In an era of rapid information flow, the line between legitimate criticism and personal attacks has become increasingly blurred. In the case of politicians and high-ranking state figures, debate often moves away from assessing their decisions, policies and actions, shifting towards claims, labels and accusations aimed at undermining their integrity, reputation and credibility.
An example is the video footage published on July 2 with the caption "Raki is bad for the Prime Minister!", which featured the acting Prime Minister, Albin Kurti, momentarily losing his balance while walking (see hereThe caption suggested that the cause of this incident was alcohol consumption.
The video was shared on social media and, from the comments of users, it was noticeable that a part of the audience had accepted this claim as credible. The case was widely commented on in public opinion (see here), prompting the reaction of the acting Government spokesman, Arlind Manjhuka, who denied the claim (see here). His post also published a video filmed from a different angle, showing the same event. According to him, Kurti at that moment had stopped to take pictures with some citizens.
Based on these video materials alone, it is not possible to confirm whether or not the Prime Minister was under the influence of alcohol. However, an internet search with the words “Albin Kurti drunk”, in addition to this video material, also reveals other publications and statements claiming that he appeared in public under the influence of alcohol on various occasions (see here, here and here ). However, in none of these cases is evidence or facts presented to support the claims.
Another form of attacks on public figures appears in verbal clashes on the political scene, where in addition to criticism of public decisions or actions, labels and accusations are also used that target the individual's character.
In two reactions published on June 15 and 25 against the Mayor of Prishtina, Përparim Rama, Vetëvendosje Movement official Dejona Mihali used derogatory language and raised accusations of links to organized crime and mismanagement, without presenting evidence to support these claims (see here and hereIn addition to allegations about public issues, the reactions also contained labels aimed at Rama's personal figure, presenting him in a negative light to public opinion.
Such cases show how public debate can shift from criticism of a public figure's actions or policies, towards attacks on their character, reputation, and identity.
The constant repetition of unfounded claims and accusations against a public figure raises questions about the reasons for using such narratives and the impact they may have on public perception.
During research into this phenomenon, I came across the English term "Character Assassination", known in Albanian as "vrasja e karakterit".
What is "character assassination"?
According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, the term "Character Assassination" means the defamation of a person, usually with the intent of destroying public confidence in him (see here).
Meanwhile, the academic research group CARP (Character Assassination and Reputation Politics) defines this phenomenon as the deliberate destruction of an individual's reputation or credibility through attacks on their integrity. According to the group, for centuries, "character assassination" has been a widespread method in the struggle for power, and that the techniques of this phenomenon include negative campaigns, the spread of rumors, anonymous defamation on social networks and online platforms, as well as many other tactics. All of these are said to be common practices in contemporary politics, but character attacks can also be used against celebrities, athletes, scientists and other individuals with a high public profile. The group explains that attackers target the privacy, values and identity of their victims, with the aim of discrediting them and making them the prey of public contempt and ridicule.
The two cases presented above illustrate different ways in which public perception of a political figure can be influenced. In one case, the claim was built on the interpretation of a visual material, while in the other through unsubstantiated labeling and accusations. However, these cases alone are not sufficient to determine whether we are dealing with an organized attempt at “character assassination”, as such an assessment requires a broader analysis of the context, sources, purpose and coordination of narratives.
To better understand how this phenomenon manifests itself in practice, Hibrid.info reviewed examples documented by fact-checking organizations and disinformation researchers, who have analyzed attacks on public figures as part of strategies to damage their reputations (see here).
Zelensky's case as an example
According to EDMO, the European network of fact-checking organizations, one of the most documented cases of attacks on the reputation of a political figure is that of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Since the beginning of the Russian aggression in Ukraine, he has been the subject of a large number of false claims aimed at presenting him negatively in the eyes of public opinion.
The allegations leveled against Zelensky have ranged from extreme and absurd accusations to seemingly more plausible allegations of corruption or illicit enrichment. Among them have been allegations that he and his wife have purchased luxury properties, expensive vehicles, and high-value objects, without any evidence to support these claims.
This case shows that “character assassination” is not necessarily based on a single allegation, but is often built through the constant repetition of negative accusations and narratives. Even when individual allegations are refuted, their repetition and circulation on various channels may result in a negative perception of the attacked figure among a portion of the audience.
This means that attacks on the reputation of public figures are not only aimed at spreading false information, but also at creating a long-term perception of an individual. The goal is not always for the public to believe a single claim, but to remain in constant doubt about the integrity and credibility of the attacked figure.
In conclusion
The cases presented in this article illustrate the different ways in which public perception of a political figure can be influenced. In the case of Albin Kurti, a video accompanied by an interpretive caption created an allegation about his behavior, while in the case of Përparim Rama, the attacks focused directly on his character and reputation through labels and accusations.
Although these cases, taken individually, are not sufficient to determine whether we are dealing with an organized attempt at “character assassination,” they demonstrate how public debate can shift from examining the actions and policies of a public figure to creating negative perceptions of the person themselves. As documented international examples show, reputational impact is often built not by a single claim, but by the continuous repetition of negative narratives.
In the face of such content, it is important for the public to critically evaluate claims that aim to influence perceptions of a public figure, especially when they are based on interpretations, labels or accusations that are not supported by evidence. Verifying the source of information, seeking documented facts and distinguishing between opinion and factual claim are important steps to avoid the influence of manipulative narratives. It should also be borne in mind that repeating a claim does not make it true.