This blog is part of the series “Shrinking Spaces – Creating Spaces” which is hosted by the (Un-)Making Democracy program at Polis180.
Disinformation increasingly targets NGOs and grassroots movements, undermining their credibility and legitimacy. By recycling xenophobic, anti-scientific, and conspiracy narratives, such campaigns can delegitimize legitimate protest, instrumentalize social movements for other political purposes, and open space for extremist actors. Whether centrally coordinated or not, they gain traction only when they tap into anti-democratic belief systems that already exist among parts of the population in Western societies, exploiting these attitudes as entry points to weaken democratic resilience from within.
A blog post by Lena Herholz
Expanding Targets: Civil Society in the Crosshairs
Since July 2024, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has been the target of a disinformation campaign in which fabricated statements were attributed to the organization to promote pro-Russian narratives. In the context of Russia’s hybrid warfare against the West, the operation impersonated a trusted institution in order to not only damage the reputation and credibility of RSF among Western societies, but also to undermine the standing of NGOs, independent journalism, and civil society more broadly, ultimately aiming to erode public trust and weaken the democratic civic space. This episode illustrates a recurring pattern in Russia’s propaganda strategy, which systematically seeks to discredit critical voices and sow mistrust.
Disinformation is the deliberate fabrication and distortion of information, for example by taking facts out of context, twisting their meaning, or framing them in a sensational way in order to mislead. Digital platforms intensify this practice by allowing tailored messages to reach specific audiences and cross borders within seconds.
An increasing number of NGOs and grassroots movements have found themselves in the crosshairs, with hostile narratives amplified not only by state actors, but also by sympathetic media outlets, interest groups, and influential individuals. Growing dissatisfaction with political institutions among Western societies, together with moments of social or political unrest, provides particularly fertile ground for such tactics: heightened perceived insecurity, resentment, and anger over perceived injustices create conditions in which disinformation spreads rapidly, deepening divisions.
What makes these campaigns particularly dangerous is their broad resonance: anti-EU and anti-Ukraine narratives, attacks on minorities, and climate denialist claims find receptive audiences even in established democracies. As such messages increasingly shape the public sphere, mainstream voices risk being drowned out, extremist and populist groups gain disproportionate visibility, and the conditions for meaningful democratic debate are gradually undermined.
Not all disinformation targeting civil society is centrally coordinated. In many cases, false or misleading narratives emerge in fragmented ways and spread because they fit into existing narratives and belief systems. The climate disinformation phenomenon, for example, has involved networks of companies, organizations, and individuals seeking to discredit established scientific findings. While these actors may act independently or pursue their own commercial or ideological interests, they are often linked through online networks or think tanks that develop and circulate misleading content via media appearances, books, websites, and even public hearings.
Why Disinformation Gains Traction
The events in Southport, England, in 2024 provide another example. After a 17-year-old attacked several people at a dance school, killing three children, false claims spread within hours that the attacker was an asylum seeker, a Muslim, and had crossed the English Channel by boat the previous year. These rumours quickly triggered outrage and violent riots in multiple cities. The story was later traced back to a commercially oriented news site, which dismissed the false report as an error rather than a deliberate attempt to mislead. Yet the speed and scale of the mobilisation were only possible because the rumours echoed widespread racist and xenophobic beliefs.
Disinformation becomes especially potent in times of protest, when emotions run high and competing political narratives struggle for dominance in the public sphere. The Black Lives Matter protests in the United States in 2020 illustrate how disinformation can exploit pre-existing racist beliefs and redirect public anger. The Black Lives Matter movement, which fights against systemic racism and police violence and advocates for racial justice, was branded a terrorist organization by a prominent white supremacist. At the same time, U.S. President Donald Trump denied that police had used tear gas, conspiracy channels on YouTube claimed that George Floyd was still alive, and rumours circulated across social media that George Soros had financed the protests. Taken together, these narratives sought to delegitimize the protests by portraying demands for racial justice as illegitimate or manipulated.
Ultimately, disinformation gains traction not because it is particularly sophisticated, but because it connects with fears, grievances, and worldviews that people already hold. Disinformation gained traction because it tapped into existing racist and xenophobic beliefs that are widely present in society, which made these false claims seem credible to many people and increased the willingness of some to support or engage in hostile and violent actions. This alignment between disinformation and pre-existing beliefs makes disinformation appear plausible, enables it to trigger strong emotions, and can lower the threshold for hostile behaviour and, in some cases, violence. Anti-democratic attitudes therefore function as entry points for disinformation and are, as such, a direct threat to democratic resilience.
How Disinformation Weakens Democracy
Disinformation directed against NGOs and grassroots movements is becoming more frequent and can take both coordinated and uncoordinated forms. Sometimes it is orchestrated by state or non-state actors; in other cases, misleading narratives emerge more spontaneously and spread through commercial media, conspiracy channels, or social networks. What these dynamics have in common is that disinformation only gains traction when it resonates with beliefs and worldviews that are already present in democratic societies. It draws on xenophobic, anti-scientific, or conspiracy-minded narratives that are widely circulating and thus finds fertile ground among parts of the population. In doing so, it can delegitimize genuine grassroots movements and NGOs, instrumentalize them for other political purposes, or even help to generate new forms of protest that undermine democratic norms and institutions.
Disinformation therefore does not simply “misinform”; it exploits anti-democratic attitudes as entry points and reinforces them. By attacking the credibility of civil society actors, distorting legitimate dissent, and normalizing extremist narratives, it gradually weakens democratic resilience from within. In the context of Russia’s hybrid confrontation with the West and the ongoing struggle over narrative dominance, these entry points for disinformation must be recognised and addressed far more systematically.
Lena Herholz holds a Master’s degree in International Relations and Comparative Political Science from the University of Duisburg-Essen. Her research examines democracy and authoritarianism through the lens of resilience, democracy promotion, global authoritarianism, political culture, and international norms.
The Polis Blog serves as a platform at the disposal of ‘Polis180’s & ‘OpenTTN‘s members. Published comments express solely the ‘authors’ opinions and shall not be confounded with the opinions of the editors or of Polis180.
Zurück