, and domestic populations. Using case studies from the Soviet Union and modern Russia, I apply text-as-data methods to analyze diplomatic communications and media narratives, shedding light on how states balance the demands of foreign policy with domestic political stability.

In the first paper, I explore the interactions between public and private diplomatic signals during Khrushchev’s tenure (1955–1964), focusing on U.S.-Soviet relations. Leveraging newly collected data from declassified private correspondence and public statements, I develop a theory of dual-channel communication. The analysis demonstrates that private messages often carry more weight due to their direct nature, while public signals can amplify or dilute their impact depending on consistency between the channels. I find that private hostility paired with public silence produces the strongest threat perception, whereas mixed signals undermine clarity and reduce perceived credibility. This chapter emphasizes the importance of studying public and private communications as interconnected elements of a cohesive strategy.

In the second paper, I analyze the role of state-controlled media in autocratic regimes, focusing on the concept of “engineered antagonism.” Using data from Russian-language state-sponsored news coverage under Vladimir Putin, I show that negative portrayals of foreign adversaries correlate with an increased likelihood of material hostilities toward those countries. For example, sustained negative propaganda preceding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine shaped public opinion, legitimizing the conflict and potentially mitigating backlash. While the study centers on an autocratic context, it offers insights into how media narratives can be used strategically in other political systems to influence public opinion and justify state actions.

In the third paper, co-authored with Yulia Kuzmina, Alexandra Rumyantseva, and Katerina Tertychnaya investigate Russian state-controlled media’s coverage of foreign protests and its implications for domestic audiences. Drawing on a decade of news coverage and global protest-event data, I find that protests in democratic countries are selectively framed as chaotic and disruptive, reinforcing negative views of collective action while undermining the image of the targeted nations. Coverage of foreign protests tends to decline when large-scale domestic protests occur in Russia, reflecting the regime’s attempts to avoid inspiring unrest at home. This chapter highlights how authoritarian regimes manage the dual risks and opportunities posed by protest coverage in shaping both domestic and international perceptions.