Influence Operations 2.0 as an Authoritarian Innovation: Evidence of the Evolution of Social Media Manipulation from South East Asia

In recent years, domestic influence operations (IO) on social media have raised growing concerns due to their role in manipulating public opinion. These operations represent an authoritarian innovation—a novel strategy employed by political elites to curtail political participation and suppress scrutiny. While many studies recognize IO as a dynamic and evolving phenomenon shaped by shifting platform policies and political contexts, few have explored how these operations adapt over time or where they may be headed. This gap in research is partly due to the secrecy surrounding IO campaigns, which complicates systematic study. Existing analyses often rely solely on social media data, limiting their scope to observable online activities and neglecting the broader operational networks behind IO. To address this limitation, this study examines the evolving nature of IO through 78 interviews with insiders in Thailand, the Philippines, and Indonesia. Southeast Asia provides a critical context for this research, characterized by high social media penetration, low news readership, and fragile democracies. Our findings reveal significant changes in five key aspects of IO practices. First, there is a shift in commissioners: whereas IO was traditionally led by state governments, a broader array of clients, including private and hybrid entities, is now involved. Second, the execution of IO is increasingly outsourced to private-sector actors, reflecting a professionalization of operations. Third, in terms of social media accounts, IO has moved from prioritizing quantity to focusing on quality, with fewer but more carefully crafted, role-specific, and influential accounts. Automated bots, once prominent, now play a minimal role. Fourth, content strategies have evolved: earlier IO campaigns relied on repetitive, state-aligned messaging, whereas contemporary campaigns use data analytics to tailor narratives to specific audiences. Instead of disseminating outright disinformation, modern IO reframes narratives and sensationalizes topics to elicit emotional engagement. Finally, dissemination strategies now rely heavily on data-driven responsiveness, optimizing communication for maximum impact. By studying the evolution of IO as an authoritarian innovation, this study highlights how digital platforms are increasingly leveraged by authoritarian actors to refine their strategies of public manipulation. Understanding these shifts is essential for addressing the challenges IO poses to democratic resilience in Southeast Asia and beyond.