They are active on social media, give advice to the government and the military, call for immediate decisive action, but never leave their sofa. They are ‘armchair experts’, a modern phenomenon that threatens not only the information space, but also the moral stability of society in times of war. They do not stand on the front line, do not help volunteers, do not bring any benefit to society and do not see the consequences of their calls, but irresponsibly try to dictate what politicians, the military and everyone else should do in a given situation. But what is the real danger behind their loud words? And are these ‘sofa troops’ becoming enemies from within?
At a time when the country is going through a brutal war, every voice, every call has weight. Social networks are full of ‘sofa experts’ who fill their feeds with calls for decisive action every day. They proclaim with pathos how we must ‘immediately attack’, ‘quickly end the war’, and ‘destroy the enemy’. But behind these loud words, there is nothing but a keyboard and a comfortable chair.
Who is an ‘armchair expert’?
An ‘armchair expert’ is a person who has managed to become an expert in everything from geopolitics to nuclear physics, from medicine to conspiracy theories, and with just a few YouTube videos and a scroll through Facebook. His main tool is a smartphone in his hands and an unquenchable desire to speak out. He sits at home on his soft sofa, and from the height of his experience (gained, of course, on the Internet), he confidently gives advice on how to properly govern a country, solve economic crises or win a war – all from the comfort of his sofa. Why would he do this if real experts, with their diplomas and years of practice, are definitely doing everything wrong?
An armchair expert always has his own theory that refutes all official data and expert opinions. He always ‘knows best’, although he does not quite understand how it works. But this does not stop him from instructing doctors, telling the military how to fight, or politicians how to run the country.
His weapons are sarcastic comments and memes, and his battlefield is social media. He knows how to add a little bile and drama to any topic, turning real problems into cheap online discussions. And, of course, he is always right. If someone disagrees, they are automatically an enemy who does not understand anything about ‘real life’. The real drama of the sofa expert is that, from the comfort of his living space, he is sure that he knows more than anyone else. And his endless ‘expert’ stream of words destabilises not only the Internet space, but also reality.
‘Armchair experts’ are people who have never been on the front line, have never seen the horrors of war with their own eyes and do not understand the complexity of the situation, but easily advise the army, politicians and international organisations on how to act. They sit in comfortable surroundings, often far from the war zone, and post on social media with one thing in common: irresponsible calls for harsh or quick solutions.
They often pose as strategists, military analysts, and diplomats, although their education and experience are limited to phrases from news headlines and online posts. They put themselves above real soldiers, politicians and volunteers, demanding radical action, while they themselves have not made any real contribution to supporting the army or helping people.
According to a social survey conducted by the Razumovsky Centre from 20 to 28 June 2024, we have the following picture:
- 61% of respondents oppose any negotiations with Russia;
- 51.5% of our compatriots support the return of Ukraine’s 1991 borders.
These are the serious intentions of our rear. But no one thinks about the cost of our own compatriots – our soldiers – defending our borders every day, losing their health and dying under enemy fire.
A few more figures come to mind:
- 46% of Ukrainians believe that in the midst of a full-scale military confrontation, there is no shame in being a draft dodger;
- 49% of respondents call for mass civil resistance within Ukraine if their wishes are not fulfilled.
In other words, we don’t want to win back the territories, but if the territories don’t come back somehow, we will go to rallies, because Ukraine, not Russia, does not imprison people for rallies. But it is unlikely that those who make such loud statements will rally. Once again, these are empty calls in action. Obviously, we are witnessing the phenomenon of ambivalence in our society – people want the territory to be returned unconditionally, as it was within the 1991 borders, but mostly not by themselves. As the saying goes, we are trying to rake in the heat with someone else’s hands. The bar for demands is usually raised so high by lonely pensioners aged 60+ who are not threatened with mobilisation, a young single woman who has no one to wait for her from the front, the owner of reliable armour or a deferral from mobilisation, or our compatriots who are watching events in their homeland from abroad as if they were watching a TV series or a football match.
What is the danger of calls from ‘sofa troops’?
Many ‘armchair experts’ base their opinions on rumours, unverified facts or their own interpretations of events. They are not able to think critically and filter information, so they often spread falsehoods that can demoralise society or disorient public opinion.
Loud statements such as ‘everything is being done wrong’ or ‘our military leaders are incompetent’ undermine the credibility of professionals who risk their lives on the frontline every day. This can cause chaos and distrust in the country’s leadership at critical moments. ‘Sofa warriors’ often forget about those who work for victory every day: volunteers, medics, rescuers, and the military. They devalue their efforts with their unrealistic demands, demanding too fast or impossible solutions. Such people create the impression that the war is just another match that can be easily won without taking into account the real sacrifices and costs.
Continuous calls for radical action create additional stress for a society that is already under constant psychological strain. People who are experiencing the war directly do not need additional advice from those who have not faced its reality.
