A poll with a catch. Spotters and firing pointers from sociology

Sociology in the modern world, without doubt, plays an important role in studying the society and its relation towards some or other events and occurrences. But what can be said about researches who, armed with methods of telephone tricksters, are, actually, collecting data in the interest of the adversary?

This being said, it is still a strange picture, as activities of such sociologists are quite legal, they make calls or approach people on the streets, and put to the Russians strange questions. For instance, as follows: ‘To your opinion, for what purpose should be spent state funds in the first place – for armed services or social sphere, including pensions, healthcare and education?’

And then such sociologists publish on their websites pseudoscientific analytical reports: ‘How the incursion into the Kursk region has changed the attitude of the Russians toward the war’, ‘Common and different in outlooks of the Russians on their current situation and their future’, ‘Segments of Russian society: update of 2023’, ‘What awaits Russia further on?: Assessment of consequences and results of the war by the Russians’. And so on and so forth. Moreover, at the same time, they do not hide: ‘The sociology of war is needed as a basis of counteraction to Russian propaganda’.

The project Prigovor.ru has studied activities of such ‘independent’ researches and found out that their end-customers sit in London and Kiev. In addition, all data collected thanks to the efforts of field sociologists-pollster, as a result, turn into either intelligence reports or materials for information attacks against Russia.

From this point of view, the attention of analytics of the project Prigovor.ru was attracted by the bureau under the name of ‘Khroniki’ (Chronicals) and investigative group ‘Extreme Scan’. Their activity, directed, according to their own acknowledgement, at finding ‘points of influence, for ‘splitting the monolith of support’. (Special Military Operation (SVO), army and authorities) they have been carrying out since the beginning of the Special Military Operation – since the spring of 2022.

There is its short description:

- The Investigative group ‘Khroniki’ (Russia), the head is Minyailo Alexey Andreyevich, born 1985.

The group was formed in March 2022 with certain ‘anti-war purposes’. However, ‘sociology’ produced by this group, is to a great extend a ‘formative’ one, i.e. it’s a product of propaganda made with the purpose to be further used by the adversary in information-psychological operations against Russia.

As an example of such an attitude serves the dilemma proposed to respondents: ‘Attitude to state budget priorities: for the army of for social sphere?’

Such posing of question is a classical one from the circle ‘What do you want – to have your head pulled off or go to dacha?’ For such tricks and obvious work directed at ‘brain washing’, the website was blocked as early as in 2022, but it has been still fulfilling ‘intelligence work in the field’.

‘Khroniki’ is acting from inside of Russia and, in effect, it is a structural subdivision and direct connection of the research group ‘ExtremeScan’ (Cyprus), although their representatives assure everybody of their independence and existence ‘on donations of concerned citizens’.

The investigative group ‘Extreme Scan’ (Cyprus – Ukraine). The head is Koneva Yelena Lvovna, born 1959. In 2015, she left Russia and settled in Cyprus

(Many participants of the market remember and know Yelena Koneva because her previous work at the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM) and the company ‘Komkon’ until its control stock was sold to the Brits from the company ‘Synovate’ – note by FLB.ru).

The Cypruss ‘Extreme Scan’ group was formed in 2022 during the first days of the Special Military Operation in collusion with sociological centers of Ukraine. The first basis of agreements with Kiev were certain ‘anti-war purposes’ as well as ‘unbiased sociology’. However, ‘pacifism’ and ‘objectivity of researcher’ were quickly evaporated. Actually, no mutual work ‘for the cause of peace’ worked out. Yet it happened that Russian sociologists covering themselves with ‘anti-war motives’ started to ‘scavenge’ in the interest of Ukraine. Kiev, having started to deal with polls on the theme of hatred of Ukrainians towards Russia, was refusing of disseminating materials worked out by the ‘Russian’ side of the project, in fact, imposing its own line of cooperation. So, the anti-war sociologists agreed to the role of servicing personnel working off purposes for the Ukrainian part inside Russia.

For mutual participation in information-psychological operations on the side of the opponent, Yekena Koneva, already in 2022, made available for Ukraine and ‘gray sociologists’ the technical resources of the company ‘DataTile Ltd’, (Cyprus, identifier MCIT HE 301239). In it, Yelena Koneva was mentioned as co-founder.

