War only briefly eased divides in Finnish social media
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine briefly reduced polarization in Finnish social media debates, but not permanently, a new study shows. If even a crisis cannot unite, what do social media bubbles mean for democracy?
A joint study by the University of Helsinki and Aalto University examined whether Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine softened divisions in Finnish Twitter (now X) discussions on climate change and immigration. Researchers used network analysis on more than one million tweets.
The study found that motivated reasoning – people’s tendency to interpret events through their own worldview and political goals – prevented lasting depolarization. While opposing groups engaged slightly more with each other after the invasion, they still viewed the threat through their own ideological lenses.
“An external threat acted as a kind of shock, pushing people to find some common ground, but discussion was still filtered through motivated reasoning,” says University Researcher Antti Gronow from the University of Helsinki.
Although the situation briefly fostered mutual understanding, groups interpreted events differently.
“Some saw the war as a reason to accelerate the green transition, others as an argument to delay climate action. That’s classic motivated reasoning,” says doctoral researcher Yan Xia from Aalto University.
Deep divisions blocked lasting unity
The findings suggest that while external threats can reduce polarization, the effect is limited if people remain deeply tied to their prior beliefs. In Finland, despite a clear and shared national threat, entrenched divisions prevented lasting rapprochement.
“If even a war cannot bridge these divides, we must ask how strong the bubbles sustained by social media really are – and what that means for democracy,” says Professor Tuomas Ylä-Anttila of the University of Helsinki.
