This article examines the persuasive dynamics of war-related discourse on Reddit, focusing on the r/Europe megathreads that emerged during the first month of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Through critical discourse analysis, the study identifies how practices of framing, interdiscursivity, and social moderation shape a collective European perspective on the conflict. The findings demonstrate that users combine rational argumentation with intertextual references to political statements, statistical data, and media reports, alongside emotionally charged appeals, irony, memes, and popular-cultural allusions. Such multimodal strategies generate discursive synergy and consolidate pro-Western, anti-imperial, and anti-populist positions. Network effects and the platform's affordances enable the construction of a solidaristic community that frames the war through problem, responsibility, and moral lenses, while leaving solution-oriented frames comparatively marginal. The analysis shows that Reddit operates not merely as a forum for opinion exchange but as a media aggregator and reflexive moderator of European digital discourse on war, fostering both moral mobilisation and symbolic resistance to Russian aggression.
the expression of extreme viewpoints circulating in society. At the same time, moderation mechanisms and the voting system provide an opportunity to observe how the boundaries of what is considered permissible within public discourse in the digital environment are negotiated and established.
The Reddit network space functionally coincides with the political environment, which,
following D. Chong and J. Druckman, may be understood as a competitive arena where actors seek
to advance their preferred messages [
The first to introduce frame analysis as a research method was Erving Goffman, who argued that
the perception of information is mediated by procedures of classification, interpretation, and the
organization of experience originating from the external world. The cognitive schemas employed
by recipients in this process he termed “frames” [
At the same time, D. Kahneman and A. Tversky's linguistic experiments proved that framing
functionally not only elevates certain aspects of the problem above others, but also dims those that
seem unimportant to the communicator. This reflects the figure-ground principle, whereby the
differentiation between primary and secondary elements directs audience reception, orienting their
attention both toward and away from particular dimensions of a topic [
As T. Leeper and R. Slothuus observe, “Framing research has significantly advanced our
understanding of how mass communication shapes public opinion and political behaviour” [
In their study “Interdiscursivity of Donald Trump’s Narratives: A Cognitive Critical Discourse
Analysis”, I. Shevchenko and I. Zmiiova examined the narratives of the American president within
the field of interdiscursive influences on the mass audience[
I. Biskub views CDA as an effective instrument for uncovering latent ideologies and underlying
tendencies in digital media communication, particularly in domains related to global politics [
The application of Critical Discourse Analysis to the study of Reddit network communication is
justified by its methodological potential, whichwe have characterised in our previous studies. This
includes the method’s social orientation, directing scholarly attention towards societal issues; the
bi-directional influence in the discourse-social practice contour; and the pronounced
interdiscursivity of objects covered by the CDA methodology [
In this study, frame analysis was applied at the macro level to identify the overarching interpretative structures of the Reddit discussions (problem, responsibility, moral, and solution frames). Critical Discourse Analysis was used at the micro level to examine how these frames are linguistically realized through nomination, metaphor, evaluation, and intertextual reference. Thus, frames constitute the objects of CDA, serving as the analytical units through which ideological and power relations are critically interpreted.
Equally heuristic in shaping our methodological choice were the conceptual contributions of
CDA scholars such as T. van Dijk, M. Nonhoff, and N. Fairclough, who integrally covered social
reactions and cognitive and communicative practices within the capacious scientific concept of
“discourse”. This concept both reflects society through its linguistic world-view and simultaneously
renders visible the ways in which social reality is constructed through linguistic influence . As the
social context changes over time, the discourse follows the same change [
CDA primarily investigates social phenomena such as inequality, domination, and the abuse of social power, as well as the processes through which these forms are enacted, legitimised, reproduced, and challenged via texts and talk within social and political contexts [14]. A number of Ukrainian researchers have identified CCA as a productive method of studying the RussianUkrainian war in its media representations [15], [16], [17]. We assume that political discourse, whether manifested in online or traditional media spaces, tends toward polarization. It is based on the archetypal bin.ary opposition of Us/Them, or In-group/Out-group, in which the opposing pole may be variably represented either as neutral (the Other) or negatively connoted (the Enemy). Comment threads reproduce various meaning-making patterns, which are organized through different frames. Each frame is realized via a semantic macro-position, which, according to W. Gamson and K. Lasch, constitutes a package of meanings reflecting a particular mental schema [18].Thus, the framing of online messages can be understood as a key mechanism for interpreting events and socially constructing the world. According to T. van Dijk, “news is not characterized as a picture of reality, which may be correct or biased, but as a frame through which the social world is routinely constructed [19]. In today's digital world, news should be understood as all media messages delivered to information consumers via online channels. At the same time, it is important to take into account that the mechanism of the bubble filter [20]. leads to variable interpretations of reality. Dennis Chong and James N. Druckman, in particular, studied how frames function in a competitive environment, whereby they present different perspectives on the same event. The researchers emphasized how contextual parameters influence the audience's choice of a frame, which will subsequently shape public opinion [21].
