The Illusion of Local News: A Coordinated Kremlin-Linked Disinformation Network
Independent researchers from Democracy Reporting International (DRI) have uncovered a sprawling, multilingual network of Telegram channels masquerading as local news outlets. Despite their diverse language offerings and localized branding, these channels lack legitimate newsrooms and operate in lockstep. The investigation reveals a sophisticated, coordinated operation that pushes pro-Kremlin propaganda, utilizing identical scripts, biased content, and synchronized timing to manipulate public opinion across Europe. This discovery highlights the ease with which such networks can proliferate, largely unchecked by the platform’s current moderation systems.
Anatomy of a Deceptive Operation
The “Common Sense” network, as dubbed by researchers, currently consists of at least 19 identified channels across 19 different languages. These channels exhibit telltale signs of inauthentic behavior, such as sharing nearly identical branding and names—all translating to “common sense”—while avoiding direct mentions of one another to maintain the appearance of independence. The network employs both vertical growth, utilizing purchased bot accounts to create the illusion of popularity through sudden, overnight spikes in subscriber counts, and horizontal growth, expanding rapidly into new language markets. This artificial “social proof” is designed to deceive unsuspecting users into viewing the channels as credible, serious news sources.
Telegram’s Regulatory Gray Area
A critical issue identified by the researchers is the disconnect between Telegram’s massive influence and its light regulatory burden under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA). Currently, Telegram reports having fewer than 45 million monthly active users in the EU, exempting it from the stricter “Very Large Online Platform” (VLOP) requirements that mandate systemic risk mitigation. This regulatory loophole allows Telegram to maintain a hands-off approach to moderation, contrasting sharply with platforms like WhatsApp, which provide significantly higher volumes of moderation actions. Consequently, Telegram continues to host various forms of harmful content, ranging from financial scams and non-consensual imagery to terrorist material, without facing substantial legal pressure to curb coordinated disinformation campaigns.
The Question of User Thresholds and Accountability
The veracity of Telegram’s user count has become a focal point of contention among European regulators and independent observers. As Telegram’s global user base surges past one billion, its reported EU figures have suspiciously remained just under the 45-million-user threshold, shielding it from VLOP designation. Critics and lawmakers argue that the methodology used to calculate “active recipients” is flawed and likely fails to account for the millions who consume public Telegram content without formal subscriptions. Experts argue that the European Commission must standardize these counting methodologies to prevent platforms from artificially manipulating their status to evade essential accountability measures.
Bridging the Gap in Platform Moderation
While waiting for formal regulatory reclassification, researchers emphasize that Telegram could voluntarily adopt more rigorous moderation standards, similar to those already implemented by platforms like Reddit. The current lack of intervention creates a dangerous environment where coordinated manipulation is permitted to flourish. By failing to address these networks, Telegram remains a uniquely vulnerable vector for information manipulation that spills over into mainstream platforms like Facebook, X, and TikTok. The study suggests that even without immediate VLOP status, the European Commission and national regulators, particularly in Belgium, possess existing supervisory powers that should be utilized more aggressively to enforce compliance regarding safety and illegal content.
A Path Toward Structural Reform
Moving forward, the European Commission is under increasing pressure to establish clearer expectations for platforms concerning electoral integrity and systemic risk management. Although current guidelines for non-VLOPs are largely non-binding, they offer a crucial benchmark for how Telegram should be handling coordinated inauthentic behavior. By fostering stronger cooperation between major platforms and Telegram, and by applying stricter oversight on cross-platform disinformation campaigns, the EU can begin to dismantle the infrastructure used by malicious actors. Strengthening transparency and accountability is the essential next step to ensuring that digital platforms—regardless of their size—cannot be weaponized against the democratic process.
