Not really. Their sources explicitly talk about disinformation and information based on true info but misconstrued to mislead people into false or pro-Putin narratives. But this “report” continues to frame this as if they’re trying to censor credible, unbiased and factual reporting, which is a claim their source does not support.
Western organisations seeking to protect the west fund those combatting disinformation from primarily Russian sources that harms the west. Not exactly a bombshell, is it?
GrayZone is a strongly pro-Putin source.
The report itself looks pretty reliable FWIW
Not really. Their sources explicitly talk about disinformation and information based on true info but misconstrued to mislead people into false or pro-Putin narratives. But this “report” continues to frame this as if they’re trying to censor credible, unbiased and factual reporting, which is a claim their source does not support.
Even ignoring that, the report serves to draw attention to the funding sources of those “combating disinformation.”
It’s a conspicuous bunch.
Western organisations seeking to protect the west fund those combatting disinformation from primarily Russian sources that harms the west. Not exactly a bombshell, is it?