3 ms·
Those weren't the headlines in 2016 though. The "troops amassing" headlines only started appearing about 6 months before it all kicked off (that I can recall),
by rcarr 4y ago
Those weren't the headlines in 2016 though. The "troops amassing" headlines only started appearing about 6 months before it all kicked off (that I can recall), after the US intelligence services became pretty much certain it was going to happen. Even then European leaders had their heads buried completely in the sand, Macron flying back and forth making a fool out of himself thinking he could talk Putin out of it. In 2016, it was more general and then a year or two later there was the whole Salisbury incident and it intensified even more. It's kind of mad really that it took til 2016 for the sentiment to properly turn considering they invaded Crimea in 2014. Looking back, the entirety of Europe was in a state of denial because they were addicted to the cheap energy.
Edit:
Just realised I might have misinterpreted this and that you're instead talking about the headlines from 2013/2014. It seemed to me like it died down pretty quick after the Crimean invasion until 2016 but I'm probably entirely wrong and just wasn't paying enough attention.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoI'm aware. I'm highlighting that maybe Russia or China have earned the negative sentiment from their actions.
- rcarr 4y agoOh yeah, I am in total agreement with you. I'm just speculating that the powers that be who are making the actual chess moves might have known (or strongly suspected) what was going to happen long before it actually happened, that it might be happening again, and that we (the average joes) might be able to pick up on some of that through sentiment analysis of the headlines.