Disinformation Case in England: Misinformation Sparks Nationwide Unrest

The nationwide unrest in the United Kingdom, following the murder of three girls, demonstrated how the spread of misinformation can create a political crisis. Similar crises can be prevented through effective strategic communication and early disinformation detection. It is also important for authorities, the media, and the public to collaborate, responding swiftly and cohesively to curb the spread of misinformation as quickly as possible and avoid similar dangerous developments. Propastop describes and comments on the chain of events in detail.

Stabbing at a Children’s Party

On the morning of Monday, July 29, at around 11:47 a.m., a 17-year-old armed with a knife entered a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in the town of Southport, in northwestern England, and attacked children aged 6 to 11. Three children were killed, and eight others were injured, five of them critically. Two adults, likely the teachers leading the class, were also taken to the hospital in critical condition.

The events unfolding in England are shocking but not surprising. After the murder of three young girls in Southport, unrest erupted across the country. Far-right rioters took advantage of widespread misinformation about the suspect, initiating violent attacks, arson, looting, and harassment of Muslims and asylum seekers. Across the UK, more than 50 protests took place during the first weekend of August, resulting in nearly 400 arrests. This crisis has sharply highlighted the challenge facing the government in combating the spread of misinformation and its consequences in society. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has called these events a display of “far-right hatred” and has demanded greater accountability from social media companies in curbing the spread of false information.

Spread of Misinformation on Social Media: Misleading Claims and Their Consequences

After the shocking attack, a 17-year-old male was arrested and, a few days later, charged with the murder of three girls and the attempted murder of 10 others. Since the suspect was a minor, his name was not shared with the public. However, the false name “Ali Al-Shakati” quickly began circulating online, with claims that he had recently arrived in the UK by a small boat and was a Muslim or a Syrian. Merseyside Police attempted to calm the situation by issuing a statement clarifying that the name spread on social media was false and urging people not to speculate on the details of the case. In an earlier statement, they also mentioned that the suspect was born in Cardiff.

Kersti Luha, former head of strategic communications at the Government Office and a strategic communications expert, commented on the incident to Propastop as follows: “Developments like those in the United Kingdom show what kind of events resonate with people and what values, when threatened, trigger reactions in Western culture. This knowledge helps security agencies and communication experts to ensure their readiness and plan operations effectively. In addition to internal coordination and quickly targeted public communication about what has happened and how the police are responding, it is important to provide action guidelines and a moral assessment of the situation.”

The Outbreak and Spread of Unrest: The Impact of Social Media

On the evening of Tuesday, July 30, unrest broke out in Southport following an event held in memory of the victims of the knife attack. Reportedly, the unrest was fueled by misinformation spreading on social media, which angered people.

The next day, on July 31, over 100 people were arrested in central London after clashes with police during a demonstration in Whitehall. The crowd chanted phrases like “stop the boats” and “save our children,” expressing their anger and frustration. The unrest also spread to other cities, such as Hartlepool and Aldershot, where violent protests also took place.

On Thursday, August 1, the name of the suspect, Axel Muganwa Rudakubana, was released. During the Royal Court hearing, the judge stated that the ban on releasing Rudakubana’s name before his 18th birthday, which is next week, would have “practically no impact on protecting the well-being of the suspect or his family.” He also added: “Preventing full coverage at this moment allows other wrongdoers to continue spreading misinformation.”

Rudakubana was placed in a juvenile detention facility.

Sources of Misinformation: Channel 3 Now and Suspicious Claims

One of the first spreaders of misinformation was the Channel 3 Now account on X (formerly Twitter), which claims to be a legitimate news outlet. The account spread false information about the suspect’s name, followed by accusations that the channel was linked to the Russian state. Although their connection to Russia is debatable, it is clear that the false claims they shared were exploited by pro-Kremlin Telegram channels. This tactic, where a story published by a little-known news portal is cited and then amplified, is a common method for spreading disinformation.

Consequences of Misinformation: Professor Chadwick’s Assessment

Although misinformation was one of the main factors in the outbreak of unrest, it was not the only cause. Professor Andrew Chadwick, an expert in political communication and the spread of online disinformation at Loughborough University, emphasizes that it is a complex mix of many different components. “It’s not just the wrong name or a false rumor. It’s the way information is presented, distributed, listed, and amplified by key figures who should really know better.”