The biggest problem with ‘armchair experts’ is that they create the illusion of active citizenship. They believe that their posts on social media are a contribution to victory, when in fact they are only a substitute for real action. Such passive activity reduces the real level of support for those who need help: the military, IDPs, and war victims.
Thus, the harm from ‘sofa experts’ is manifested in the following aspects:
Misinformation and superficial knowledge. People without real experience or deep knowledge try to influence public opinion, which leads to the spread of disinformation. Their statements are often based on emotions or personal beliefs rather than facts.
Polarisation of society. ‘Armchair experts’ often provoke conflicts by providing simple answers to complex questions, which contributes to the growing divide between different groups. In addition, they sow panic among people and inflame the situation. And this often works against the backdrop of the mental state and mood associated with war.
Decreased trust in real experts. When people accept the opinions of amateurs as truth, it undermines the credibility of professionals who have years of training and practical experience.
Simplifying complex issues. ‘Armchair experts’ often ignore the complexity of certain issues, offering easy but wrong solutions, which can have negative consequences for society.
How do ‘armchair experts’ manifest themselves abroad?
In many foreign countries, the activities of so-called ‘sofa experts’ or backseat drivers, which literally means ‘backseat driver’ (people who intervene in difficult situations by giving unsolicited advice without taking any real part – ed. Especially during conflicts, crises or pandemics, these people actively disseminate their ‘expert’ opinions through social media, blog platforms or the media.
During military conflicts, such as in Syria or Afghanistan, backseat drivers in the US or Europe often express opinions on strategy, tactics or diplomacy, criticising governments, armies or international organisations for allegedly making the wrong decisions. They offer simple solutions to extremely complex problems without understanding their depth.
During the pandemic, there was a surge in the activity of such ‘experts’. People who had no medical education or experience in epidemiology massively disseminated their theories about treatment, vaccines, and crisis management. Disinformation on this topic has led to a lack of trust in scientists and medical institutions in many countries.
In the international debate on climate change, pundits offer primitive solutions, ignoring the scientific evidence. For example, they speculate that reducing the use of plastic bags will solve the problem of global warming, even though this is only a small part of the larger environmental problem.
They also criticise governments for their economic decisions during crises (such as the global recession), offering unrealistic, often populist solutions. This advice usually does not take into account the long-term consequences or deeper systemic problems.
In order to combat the subversive activities of ‘sofa advisers’, many countries have created fact-checking organisations and platforms, such as Snopes, PolitiFact or Full Fact in the UK. These resources regularly refute fake claims and erroneous advice spread by pundits. Social media is also beginning to label fake content, which helps limit its impact. Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have been actively changing their algorithms in recent years to reduce the spread of disinformation and fake news. They are also implementing policies that allow them to flag false or manipulative messages and block accounts of those who regularly spread disinformation.
In the EU, the US and Canada, educational campaigns on critical thinking are being conducted, including as part of school and university curricula. These measures are aimed at teaching people how to distinguish between reliable sources of information and how to avoid being manipulated.
In some countries, the fight against dangerous ‘experts’ can even reach the courts. For example, in the United States and Canada, those who disseminate harmful advice or misinformation that leads to real consequences for people’s health or safety are often sued.
Some governments are launching information campaigns aimed at debunking myths and supporting official sources of information. During the COVID-19 pandemic, governments around the world have been actively working with academia, media and NGOs to combat disinformation.
Obviously, ‘armchair experts’ are a global problem that is dangerous because of disinformation and manipulation of public opinion. The fight against them involves a combination of technological, legal and educational measures. The key task for society is to learn how to recognise fake experts and prevent them from influencing important decisions.
How to counteract futile calls from ‘armchair experts’
First of all, you need to understand that not every voice on social media is competent and worthy of attention. You should critically evaluate the information that is disseminated and always check the sources. If someone is constantly calling for radical action without backing it up with facts or real actions, their words should be suspect.
It is also necessary to promote real examples of help: volunteering, charity, participation in the information war based on true data. This is a genuine contribution that helps, not harms.
Instead of becoming just another ‘couch expert’, each of us can really help: support the army, donate to the needs of the victims, or even just support our loved ones morally. The really important changes happen not in online posts, but in real actions.
‘Armchair experts’ are a modern problem that poses a serious threat to society in times of war. Their loud words are often empty, but can lead to dangerous consequences. At critical moments in history, society needs real actions and support, not slogans.
At a time when every step can cost lives, loud but empty calls from ‘sofa experts’ become a quiet but no less destructive weapon. They wreak havoc, disorientate society and undermine the credibility of those who are actually fighting for the country’s future. Their passivity, disguised as activity on social media, creates the illusion of participation, while the real struggle requires real action and sacrifice. The biggest threat of these ‘sofa troops’ is to divert attention from those who need our support. It is time to leave illusions behind and focus on real actions, because victory depends not on words but on the actions of each of us.