For the analysis, we chose the online platform Reddit, which serves as a rich source of data for researchers studying discursive processes in digital spaces, due to the combination of the functions of a content aggregator and a platform for discussing socially important topics. As N. Adams rightly notes, “the primary purpose of Reddit is to facilitate the open discussion of almost any topic, and to bring people together into globally reaching forums to achieve this” [22]. According to the analytics platform Backlinko, in the second quarter of 2025, the number of daily unique Reddit users worldwide reached 110.4 million [23] (Figure 1).
In 2025, approximately 620 million posts were published on Reddit, representing an increase of 12.73% compared to 2024 (Figure 2).
According to Statista, nearly 5.97 billion units of content were created on Reddit during the second half of 2024, highlighting the scale and intensity of this communicative environment, which constitutes a valuable object of study for CDA [24] Of the content, 1.794 billion are comments, which demonstrates the activity of communities in developing and maintaining discourse.
The r/Europe subreddit represents one of the largest thematic communities within the platform, comprising over 11 million subscribers and spanning 50 countries. Despite its geographical breadth, the subreddit operates predominantly in English, thereby facilitating transnational messaging and receptive unification of discourse. The macro-themes under discussion include European politics, economics, social processes, cultural values, and related issues. Both its geographical scope and quantitative characteristics render r/Europe a significant communicative arena that contributes to shaping the global agenda and exerts influence on a wide audience. An important topic within this discursive field is the Russian-Ukrainian war, presented in the categories of its causes, consequences, conditions, and manifestations. Content within the subreddit, when sorted by the number of comments – a measure we regard as representative characteristic of the resonance of this media environment – reveals the ten most frequently discussed macro-themes. These are represented by so-called megathreads, t. e. large, centralized posts that accumulate user-generated content around a single core theme (Table 1).While diverse in characteristics, users demonstrate a shared engagement with the focal issue of each megathread.
Russian invasion of
Ukraine – Megathread 5 – Read the post about the
current rules Russian invasion of
Ukraine – Megathread VI Ukraine-Russia
Conflict – Megathread 4 Russia invades
Ukraine –
Megathread IV – Posting rules about the conflict relaxed, picture, video and text posts still not
allowed War in Ukraine – Megathread VIII Russia invades
Ukraine – Megathread II Russia invades
Ukraine –
Megathread III – Please be aware that individual posts are
only allowed for major developments /r/worldnews Live Thread: Ukrainer/Europe 10.
(February 21, 2022 /r/worldnews Live Thread: Ukraine
Russia Tensions (February 21, 2022
Russia invades
Ukraine – Megathread I – Rule changes inside r/Europe r/Europe
We examined this list of megatrends as an object of critical discourse analysis using frame theory and identified a number of significant discursive characteristics.
Firstly, the repetition of megathread titles indicates a standardized approach of moderators to framing the topic. This approach reflects the peculiarities of the war's reception: events in Ukraine are presented not as isolated incidents but as a continuous, ongoing process, structured into series by number. Secondly, the different number of voices and comments reflects the changing intensity of the audience's attention. From the perspective of CDA, this points to the communicative level of the subreddit, serving as an indicator of the emotional and thematic intensity of discourse during specific periods. It is noteworthy that the peaks of audience activity coincide with important military and political events that act as communication triggers, as well as with changes in moderation rules, such as the relaxation of restrictions on the posting of visual content. Thirdly, by applying a framing dimension to the analysis, several notable frames can be identified: the “invasion” frame, which sets an unambiguous interpretation of the event as an act of aggression; the “war” frame, which emphasizes the protracted and enduring nature of the armed conflict; and the “tensions” frame, which describes the situation in a certain embryonic or uncertain phase without explicitly acknowledging combat. This formulation may reflect a discourse of containment or anticipation, characteristic of the early stages of events, or a position that avoids unequivocal accusations.