The firm was founded in 2012. It is a designer of digital investigative planform and application decisions that until 2022, had been widely used in Russia. As the website Prigovor.ru has found out, the mentioned above Cyprus company, actually, served as a sponsor of Kiev on the wave of anti-Russian hysteria having taking upon itself the engagement to provide Ukraine until 2025 free of charge research applications which it was announced on the corporative website.

The roles among partners, obviously, were set in the following way:

The group ‘Khroniki’ and, perhaps, ‘Russian Field’** were assigned to do direct ‘field work’. This activity connected with gathering of primary date while carrying out ‘live polls’ on the streets, operators of mass polls by phone (quantitative researches) as well as operators of ‘qualitative’ researches (focus-groups).

- The group ‘Extreme Scan’ headed by Yelena Koneva is responsible for analysis, interpretation of collected data, and, which is most important, for promoting of the ‘product’ in public sphere, on platforms of foreign agents and undesirable organizations.

PUBLIC OPINION SURVEYS IS A WEAPON AGAINST RUSSIA

Yet, the ‘pacifism’ of Yelena Koneva from the very start was with an outrageous ‘Ukrainian’ bias, and her kindled interest to ‘sociology of war’ was directed at the ‘defeat of Russia’, what, actually, has become the ‘personal mission’ of Koneva and her project ‘Extreme Scan’. With researches on the theme of military conflict, she decided to deal ‘when she didn’t understand yet what had happened’, in February-March 2022 and up ‘to the end of the mission’. It was she who formulated the purpose of sociological polls among inhabitants of Russia:

‘The sociology of war, declared Yelena Koneva, ‘is needed as a basis of counteraction of Russian propaganda and information policy in context countries. It allows targeting the content and specifying channels of communication’.

In the interpretation of British and American ‘brain washers’, these principals of ‘sociology of war’ formulated by Yelena Koneva, imply collecting and analyzing of data from available sources, revealing and monitoring of existing and emerging trends in a target-country, as well as its information strategies. And, naturally, the analysis of reactions of the audience to various types of information influence. These are sociological or marketing tools for carrying out, in fact, intelligence activity in the depth of Russia for the needs of information war.

Exactly such ‘sociology of war’ game is played by ‘anti-war sociologists’ who have chosen for themselves such a weird ‘form of resistance’, as they, obviously, are acting of the side of the enemy and it its interests. And this could be already not a simple ‘form of protest’, but a so-called ‘forth form’ of high treason with such component elements as collection and analysis of non-classified information in the interests of foreign states, especially during military conflicts. May be, these ‘independent sociologists’ are dealing with such things in their ‘searching points of influence for reducing support for the Special Military Operation (SVO)?

MEASURING EFFECTIVENESS OF INFORMATION ATTACKS

The batch of publications and materials of the group ‘Khroniki’ and ‘Extreme Scan’, including appearances on platforms of foreign agents, show that the work has been performed according to the following pattern: influence – control of effectiveness of data dumping (reaction in the press, reaction and attitudes in social media – working out of further steps of impact).

Empirical material through quantitative and qualitative researches, including telephone and online polls, have been collecting by ‘sociologists’ of the mentioned groups – and we would like to stress it once more: it has been done in the interest of states hostile to Russia. Just to be safe, they say ‘we didn’t hand over anything’, some initial parts of researches were spilled to public access where they are ‘picked up’ by the Ukrainian side that, in general, meticulously selects all data – from attitudes among Russian citizens up to the current level of sales of tablets and alcohol, all these for further processing and using, actually, for information-military purposes.

We would like to point out that nobody was hiding such plans – the newspaper ‘The New-York Times’ marked everything as early as in April 2022: ‘Using the mix of high-tech and Cold War tactics, Ukrainian activists and Western institutions have begun to pierce the propaganda bubble in Russia, circulating information about the Ukraine war among Russian citizens to saw doubt about the Kremlin’s accounts’.

It is hardly likely that in repeatedly advertised operations against Russia there have been no traces of participation of the groups ‘Khroniki’ and ‘Extreme Scan’.