Misinformation soon reaches personal messaging platforms like WhatsApp, “where news is shared in smaller groups, often in a local context, such as among family and friends,” said Professor Chadwick. “There is always the risk that it has direct impacts on communities, and that’s exactly what we saw,” he added.

Misinformation and disinformation are both forms of misleading information, but the difference lies in their intent. Misinformation is misleading or false information spread unintentionally, where the people sharing it believe it to be true and do not intend to deceive anyone. Disinformation, on the other hand, is deliberately spread misleading or false information, with the aim of intentionally deceiving people, creating confusion, or influencing opinions in a specific direction.

Far-Right Activists: The Role of the Internet in Inciting Unrest

The unrest revealed how far-right activists have found a home on the internet, where platforms enable the rapid spread of hate-fueled disinformation. Disinformation was at the heart of the unrest.

After the killings in Southport, users on X (formerly Twitter) posted and shared false claims, stating that the alleged attacker was an asylum seeker who had arrived in the UK by boat, when in reality, he was born and raised in Wales.

On TikTok, far-right users livestreamed and called on their followers to gather in protest. Thanks to the platform’s aggressively personalized “For You” page, it wasn’t difficult to reach the intended audience—those who had already been exposed to far-right or anti-immigrant content.

Messaging services also played a significant role in spreading disinformation. On Telegram, far-right group chats shared lists of protest locations; one message read: “They won’t stop coming until you tell them to.” In WhatsApp conversations, there were discussions about “taking back the streets” and attacking “key bases” in immigrant areas of London. These calls were quickly amplified by far-right figures like Andrew Tate and English Defence League founder Tommy Robinson, who used the platform X to spread falsehoods and incite hatred. Almost immediately, people were rioting in the streets.

Responsibility of Social Media Platforms

The spread of false claims and hateful messages is difficult to stop, even when authorities provide accurate information. Internet safety legislation is complex and cumbersome, and finding the right balance between protecting free speech and controlling harmful speech is a major challenge.

In the absence of effective regulation or oversight, social media platforms have played an increasingly central role in the radicalization of far-right extremists in the UK. Under Elon Musk’s leadership, X has allowed far-right figures to return to the platform. Since the unrest began, billionaire Musk himself has escalated the situation, claiming that a “civil war is inevitable” and continuing with a bizarre tirade in multiple posts.

Civil Society’s Pushback: Peaceful Protests and Government Measures

Despite the severity and scale of the unrest, the response was swift and decisive. In major cities across the United Kingdom, thousands of people gathered for peaceful counter-protests to stand against violent racism. The government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, has promised to implement tougher measures against rioters, including pressing charges for inciting hate online. However, it is unfortunate to acknowledge that the government’s ability to hold social media platforms accountable remains limited.

Conclusion: The Danger of Disinformation and the Role of Social Media

The unrest in the United Kingdom demonstrates how dangerous the spread of disinformation can be and how it can lead to violent conflicts. Although the government and civil society have taken steps to mitigate the unrest and spread the truth, regulating social media platforms remains the biggest challenge. Without effective measures, similar events may become more frequent in the future.

Strategic communications expert Kersti Luha points out that the prerequisite for a swift and effectively targeted response is functional cooperation within the country, between ministries, agencies, and their communication experts. Domestic collaboration is key to debunking potential disinformation and conspiracy theories by experts.

She adds: “In my opinion, such cooperation and coordination have worked quite well in Estonia so far. I would cite an example on a similar topic that could have posed a potential threat to the lives of children and young people. In the fall of 2023, when disinformation and threatening letters were spread to schools and public institutions, the police responded promptly and reassured the public: they informed not only the recipients of the threat letters and those potentially at risk, but also the general public about their actions, assessments, and recommendations.”

According to Propastop, people are aware of the dangers of disinformation and do not react impulsively to information circulating on the internet, but instead verify its accuracy. Only in this way can the amplification of false information and the resulting harm be avoided.