Within the three identified macro-frames, further discursive analysis of smaller, thematically and semantically narrower frames is carried out. We define such micro frames as stable patterns of interpretation that form a specific optic for perceiving events within a broader discourse. The analysis of micro frames is carried out using the CDA methodology, which takes into account lexical-semantic, pragmatic and other features that serve to represent meanings.
In particular, we applied Chong and Druckman's (2007) frame typology, operationalising four frame categories: problem, responsibility, moral, and solution. Each comment was coded according to its dominant frame, determined by the communicative intention; at the same time, lexical and rhetorical indicators as well as power ones were marked following the logic of CDA.
When framing the war in Ukraine within large-scale online discussions (megathreads), we monitored the discursive manifestations of four types of frames, correlating them with heuristically valuable categories of CDA identified as pertinent to our study (Table 2).
and Action Proposals “conflict,” etc.
Labels and epithets: “occupier,” “fascist,” “victim,” “weak West”
Identification of actors responsible for decisionmaking and influencing
events Coding specific actions proposed as solutions to the problem
Within the scope of this study, a targeted sample of user comments from the Reddit platform was constructed. In total, 1,500 comments were analysed from the r/Europe megathreads published during the first month of Russia’s full-scale invasion (late February – March 2022). In order to ensure representativeness, 300 comments were selected from each of the five most resonant megathreads.
The identification of frames according to Chong and Druckman’s typology yielded the following results: • • • •
The problem frame is represented by 630 comments (42%). Within this discourse, the dominant descriptors of the war include “aggression”, “invasion”, and “crime”.
The responsibility frame is represented by 450 comments (30%). It clearly identifies Russia as the perpetrator, while criticism is simultaneously directed towards the indecisiveness of the UN (e.g.: The UN is just a diplomatic forum, do not expect it to be anything more) and the slow and lenient response of the EU (e.g.: The current sanctions are too soft. The EU must end all diplomatic and business relations with Russia. A terrorist state should be cut off from everything).
The moral frame is represented by 285 comments (19%). It is characterized by the use of categorical evaluative terms such as “barbarism”, “genocide”, and “crimes against humanity”. In the personified dimension, Putin is labelled a “scumbag” and a “villain”, while Girkin is called a “mass murderer”.
The solution frame is represented by 135 comments (9%). It encompasses proposals concerning the supply of weapons, the imposition of stricter sanctions, and NATO intervention. Users called for providing Ukraine with weapons free of charge (e. g.: as a taxpayer, I would not mind if we just gave it to them for free) and demanded a complete cessation of Russian oil and gas imports, acknowledging economic losses as a necessary trade-off for saving human lives.
The dynamics of frames in the first month of the war are also indicative. In the first week (February 24, 2022 – March 2, 2022), the discourse was characterised by maximum emotional tension and focused on the problem frame (approximately 60% of comments). This perspective can be explained by the shock effect: users tried to comprehend the very fact of war as “aggression”, “invasion”, and “crime”. At this stage, the principal communicative task was to establish a clear position on the unfolding events and to anchor them within understandable categories, notably by designating the war as an unequivocal act of Russia’s aggression.
During the second week, the focus gradually shifted towards the responsibility frame (35–40% of comments). Whereas the initial priority had been to acknowledge the fact of aggression, attention subsequently turned to the actors from whom a proportionate response was expected. Institutional criticism emerged, primarily directed at the EU, which was reproached for adopting a perceived lenient stance (e. g.: “sanctions are too soft”, “diplomatic relations with Russia must be terminated”). This reflects a discursive transition from initial shock to demands for concrete action and the attribution of responsibility not only for the aggression itself but also for institutional inaction.
