SINIR ÖTESİ DEZENFORMASYON VE KARŞI ÇERÇEVELEME: BANGLADEŞ HAKKINDA HİNDİSTAN BAĞLANTILI ASILSIZ İDDİALAR VE ÇEVRİMİÇİ KARŞI TEPKİLER, 5 AĞUSTOS 2024 – 11 ŞUBAT 2026

Öz

Şeyh Hasina hükümetinin 5 Ağustos 2024’te çöküşü, sınır ötesi aktörlerce hızla kullanılabilecek bir bilgi boşluğu yaratmıştır. Bu çalışma, 5 Ağustos 2024 ile genel seçim arifesi olan 11 Şubat 2026 arasında Hindistan medyası ve sosyal medya ağları üzerinden dolaşıma giren, Bangladeş’e ilişkin Hindistan bağlantılı yanlış ve yanıltıcı iddiaları ile Bangladeşli çevrimiçi aktörlerin bu iddialara verdiği yanıtları incelemektedir. 83 doğrulanmış külliyat öğesi üzerinde yürütülen nitel çerçeveleme analizi ve betimsel içerik kodlamasına dayanan çalışma, altı baskın yanlış bilgi çerçevesini belirlemektedir. En yaygın çerçeve, külliyatın %42,2’sini oluşturan 35 öğeyle komünal zulüm çerçevesidir. Bu çerçeve Bangladeş’i yanlış tanımlanan mağdurlar, yeniden kullanılan görseller ve yapay zekâ ürünü içerikler aracılığıyla Hindu mağduriyetinin mekânı olarak sunmuştur. Diğer çerçeveler devlet meşruiyetini (%20,5, 17 öğe), güvenlik ve egemenliği (%12,0, 10 öğe), medya sansürünü (%7,2, 6 öğe), ikili kültürel düşmanlığı ve seçim dönemi sentetik medyayı (%8,4, 7 öğe) hedef almıştır. Entman’ın çerçeveleme kuramı, Pan ve Kosicki’nin haber söylemi yaklaşımı ve Miskimmon ve diğerlerinin stratejik anlatı çerçevesinden hareketle, çalışma bu iddiaların münferit yanlışlıklardan ziyade koordineli bir epistemik strateji olarak işlediğini savunmaktadır. Rumor Scanner, Dismislab, AFP Fact Check ve BSS dâhil olmak üzere Bangladeşli karşı-çerçeveleyiciler, asimetrik bir bilgi ortamında epistemik onarıma katkı sağlayan 5 tanımlanabilir karşı-strateji kullanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bangladeş
• Hindistan
• Dezenformasyon
• Karşı-çerçeveleme
• Doğrulama gazeteciliği

CROSS-BORDER MISINFORMATION AND COUNTER-FRAMING: INDIA-LINKED FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT BANGLADESH AND ONLINE COUNTER-RESPONSES, 5 AUGUST 2024 TO 11 FEBRUARY 2026

Öz

The collapse of Sheikh Hasina’s government on 5 August 2024 created an information vacuum that was quickly filled by cross-border actors. This study examines India-linked false and misleading claims about Bangladesh that circulated through Indian media and social media networks between 5 August 2024 and 11 February 2026, the eve of the general election, and the responses of Bangladeshi online actors. Using qualitative framing analysis and descriptive content coding of 83 verified corpus items, the study identifies six dominant misinformation frames. The most prevalent frame was communal persecution, accounting for 42.2% of the corpus and 35 items. It portrayed Bangladesh as a space of Hindu victimhood through misidentified victims, recycled images, and AI-generated content. Other frames targeted state legitimacy (20.5%, 17 items), security and sovereignty (12.0%, 10 items), media censorship (7.2%, 6 items), bilateral cultural hostility, and election-period synthetic media (8.4%, 7 items). Drawing on Entman’s framing theory, Pan and Kosicki’s news-discourse approach, and Miskimmon et al.’s strategic narrative framework, the study argues that these claims operated as a coordinated epistemic strategy rather than isolated falsehoods. Bangladeshi counter-framers, including Rumor Scanner, Dismislab, AFP Fact Check, and BSS, used five identifiable counter-strategies that contributed to epistemic repair in an asymmetric information environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Bangladesh
• India
• Disinformation
• Counter-framing
• Fact-checking