TRYING TO FIND ‘POINTS OF INFLUENCE’

Thus, in August 2022, as it is evident from the summary publication of Yelena Koneva’s group, in the field worked operators of the group ‘Khroniki’ with coordination of ‘Extreme Scan’.

Collection and analysis of data carried out in Russia’s regions up to August 2022 by field operatives (pollsters) of the group ‘Khromiki” and processed by ‘Extreme Scan’ were oriented for Ukrainian interests. From the reports is evident that the reaction of Russian citizens (and influence on them through questions of questionnaires – sowing doubts and panic) were collected in the context of information attacks of our rivalries. ‘Researches’ were flippantly pulling feelers to assess a possibility of a cognitive attack for ‘changing a positive attitude toward the SMP’.

For this purpose, operators of polls were planting on ‘substantive reasons’ for refusal to support the Special Military Operation (SVO). Among such ‘reasons’, they were pushing such things as ‘foot-dragging of the operation’, ‘lack of clear purposes of the operation’, ‘theoretical weakness of the army and military command’, ‘corruption in the army’. (The last option, by the way, played a bit later a cruel joke with Ukraine – Russian special services materialized a series of data about corruption in the defense department thus having shown that the force of Russia is in solving problems and not in muffling them – note of FLB.ru).

It was expected that yet another point of influence would be ‘new information of humanitarian character about victims from the Ukrainian side’ – these dirty staging of Bucha type and some such. By the way, ‘independent sociologists’ themselves believe in them despite of mismatches and even obvious fakes.

In them, of course, from one poll to another (from 2022 up to 2024), they were pumping up once a theme of ‘total mobilization’, once ‘inevitable mobilization is soon’, once ‘mobilization regarding…’. It is enough to look at questions in which respondents felt a ‘false bottom’ and ceased conversation with an operator.

SOCIOLOGY OF WAR

Any analysist who followed from the very beginning the developments of the Special Military Operation (SVO) will remember without any difficulty the mentioned above thematic ‘approaches’ of the Ukrainian Center of Information-Psychological operation (TsIPSO) that emerged in large scale in the Russian information field through social media, foreign agents and undesirable organizations. Into the picture has come also those who relate themselves to the block of ‘patriots’ but this is a separate subject. As to ‘independent sociologists’ from ‘Khroniki’ and Extreme Scan’, they were desperately ‘adjusting fire’ by way of collecting sociological data. Desperately because the collected data could not be spread on the picture that was needed for the West and Ukraine, that Russia ‘has already lost’. They were forced to fool themselves and their customers with the help of ingenious tricks that ‘the share of those opposed to military incursion is growing, although it is not yet evident’, but if you ‘analyze it differently, then the point of ‘support-nonsupport’ would be close as never before. ‘We are entering a new phase which – canonically, after anger and bargaining – will be a phase of depression’, so were conclusions of Yelena Koneva in August 2022. And all these ‘bargaining – depressions’ these ‘sociologists’ have been attributing to Russian citizens up until now. At the same time, information henchmen of ‘pollsters’ are pushing them into the public field trying to ‘blow’ Russia from within.

Attached to the mentioned ‘researches’ are also attempts to ‘get reaction’ of Russian citizens on terror acts and sabotage attacks. The bloody incursion of terrorists in the concert ‘Krokus City Hall’, to be more precise, data of polls about it, provoked among sociologists of the group ‘Extreme Scan’ a whole bouquet of indignation, as all polls pointed to Ukraine and its Western sponsors. “During only two weeks, without presenting any arguments, propaganda managed to persuade its audience that the terrorist attack is the work of the West and Ukraine’, said the Madame indignantly. The reason, according to Yelena Koneva, is ‘massive uncritical thinking of inhabitants of Russia’. It is a surprising conclusion taking into account that the terrorists were caught while they were moving towards the border with Ukraine that, with its aggressive sponsors from Washington, had been making a lot of efforts in order to discredit this objective circumstance.