In the third and fourth weeks, the moral frame came to the fore (up to 25% of comments). Its intensification coincided with the emergence of reports about mass crimes against civilians in Mariupol and the shelling of residential areas (e. g.: “Given Russia’s actions in Ukraine, exemplified by such extreme cases as Mariupol, should they not be called terrorist attacks?”, or “I would support airstrikes on Russia to break the blockade of Mariupol. That city is being erased from the map”). The moral lens enabled users not only to describe events as criminal but also to assign categorical evaluations: “genocide”, “barbarism”, “crimes against humanity”. At this stage, one may observe the crystallization of a symbolic frame in which the war is represented as absolute evil.
The analysis of discursive practices in Reddit megathreads devoted to the Russia-Ukraine war has also made it possible to trace the specificity of conflict representation in the networked environment. We focused on four key dimensions: discursive framing and actor positioning; practices of moderation and censorship; interdiscursivity and network effects; and underlying ideological orientations (Table 3). This approach enabled us to identify how, within online discussions, the public discourse of war is not merely reproduced but also transformed, bringing together political optics, emotional dimensions, network effects, and the self-regulatory practices of digital communication.
Critical discourse analysis has demonstrated that, during the first month of the Russia–Ukraine war, Reddit (r/Europe) functioned as a contested discursive arena in which a distinctly empathetic pro-Ukrainian framing prevailed. Headlines such as “Dark day for Europe” reinforced a dramatic positioning of the event, which became a central meaning-making reference point for the subreddit, particularly among users from European countries who displayed high levels of discursive engagement. The deletion of almost one third of comments illustrates the controlled nature of the discursive field: marginal or openly antagonistic voices challenging the dominant frame were blocked through moderation. A networked community supporting Ukraine was emerged, ranging from symbolic expressions to tangible actions (e.g. donations).
Megathread 1 in our dataset, among other functions, served as a channel for transmitting alternative information to a Russian audience. Readers were explicitly encouraged to disseminate appeals of an expositional and educational nature within the Russian segment of social media. By contrast, Megathread 2 exhibited pronounced interdiscursivity, shaped by references to historical facts and events that illuminate the deeper roots of the Russia-Ukraine war (e.g. Catherine II, the Black Sea Fleet, Crimea, fleet division, the lease agreements, and broader post-Soviet processes). A significant role was played by an ironic mode of discourse aligned with traditions of popular laughter culture. Comments frequently contained cultural allusions ridiculing the Russian political elite and circulated memes equating the so-called “Z” symbol of Russian aggression with the swastika (e.g. “Russia has found its swastika”).
Our analysis further revealed that satirical allusions within the media discourse of r/Europe’s Megathread 3 perform a significant delegitimizing function by deconstructing the symbolic capital of political actors labelled as enemies. One illustrative example is a parodic narrative describing Putin as dispatching mercenaries to hunt “moose and squirrel” – an allusion to the animated series “Rocky and Bullwinkle” (1959–1964). Interdiscursive appeals to the Cold War, as well as to the “Smurf village”, contribute to a discursive field of absurdity in which the Russian president is reconfigured not as a state leader but as a caricatured figure. Thus, humour here acts as a form of counter-discourse: it reduces fear of the aggressor while highlighting the irrationality of his actions, reframing the binary opposition of “Us/Them” to the format of “Rational and Civilized / Ridiculous and Absurd”.
Megathread 4 displays a pronounced discourse of moral mobilisation, e.g.: Europe “must respond”, NATO “has to do something”, otherwise Europeans face catastrophic consequences and a historic failure.
Our analysis suggests that the dominant position of users across the examined r/Europe megathreads is broadly liberal and pro-Western, articulated through anti-populist and anti-imperial rhetoric. In Megathread 5, we observe a clear synergy effect generated by the interplay of multiple discursive modes, including historical references, jokes, allusions, and memes. This interplay amplifies the positively marked self-identification component of the binary opposition Us/Them, while simultaneously neutralising utterances that articulate opposing viewpoints. Through such dynamics, the subreddit operates as a solidaristic community reinforced by network effects.
The analysis of digital discourse on Reddit (r/europe) demonstrates that the platform functions not merely as an information-sharing space but as a self-regulating public sphere, where users collectively construct meanings of war and delineate the boundaries of what is morally and communicatively acceptable. The evolution of frames during the first month of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine followed the logic of transition from emotional-reactive to normative and moral discourse, indicating a process of collective moral positioning within the online community.
