Imagine scrolling through your social media feed in Bulgaria and suddenly realizing that the posts about the European Union have become quieter, less frequent, fewer and farther between. At first, that might feel like good news. After all, we have grown used to the idea that disinformation is a flood, and when the flood waters recede, we assume the danger has passed. But a new report from the Foundation for Humanities and Social Research – Sofia, published and promoted by BROD, one of the fifteen EDMO Hubs working to monitor and expose digital manipulation across Europe, tells a different and far more unsettling story. The report, titled “Propaganda and Disinformation in Bulgarian Online Media Against the European Union and European Institutions (1 January–31 December 2025),” found that in 2025, the overall volume of anti-EU propaganda in Bulgarian online media declined significantly compared to previous years. That sounds reassuring. Yet, the same report warns that the nature of the messaging has become more explicitly anti-European, with the EU increasingly portrayed not as a sometimes-bloated bureaucracy or a distant political project, but as a direct adversary of Russia. That shift matters more than the raw numbers. A decline in quantity, in other words, has been accompanied by a dangerous rise in ideological sharpness, turning what was once mostly dismissive rhetoric into something far more hostile and emotionally charged.
What should we make of this decline in volume? It would be tempting to say that fact-checkers, platform moderators, and public awareness campaigns are winning the battle. Perhaps some of that is true. But when disinformation specialists see a decrease in output, they rarely interpret it as surrender. More often, it means the strategy has evolved. The report suggests that the propaganda apparatus in Bulgarian online media is no longer trying to drown audiences with a constant stream of fabricated stories. Instead, it is focusing on fewer, better-targeted narratives designed to stick in the mind and linger in conversation. There is a big difference between noise and resonance. A hundred silly articles about absurd EU regulations can be easily dismissed, but one carefully crafted story that frames the EU as an existential threat to Russia, and therefore to peace, can be far more corrosive. The decline in volume, in this sense, is not the same as a decline in influence. It is the difference between spraying a firehose and using a laser pointer. The firehose is messy and exhausting; the laser pointer can set a specific target alight. In 2025, the report argues, the target has become clearer than ever: the European Union as a whole, along with its institutions, values, and legitimacy.
This brings us to the heart of the report’s most striking finding. In previous years, much of the anti-EU disinformation in Bulgarian media relied on familiar tropes: the EU as a bureaucratic monster, Brussels imposing absurd rules, Germany and France hogging the benefits, and Bulgaria being treated as a second-class member. These narratives were annoying, divisive, and false, but they were also part of a recognizable political tradition. In 2025, something shifted. The EU is no longer merely depicted as incompetent or self-serving. It is being actively framed as a direct adversary of Russia. This may not sound like a huge difference at first, but in the context of Bulgarian public life, it is enormous. Bulgaria has deep historical, cultural, and religious ties to Russia, and many Bulgarians still hold complicated feelings about the relationship. By framing the EU as an enemy of Russia, disinformation producers are deliberately placing the EU in opposition to a country that many people in Bulgaria regard with affection or loyalty. The implication is that supporting the EU means betraying a friend. The EU, in this storytelling, is not just a foreign power; it is a hostile one, pushing Europe toward war, stripping sovereign nations of their identity, and forcing ordinary people to choose sides in a conflict they never wanted. This kind of narrative is much harder to combat because it operates on emotion, memory, and identity rather than on facts and policy arguments. You cannot simply fact-check a feeling of betrayal.
Why does this matter so much for ordinary people? Because disinformation is never just about abstract ideas. It influences how people vote, how they treat their neighbors, how they respond to crises, and how they view their own country’s future. If a significant portion of Bulgarian online media tells its audience that the EU is a direct adversary of Russia, it creates a framework in which every EU action, every European election, every allocation of funds, and every diplomatic initiative can be reinterpreted as part of a larger hostile plot. That is not merely an intellectual problem. It has real consequences for public policy. It can make people resist energy transition plans, reject European health initiatives, distrust international aid, and question the legitimacy of democratic institutions. It can also deepen social divides within Bulgaria, as communities become polarized between those who see the EU as an opportunity and those who see it as a threat. The human toll is harder to measure, but it is real. When disinformation turns institutions into enemies, it creates a climate of anxiety and resentment. People become more suspicious, more isolated, and more vulnerable to further manipulation. They may stop believing in the possibility of positive change. They may withdraw from civic life altogether. The report’s findings are therefore not just a warning for policymakers in Brussels or Sofia. They are a reminder that propaganda operates at the level of daily life, in the memes we share, the articles we click, and the outrage we feel when we are told that something we care about is under attack.
In this landscape, the work of organizations like BROD and the wider network of EDMO Hubs becomes essential. These are not faceless institutions issuing distant warnings from an ivory tower. They are teams of researchers, journalists, and fact-checkers who spend their days reading the dark corners of the internet, checking obscure websites, tracing viral posts, and trying to understand the mechanics of manipulation. They are the librarians of the digital age, the ones who keep records when everyone else has already forgotten. The report by the Foundation for Humanities and Social Research – Sofia is a perfect example of this work. It does not simply offer a snapshot of propaganda; it names the trend, explains the shift, and gives the public a clearer way to recognize what is happening. By publishing this research through BROD, one of the fifteen EDMO Hubs across Europe, the findings become part of a larger collaboration. No single country can solve the problem of disinformation alone. The tactics used in Bulgarian online media are often borrowed from campaigns in other European countries, adapted to local languages, histories, and grievances. By sharing information across borders, researchers can identify patterns earlier, warn the public sooner, and support each other in the difficult task of defending democratic discourse. In this sense, the report is both a mirror and a toolbox. It reflects what is happening today, and it provides the tools to build resilience for tomorrow.
So where does this leave us? Perhaps the most important lesson from the report is that we must stop measuring the health of our information environment by the volume of obvious falsehoods. The quiet periods are not always peaceful. Sometimes they are the moments when more dangerous ideas are being planted, allowed to grow slowly in the soil of everyday conversation. The decline in anti-EU propaganda in Bulgarian online media in 2025 could be a sign of success, but it could also be a strategic retreat. The report urges us to look beyond the quantity and to examine the quality of the messages that remain. A sharper, more explicitly anti-European message, centered on the idea of the EU as a direct adversary of Russia, is not something to be met with a shrug. It deserves attention, concern, and a measured, thoughtful response. We are not helpless in the face of propaganda. We can choose to read critically, to share only what we have verified, to support independent journalism, and to talk to our friends and family with patience instead of anger. We can also demand more transparency from platforms and more accountability from political leaders. Democracy is not a machine that runs by itself. It requires constant care, attention, and repair. The report from the Foundation for Humanities and Social Research – Sofia is one small part of that repair work. It reminds us that even when the noise fades, we should not stop listening. In fact, we should listen more carefully. The next time you see a story that seems designed to make you angry or afraid, pause. Ask yourself who wrote it, who benefits from it, and what it wants you to believe. That pause, that tiny moment of curiosity, is the beginning of the resistance. And it is something each of us can do, no matter where we live or what language we speak.