The ‘sociologists’ of the group ‘Extreme Scan’ were also churning through in the Russian border regions. For instance, in the spring of 2023, under the cover of sociology, the group of Yelena Koneva was actively collecting data on ‘attitudes’ in Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk regions. ‘It was important for us to understand when the events can in the end influence a lowering of support of the Special Military Operation’ revealed Yelena Koneva in a conversation with foreign agents. And the bulk of collected materials, according to her own revelation, allowed the group ‘Extreme Scan’ to model a situation and to see ‘what will happen if the war would be transferred to the Russian territory’. In all appearances, their deep field researches ended up in the hands of Ukrainian and NATO officers of General Staffs who then planned the operation of incursion into the territory of the Kursk region.

‘We searched for all factors which can lead us to reduce support of the Special Military Operation (SVO), but they happened not to be new ones – these are personal charges. The question is of their (charges) intensity’ explained Madame Koneva the gist of her researches. In other words, while questioning inhabitants of the border regions, ‘sociologists’ were searching for a heavy ‘information brick’ so that the opponent would throw it at the heads of responders along with rockets of the armed forces of Ukraine.

We would like to explain that under ‘personal charges of inhabitants’ is understood everything – from the necessity of emergency evacuation to destroyed houses and deaths of citizens.

Apart from that, certain questions included in the lists, pointed at the interest of beneficiaries towards the theme of providing the border regions with necessary medical supplies, as well as transport connection with populated settlements. There were also questions of providing security of the territories like ‘is, perhaps, a curfew is imposed at your place?’ and so on and so forth.

Questions that were of interest for ‘independent sociologists’ in the Russian border region

In the whole bulk of information collected by agents of the opponent, by NATO intelligence services – they, to be sure, are not sleeping – the ‘sociology’ of Yelena Koneva is a necessary material for planners of the opponent needed for composing a ‘sociological and psychological portrait of inhabitants’ which is always included as a separate chapter in a plan of military operation.

It is not by chance that when insane Kiev facilitated by NATO countries decided, in August 2024, to carry out an adventure in the Kursk region, Yelena Koneva already on September 3, 2024, in the air of the ‘tele-makeup’ (tele-marathon) nourished the Ukrainians on ‘tablets of peremoga’ (victory in Ukrainian). She explained the ‘Russian army is week’, and the breakthrough of the Armed Forces of Ukraine into the Kursk region would definitely ‘influence the Russians’, ‘dismantle of support of SVO’ as well as ‘confidence in government institutions’. The anchor, having swallowed the pill, was shining from the ‘genius of the Kursk operation’ and its ‘perspectives’. (They were miserable for Kiev from the very outset, irrespective of any dreams inside NATO).

As to Yelena Koneva, she pointed out once more that ‘personal charges’ of inhabitants of Russian border regions are one of the main part of efforts directed at breaking of social support of the Special Military Operation (SVO). By the way, it becomes clear now why Ukrainian fighters were methodically burning empty houses in Kursk villages. This was part of a plan that was suggested by serviceable sociologists from the team of Madame Koneva.

BENEFICIARIES OF ‘BRAIN-WASHING’

It is characteristic that the whole ‘sociology of war’ in case of publishing never mentions the customer of polls, although it is a custom in the community. It is explained by ‘military censorship and repressions’, and sometimes even by ‘care about destinies’ of respondents for whom, we would like to note, there is, de jure, no threat. Phone polls are for record and that records, by the way, later go to someone, somewhere and it’s not quite clear by whom and how they are later used. So, this question arises for a reason.

The thing is that preliminary conclusions that collection, analysis and other processing of ‘sociological’ information from the territory of Russia were carried out (and has been carrying out) in the interest of opponents and unfriendly countries, and this is corroborated by a substantial circumstance.

The project Progovor.ru has found out that the sociological group ‘Extreme Scan’ of Yelena Koneva is connected by partnership relations with the Ukrainian-British organization ‘Open Minds Institute’ (OMI) created also in 2022.

The British ‘Open Minds’, as it is stated on the website of the organization, has become a key research center ‘on Russia-Ukraine information and psychological war and struggle against Russian disinformation’.

This firm has several clone-websites and two offices. One in Kiev. Another in London, which was opened at the end of 2023 and is a separate legal entity. The full legal name of it is ‘Openminds Global Ltd’, London, Companies House 15377359.