Kaynakça

1. Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44235006 Bakir, V., & McStay, A. (2018). Fake news and the economy of emotions: Problems, causes, solutions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 154-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1345645
2. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611-639. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
3. Benkler, Y., Faris, R., & Roberts, H. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190923624.001.0001
4. Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R. G., & Livingston, S. (2007). When the press fails: Political power and the news media from Iraq to Katrina. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1460-2466.2007.00380_6.X Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317
5. Bhattacharya, J. (2025). Post-Hasina India-Bangladesh relations: Implications for Northeast India. Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, 28(2), 194-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/09735984251342025
6. Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019). The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation. Oxford Internet Institute. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2019/09/CyberTroop-Report19.pdf
7. Chadwick, A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190696726.001.0001
8. Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10, 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054

9. Datta, S. (2008). Bangladesh's relations with China and India: A comparative study. Strategic Analysis, 32(5), 755-772. https://doi.org/10.1080/09700160802309134
10. de Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal + Document Design, 13(1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
11. Egelhofer, J. L., & Lecheler, S. (2019). Fake news as a two-dimensional phenomenon: A framework and research agenda. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(2), 97-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1602782
12. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. https://fbaum.unc.edu/teaching/articles/J-Communication-1993-Entman.pdf
13. Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. University of Chicago Press.
14. Freelon, D., & Wells, C. (2020). Disinformation as political communication. Political Communication, 37(2), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1723755
15. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234336500200104
16. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271628145600152
17. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press. https://archive.org/details/frameanalysisess00goff_1/page/n611/mode/2up
18. Graves, L. (2016). Deciding what's true: The rise of political fact-checking in American journalism. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818795694
19. Graves, L., & Cherubini, F. (2016). The rise of fact-checking sites in Europe. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://doi.org/10.60625/risj-tdn4-p140
20. Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances, 5(1), eaau4586. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4586 Humprecht, E. (2019). Where 'fake news' flourishes: A comparison across four Western democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 22(13), 1973-1988. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1474241
21. Jack, C. (2017). Lexicon of lies: Terms for problematic information. Data & Society Research Institute. https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2017-08/apo-nid183786.pdf
22. Jalal, A. (1995). Democracy and authoritarianism in South Asia: A comparative and historical perspective. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511559372
23. Jamieson, K. H. (2018). Cyberwar: How Russian hackers and trolls helped elect a president. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190058838.001.0001
24. Jungherr, A., & Schroeder, R. (2021). Disinformation and the structural transformations of the public arena: Addressing the actual challenges to democracy. Social Media + Society, 7(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305121988928
25. Kalsnes, B. (2018). Fake news. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.809
26. Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094-1096. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323650280_The_science_of_fake_news
27. Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612451018
28. Lewis, D. (2011). Bangladesh: Politics, economy and civil society. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4762.2012.01117.x
29. Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Research Institute. https://media.glaad.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/10142527/DataAndSociety_CaseStudies-MediaManipulationAndDisinformationOnline.pdf
30. McNair, B. (2018). Fake news: Falsehood, fabrication and fantasy in journalism. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315142036
31. Mihelj, S., & Jimenez-Martinez, C. (2021). Digital nationalism: Understanding the role of digital media in the rise of new nationalism. Nations and Nationalism, 27(2), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12685
32. Miskimmon, A., O'Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315871264
33. Mohsin, A. (2003). Religion, politics and security: The case of Bangladesh. Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. https://www.ijmh.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/v2i4/D0108042416.pdf
34. Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32, 303-330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2
35. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963
36. Pattanaik, S. S. (2005). Internal political dynamics and Bangladesh's foreign policy towards India. Strategic Analysis, 29(3), 395-423. https://www.idsa.in/publisher/system/files/strategicanalysis_spattanaik_0905.pdf
37. Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011
38. Reese, S. D., Gandy, O. H., Jr., & Grant, A. E. (Eds.). (2001). Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410605689
39. Riaz, A. (2016). Bangladesh: A political history since independence. I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350985452
