Imagine trying to find a trustworthy piece of news in a world where every scroll, share, and search can be met with a flood of fabricated stories, manipulated images, and state-backed propaganda. That is the reality for millions of people today, especially in regions where the lines between information and disinformation have become dangerously blurred. It is precisely this landscape that the BBC World Service is trying to navigate with its new research initiative, Global Signals. This is not just another media study; it is a deep, data-driven attempt to understand how false narratives spread, how the BBC can respond more effectively, and how ordinary audiences can be better protected from the chaos of the online information environment. The project, developed with BBC Monitoring, the BBC’s Global Audiences team, and the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media (CASM Technology), focused on two of the most contested information markets in the world: Russian and Arabic. Researchers examined more than 100,000 posts from known disinformation accounts and over 54,000 posts mentioning the BBC across 11 social platforms over a four-month period. The findings are not just about the BBC’s own performance; they are a window into how information warfare operates, how trust is built or destroyed, and what it takes to ensure that people can still find facts amid the noise.
The research reveals that the BBC plays three crucial roles in the global information ecosystem, and each one is more nuanced than simply “reporting the news.” First, the BBC directs attention. In key global moments, the organisation’s presence in the information space matters before disinformation has a chance to take root. If the BBC is not there quickly, something else will fill the vacuum—often a falsehood designed to exploit confusion. Second, the BBC shapes interpretation. People do not just want to know what happened; they want to understand what it means. The BBC provides context, background, and analysis that help audiences make sense of events, rather than simply reacting to headlines. This is especially important in complex stories where the first version of events is often misleading or incomplete. Third, the BBC acts as a trusted authority. It does not merely report; it also proactively debunks false claims, verifying facts and correcting misinformation. Across the Arabic and Russian ecosystems, the BBC was regularly used as a source to establish what was true. But the research also exposed a stark contrast: in Arabic-speaking markets, the BBC was mentioned naturally in connection with its journalism, whereas in the Russian-speaking world, where the BBC is blocked and jammed, its presence depends on constant circumvention. People have to work around the system to reach the BBC, and the BBC has to work twice as hard to reach them. This is not an abstract problem; it is a daily struggle for information access that has real consequences for people’s understanding of the world.
The scale of Russia’s disinformation operation, the research found, is overwhelming at surface level. It is not a matter of a few rogue accounts or occasional fake stories; it is a coordinated, well-resourced effort that mirrors state investment in media and propaganda. The BBC, as one of the most visible international broadcasters, is a prime target. The study found significant efforts to attack and discredit the BBC across both Russian and Arabic information ecosystems. Networks have fabricated BBC personas and content, creating fake quotes, fake articles, and fake social media accounts that pretend to be the BBC. This is a deliberate strategy to undermine trust, not just in the BBC but in the very idea of independent journalism. If people cannot tell the difference between a real BBC story and a fabricated one, the damage goes far beyond one organisation. It erodes the credibility of all journalism and makes it easier for authoritarian actors to dismiss any inconvenient reporting as “fake news.” Yet the research also found something hopeful: in both markets, the BBC World Service is covering stories that local outlets and state media are not. That means the BBC is not just competing with disinformation; it is providing genuinely important reporting that would otherwise be invisible. For audiences, that can make the difference between knowing what is happening in their own country and being left in the dark.
Fiona Crack, the BBC World Service Director, described the research as the beginning of a much deeper understanding of the BBC’s role in complex information markets. Her words reflect a sense of humility and determination. She acknowledged that debunking and verifying are vital, but she also stressed the importance of scale, presence, and pace. It is not enough to be right; the BBC has to be there early, and it has to be visible. She spoke about the need for BBC teams to understand the information environment and the false narratives that audiences are exposed to, so that daily news and content—the mix of reporting, explanation, and analysis—can respond to what people actually need. In her view, accurate and impartial journalism that people can trust has never been more important. This is a strikingly human way of framing what could easily be a technical or corporate announcement. It is not about market share or brand reputation; it is about the relationship between journalists and the people they serve. When audiences are surrounded by lies, a reliable source of truth becomes a lifeline. The research is, in part, an effort to make sure that lifeline remains strong, even in the most difficult environments.
Carl Miller of CASM Technology offered an even sharper perspective. He pointed out that the BBC’s role in confronting information threats is not just about debunking and fact-checking after the fact. It is about preventing disinformation from taking hold in the first place. By capturing attention, providing context, and helping people understand events, the BBC confers additional protections to information integrity before falsehoods are even created. In other words, a well-informed public is harder to deceive. Miller noted that it is little surprise the BBC is such a key target of Russian information warfare; it is one of the most important barriers standing in their way. He also admitted that the findings suggest the level of the problem is much vaster than the researchers had anticipated. The Russian information ecosystem, he said, is incredibly crowded with inauthentic online activity. To compound that threat, the resources focused on attacking the BBC are breathtaking. His remarks highlight the scale of the challenge: this is not a fair fight, and it never was. The BBC is up against state-backed actors with enormous budgets and no commitment to truth. Yet Miller’s conclusion is not defeatist. He emphasized the critical need for circumvention to reach audiences in international markets, meaning that finding ways around censorship and manipulation is not a technicality but a core part of the mission.
The stakes are also visible in the numbers. BBC News Arabic is the BBC’s largest and oldest language service, reaching over 37 million people on average every week. That is an enormous audience, and it reflects the enduring demand for reliable information in a region where trust in media is often fragile. BBC News Russian, meanwhile, reached 6.5 million Russian speakers on average every week in 2025/26, an increase of more than 45 percent year-on-year. In a country where independent media has been crushed and foreign broadcasters are blocked, that growth is remarkable. It suggests that even with all the barriers, people are finding ways to access the BBC and are choosing to trust it. The Global Signals research is publicly available, and it arrives at a time when the BBC has been outlining its broader role in defending democratic values and strengthening what experts call epistemic security—the idea that societies need reliable knowledge to function. In its response to the UK Government’s Green Paper, the BBC argued that information resilience is a critical challenge and that the BBC has a vital contribution to make in countering disinformation. But the true importance of this research goes beyond any single policy debate. It is about recognising that information is not just content; it is the foundation of public trust, democratic decision-making, and human connection. When that foundation is attacked, everyone is affected. The BBC’s work, through Global Signals and through its daily journalism, is an attempt to protect that foundation for people who may never meet a BBC journalist but who rely on the BBC to make sense of a confusing, often hostile, information world. In the end, the most human takeaway from this research is simple: truth matters, and it is worth fighting for.