Finance reporting has not been uploaded so far, yet, according to preliminary estimates, the firm owns the capital to the amount of about 600 thousand pounds.

The founders of the firm are Gnezdovaky Svyatoslav Mikhailovich, born 1998 (Ukraine) and the Brit Ruda Simon, born 1983, ‘specialist on behavioral analysis’ including tools and methods related to managing the behavior of society.

The program director in this organization is Sofiya Gnezdovskaya, specialized in working out methods ‘on how to get through Russian propaganda and convey to the Russians the truth about Kremlin’s incursion’.

Among the possibilities declared by the organization:

- ‘Penetration in limited spheres through micro-targeted and mass unattributed channels of communication;

- ‘Dissemination of highly effective narratives using non-traditional methods;

- ‘Carrying out investigations and collecting of intelligence information on particular malevolent persons;

- ‘Quantitative and qualitative researches for finding clusters of audience according to conviction, aspirations, anxieties and fears’.

Thus, on the last direction sit ‘spotters’ from Russia – ‘anti-war sociologists’ with their ‘research’ activism. The British-Ukrainian projects ‘Open Minds’ assesses its activity as ‘splendid’, and systematically acts with them within one narrative.

Among partners of ‘Open Minds’ there is the already over-exposed squad of subversive centers, and a number of them are already included in the Russian registry of undesirable organizations. There are ‘Center for Strategic and International Studies’, ‘Atlantic Council’ (USA)*, Georgetown University. The same can be said about ‘London School of Economics (LSE) and Kings College London**. It is on the platform of the latter that, in April 2024, could be seen Sofiya Gnezdovskaya as the organizer of a conference, as well as Yelena Koneva in the capacity of ‘non-indifferent’ speaker. The entrance to this London symposium was strictly by invitation in order to avoid blunders.

On the site of the OMI there is a note also about partners of the founders of the recent past – the US Defense Ministry and FCDO, i.e. the Foreign Office from where British spies are just a step away. As investigators of the project ‘Underside’ has pointed out, ‘contacts of recently expelled employees of ‘HMG Russia Unit’ from Foreign Office who oversee the work of the Ukrainian Center of Information-Psychological Operations’ are throughout active intelligence officers of MI-6’.

Moreover, as acting partners of ‘Open Minds’ are mentioned also the Ministry of Digital Transformation of Ukraine and Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council. To put in more simply, there are open enemies of Russia, and, actually, beneficiaries of researches of ‘independent sociologists’ from Russia.

We would like to stress that some foreign media outlets, portraying the role of new technologies in struggle against Russia, made boasts of interacting with the ‘scientific community’. It was said that Sviatoslav Hnizdovsky and his group with the aid of AI had carried out some assessments that ‘helped’ Ukrainian authorities to make important decisions with regard to fighting at the front-line’, including while taking decisions about strikes at the Russian Kerch Bridge and other objects of infrastructure.

As a result, organizers of collecting data on Russia, as we see, did not cover themselves that much, and beneficiaries are known as well. The reports of Yelena Koneva are on the pages of the project ‘Open Minds’. ‘Open Minds’ is a partner of Yelena Koneva’s project. And the group ‘Khroniki’ is on standby. The whole scheme is complete.

10-koneva-shema

It remains, perhaps, to wait when, at last, corresponding Russian agencies will propose to participants of ‘gray sociology’ to take part in their own ‘research’. And will ask organizers to answer ‘sensitive questions’ of which, obviously, there are already quite enough for several hours of interrogations.
Author: Buba Filin

See the Russian version at: «Опрос с подвохом. Корректировщики и наводчики от социологии»

Also on this subject:

‘For sociologists from the group ‘Russian Field’ happened…Kats’
Sociology of influence. The research group ‘Russian Field’, from February 2022, has been cooperating with foreign agents and foreign sponsors.

‘Khodorkovsky has financed the proposal to ‘increase the U.S. military help to Ukraine up to 1 billion dollars a year’
The website Prigovor.ru has found out that the foundation ‘Future of Russia’ is the key sponsor of the analytical center ‘The Atlantic Council’ attached to NATO and the British Center ‘Chatham House’.