The same day, RT ran an interview with Italian sports journalist Marcello Foa which it headlined, “What’s up with WADA? ‘Anti-doping agency practicing double standards against Russian Olympians’.” RT’s editorial stance, including its defense of Russia against the charge of hacking, emerged from its introductory paragraphs and questions:

Western media and government reaction was to divert attention from the news that some US athletes took banned substances by alleging Russian hackers were able to acquire the details, Italian sports journalist Marcello Foa told RT. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has confirmed its databases had been compromised, saying the attack was carried out by a hacking group known as Fancy Bear. And judging by Wednesday’s headlines, the organization’s alleged ties to Russia excited the mainstream media far more than the doping scandal itself. The Russian government has dismissed any possibility that it had anything to do with the incident. RT: Why has the media chosen to focus on the hack attack rather than on the revelations themselves? (…) RT: Do you think the athletes involved in this scandal will be treated any differently by the media and other competitors?”

None of RT’s published questions stated that the drugs had been provided legally, under the TUE rule; indeed, the final question began, “If these medications were indeed prescribed to them,” as if there were doubts about it. Overall, the article appears to have been an attempt to defend the hackers and publicize the leaks, by implicating the Western media in the “scandal.”

Russian diplomatic accounts took the same line. On September 15, the Russian Embassy in London tweeted about the leaks, pointing out that far more Western than Russian athletes had been implicated. The tweet focused, literally, on the word, “hypocrisy.”

Archived on October 9, 2018. (Source: Twitter / @RussianEmbassy)

The same day, the Russian Embassy in South Africa tweeted a link to the RT article mentioned above, highlighting the claim of “double standards.”

Archived on October 9, 2018. (Source: Twitter / @EmbassyofRussia)

This messaging reached to the very top of Russian politics. On September 19, 2016, President Vladimir Putin gave an address to Russian Paralympic athletes who had been banned from competition because of the doping scandal. Putin’s comments on the leaks are worth repeating in full:

As you know, we do not welcome hackers and their actions, but it was thanks to them that we learned that people who took part in the Olympic Games and were outwardly perfectly healthy were actually taking prohibited substances that gave them and give them clear advantages in sports competition. Why were our Paralympic athletes the only ones banned from taking part in the Paralympics on the sole basis of some incomprehensible suspicion of taking who knows what substances? This was clearly a dishonest, hypocritical and cowardly decision.

Putin explicitly thanked the hacking team, a comment which may well have caused champagne to pop in GRU headquarters. He also called the decision to ban Russian athletes “hypocritical,” and claimed that the ban was based on “some incomprehensible suspicion,” rather than a whistleblower’s testimony and 95 pages of report. This messaging was fully aligned with the state’s broadcasters, declared and undeclared.

At the other end of the communications scale, the “troll farm” in St. Petersburg also attacked WADA and its investigation, albeit rather later. On September 30, troll account @nataturn, one of the many troll-farm accounts later suspended by Twitter, posted a number of attacks on the agency which have been recovered by NBC News.

List of troll farm accounts provided to the U.S. Congress by Twitter, showing @nataturn. (Source: House Democrats)

Each tweet was addressed to a public figure, including sports writer Erin Strout, BBC Scotland sports journalist Tom English, WADA head of communications Catherine MacLean, sports physician Margo Mountjoy, journalist Eoghan Sweeney, commentator Nick McCarvel, and CBC journalist and producer Stephanie Jenzer.

@erinstrout WADA got hacked! Check it out, maybe you will want to write about it https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs @BBCTomEnglish Hello! Here’s what I found on Twitter. Can you please comment on this? https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs @CatherineM_WADA Can you comment on this? Do you think it’s fake? Because it doesn’t look like one @margomountjoy What’s the deal with doping use? I though WADA was fighting it. Can you explain this? https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs @buileshuibhne Hello! I think I got something for you. WADA is hiding something. Is this a case for investigation? https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs @NickMcCarvel Hello! WADA shadow activities exposed! Here’s what I just read https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs @StephJenzer Hello! I think everybody should know it. WADA leaks told us a lot more than we wanted https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs

In all, the account tweeted to at least 30 journalists and commentators, asking them to read the post and comment on it. One tweet was addressed to @Jenn_Abrams, Jenna Abrams, arguably the troll farm’s most famous creation, who boasted 70,000 Twitter followers in “her” prime.

@Jenn_Abrams @wada_ama That’s unbelievable! It’s nice to realize your favorite athletes are frauds and @wada_ama covers their asses!

Most of the posts came with a Twitter-shortened URL, https://t.co/sBGo3VvRGs. The link led to a broken Medium page called “Bullshitist.” Entering it into a search bar revealed the original URL, https://bullshit.ist/doping-vs-money-who-wins-df5f8f0d93a3#.67j0be6fp. This suggested that the original headline was “Doping vs Money: Who Wins?”

Result of entering the shortened link into the search bar. (Source: @DFRLab)

A Google search for that headline returned just one hit: an archived Medium article dated September 29, 2016, one day before @nataturn’s posts.

Results of the search. (Source: Google)

The archive link led to an article under the byline of — Jenna Abrams.

The article tweeted by @nataturn and attributed to Jenna Abrams. Note the byline, the attack on WADA in the second paragraph (“corrupted bastards”), and the claim of “rules violation” (highlighted). Archived on October 18, 2017. (Source: archive.is, from bullshit.ist)

The piece was written in Abrams’ signature style, calling WADA “corrupted bastards,” and addressing the accusation of Russian hacking with withering sarcasm:

Yeah, Russian hackers would use such an obvious symbol as bear. Their site also looks more like something developed by the Western anarchist hacker group, Anonymous.

The article claimed, falsely, that the leaks exposed “more than one questionable case of rules violation.” It went beyond official Russian government lines, arguing that the U.S. had bribed WADA to allow it to cheat.

At the same time, we can see top US athletes (Serena Williams and Simone Biles, for example) being permitted to participate in the Olympics despite the banned drugs. What was the donation by the US to WADA? Yes, the biggest of them all, over $2 million (and there is only official information).

The article also accused Reedie and his family of personal corruption.

Suddenly, on August 4th WADA changed its’ mind and let Kenya participate. Why? Follow the money! Days before the Olympics significant amounts of money were transferred to the accounts of Sir Craig Reedie’s family.

This was a substantial effort by the troll farm, albeit a late one: a 500-word article under its best-performing byline, backed up by amplification from at least one other troll account which targeted at least 30 public figures and commentators.

The messaging continued for a considerable while. In November 2016, RT ran another piece accusing WADA of hypocrisy; yet another, by the same author, came the following month.