40. Riaz, A., & Rahman, M. S. (Eds.). (2016). Routledge handbook of contemporary Bangladesh. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315651019
41. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122. https:/ /doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
42. Schudson, M. (2003). The sociology of news. W. W. Norton. https://archive.org/details/sociologyofnews00schu
43. Silverman, C. (2015). Lies, damn lies, and viral content: How news websites spread and debunk online rumors, unverified claims, and misinformation. Tow Center for Digital Journalism. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8Q81RHH
44. Snow, D., & Benford, R. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197-217. https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~peoliver/SOC924/Articles/SnowBenfordIdeologyframeresonanceandparticipantmobilization.pdf
45. Tandoc, E. C., Jr., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining fake news: A typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143
46. Tsfati, Y., Boomgaarden, H. G., Strömbäck, J., Vliegenthart, R., Damstra, A., & Lindgren, E. (2020). Causes and consequences of mainstream media dissemination of fake news: Literature review and synthesis. Annals of the International Communication Association, 44(2), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2020.1759443 Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/2578016
47. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151. https://politics.media.mit.edu/papers/Vosoughi_Science.pdf
48. Waisbord, S. (2018). Truth is what happens to news: On journalism, fake news, and post-truth. Journalism Studies, 19(13), 1866-1878. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1492881
49. Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339031969_INFORMATION_DISORDER_Toward_an_interdisciplinary_framework_for_research_and_policy_making_Information_Disorder_Toward_an_interdisciplinary_framework_for_research_and_policymaking
50. Woolley, S. C., & Howard, P. N. (Eds.). (2018). Computational propaganda: Political parties, politicians, and political manipulation on social media. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190931407.001.0001
51. INTERNET SOURCES
52. Ahmed, K., & Ahmed, R. (2024, August 7). ‘We’ve ousted this regime and will do so again’: The students bringing change to Bangladesh. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/aug/07/bangladesh-gen-z-revolution-students-protest-change-sheikh-hasina-awami-dhaka
53. Alam, J. (2024a, December 9). Bangladesh and India hold talks aimed at defusing escalating tensions. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/bangladesh-india-hasina-yunus-minority-881cf57c2ab65fd1c64bc8aa0ae93783
54. Alam, J. (2024b, November 2). Hindus in Muslim-majority Bangladesh rally to demand protection from attacks. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/bangladesh-hindu-minority-attacks-hasina-yunus-beaddefd93f1b9dcf14d287543b023f5
55. Amnesty International. (2025). Human rights in Bangladesh. https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/asia-and-the-pacific/south-asia/bangladesh/report-bangladesh/
56. Brennen, J. S., Simon, F. M., Howard, P. N., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Types, sources, and claims of COVID-19 misinformation. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/types-sources-and-claims-covid-19-misinformation
57. Congressional Research Service. (2026, June 5). Recent political developments in Bangladesh: Background and issues for Congress (R48975). https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R48975.html Dieterich, C. (2024, August 13). Bangladesh’s Hindu community fears it will pay the costs of the ‘revolution’. Le Monde. https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/08/13/in-bangladesh-the-hindu-community-fears-it-will-pay-the-costs-of-the-revolution_6714809_4.html
58. Ellis-Petersen, H. (2024, September 3). ‘A myopic policy’: India’s backing of ousted Bangladesh leader Sheikh Hasina leaves it in a bind. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/03/a-myopic-policy-indias-backing-of-ousted-bangladesh-leader-sheikh-hasina-leaves-it-in-a-bind
59. Human Rights Watch. (2024, August 8). Vandalism, attacks follow Bangladesh prime minister’s exit. https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/08/08/vandalism-attacks-follow-bangladesh-prime-ministers-exit International Crisis Group. (2025). After the golden era: Getting Bangladesh-India ties back on track. Asia Report No. 353. International Crisis Group. https://www.crisisgroup.org/rpt/asia-pacific/bangladesh-india/353-after-golden-era-getting-bangladesh-india-ties-back-track
60. Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. (2024, August 6). Suo moto statement by EAM, Dr. S. Jaishankar in Lok Sabha on the situation in Bangladesh. https://www.mea.gov.in/speeches-statements?dtl/38098/Suo_moto_statement_by_EAM_Dr_S_Jaishankar_in_Lok_Sabha_on_the_situation_in_Bangladesh=
61. Ranjan, A. (2024, August 12). India’s options in post-Hasina Bangladesh. Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore. https://www.isas.nus.edu.sg/papers/indias-options-in-post-hasina-bangladesh/
62. Reuters. (2024a, August 9). Hundreds protest in Dhaka over violence against Hindus in Bangladesh. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/hundreds-protest-dhaka-over-violence-against-hindus-bangladesh-2024-08-09/
63. Reuters. (2024b, December 9). Bangladesh, India hope to clear ‘cloud’ over relations as officials meet. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladesh-india-hope-clear-cloud-over-relations-officials-meet-2024-12-09/
64. Reuters. (2024c, December 23). Bangladesh tells India it wants former PM Hasina back for ‘judicial process’. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladesh-tells-india-it-wants-former-pm-hasina-back-judicial-process-2024-12-23/
65. Reuters. (2025a, February 7). Bangladesh asks India to stop ousted PM Hasina making 'false statements'. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/bangladesh-asks-india-stop-former-pm-hasina-making-false-statements-2025-02-07/
66. Reuters. (2025b, April 4). India's Modi urges Bangladesh leader to avoid rhetoric that mars ties. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/indian-pm-modi-bangladeshs-yunus-hold-first-talks-after-hasina-exit-2025-04-04/