The predominance of the problem and responsibility frames reflects a high level of cognitive and ethical engagement among users, who seek not only to describe events but also to define accountability, agency, and the necessity for response. The subsequent strengthening of the moral frame can be interpreted as a digital form of social mobilization, transforming discourse into a site of shared ethical reaction. In this sense, Reddit serves as a mediator of European values, shaping a humanitarian, anti-populist, and anti-war narrative within transnational communication.
The pronounced interdiscursivity of the megathreads reveals how the combination of serious argumentation, historical allusions, and humorous memes produces a networked counter-discourse aimed at delegitimizing the aggressor. Humor and satire emerge as strategic tools of critical discursive resistance, not as peripheral elements. Reddit thus exemplifies a communicative environment where cognitive, emotional, and cultural resources are integrated to construct and maintain a shared moral stance.
From a methodological perspective, the integration of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and framing theory proved effective for examining digital political discourse. This combined approach exposes both the ideological structures of influence and the linguistic and cognitive mechanisms through which social legitimization operates. Hence, framing on Reddit does not simply mirror social reality but actively participates in its construction through language use and communitybased moderation.
Future research should expand the dataset to include other subreddits and track the longitudinal evolution of frames from 2022 to 2025. Such an extension would provide deeper insight into the transformations of European public discourse on war within digital communication environments. Declaration on Generative AI When writing the article, the authors used GPT chat to check grammar and spelling. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as necessary and bear full responsibility for the content of the publication. The concept, idea, presentation of material, calculations, and conclusions belong exclusively to the authors. [14] T. A. van Dijk, Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society. 4(2) (1993) 249283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006 [15] B. M. Polishchuk, Voiennyi dyskurs novyn yak komunikatyvne yavyshche: osnovni pidkhody do analizu [Military news discourse as a communicative phenomenon: basic approaches to analysis]. Linguistic research. 62 (2025) 157-168. DOI:10.34142/23127546.2025.62.13. [in Ukrainian]. [16] I. Matseliukh, Krytychnyi dyskurs-analiz pryntsypiv propahandy Y. Hebbelsa u vysvitlenni viiny Rosii proty Ukrainy na kanali RT [Critical discourse analysis of the principles of propaganda of J. Goebbels in the coverage of Russia's war against Ukraine on the RT channel]. Problems of the Humanities: Collection of Scientific Works of the Ivan Franko Drohobych State Pedagogical University. Series "Philology". (61) (2025) 86–99 DOI:10.24919/25224565.2025.61.10 [in Ukrainian]. [17] O. Sydorenko, O. Bondarenko, K. Riabokon, Zaklyk yak movlennievyi akt obiektyvatsii zlochyniv proty osnov natsionalnoi bezpeky Ukrainy [Appeal as a speech act of objectification of crimes against the foundations of national security of Ukraine]. Philological Treatises. 17(1) (2025) 78-89. https://www.doi.org/10.21272/Ftrk.2025.17(1)-7 [in Ukrainian]. [18] W. A. Gamson, The Political Culture of Social Welfare Policy. William A. Gamson, Kathryn Eilane Lasch. Center for Research on Social Organization, University of Michigan. Paper prepared for the Pinhas Sapir International Conference on Development: Social Policy Evaluation: Health, Education, and Welfare, Tel Aviv University, Israel, December. 1980. [19] T. A. Van Dijk, News analysis. Case studies of international and national news in the press.
Hillsdale, L. Erlbaum, 1988. [20] E. Pariser, The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. New York: Penguin Press, 2011. [21] D. Chong, J. N. Druckman, Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American
Political Science Review. 101(4) (2007) 637–655. [22] N. N. Adams, ‘Scraping’ Reddit posts for academic research? Addressing some blurred lines of consent in growing internet-based research trend during the time of Covid-19. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society. 20(1) (2022) 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-12-2021-0123 [23] Banklinko. Reddit User and Growth Stats, 2025. http://backlinko.com/reddit-users. [24] Statista, Number of pieces of content created on Reddit from July to December 2024 (in millions), 2025. URL: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1319008/reddit-content-created/