Russia: fact-checking is the Kremlin's latest propaganda tool
The Russian Global Fact-Checking Network (GFCN) claims it verifies facts, but in reality, this website — created and run by Kremlin-affiliated entities — exists to promote the Russian government’s narrative internationally. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemns this new instrument of Russian propaganda.
“Our goal within the Network is to unite experts, journalists, and media representatives who are ready to jointly defend the right to reliable information,” announced Vladimir Tabak, president of the GFCN. Speaking at a digital forum in Nizhny Novgorod, a city east of Moscow, the former presidential administration official and director of Dialog Regions — a Russian organisation sanctioned by the US — presented the initiative to an audience of both local and international participants.
Other speakers at the forum included Russian MFA spokesperson Maria Zakharova, Serbian Minister of Information and Telecommunications Boris Bratina, and Irish correspondent for the Russian state propaganda channel RT, Chay Bowes.
Launched in November 2024 with an active website since April 2025, the GFCN claims to “coordinate efforts to combat misinformation by participants from different countries at the global level.” In reality, it is a propaganda vehicle founded and managed by Kremlin-linked structures: Dialog Regions, the New Media School — a federal training program for members of the Russian media — and the state news agency TASS. Promoted by the Russian Foreign Ministry, the GFCN poses as an alternative to independent international organisations like the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN).
“This initiative is part of a well-established Kremlin strategy: mimicking independent institutions to better spread its propaganda. Russia’s version of fact-checking should fool no one. Moscow and its proxies don't verify facts — they twist them to fit a narrative, notably to justify its full-scale war against Ukraine. RSF condemns this new tool for the Russian disinformation machine.
A Kremlin-controlled tool
Publishing in both English and Russian, the GFCN claims to have 55 experts from 37 countries. On its website in mid-June, it listed five organisations and 36 individual participants. Among them are members of the International Reporters disinformation site, such as Christelle Néant from France, who has been relaying Russian propaganda from occupied Ukrainian territories for a decade; Andrea Lucidi from Italy, a pro-Kremlin voice; and Sonja van den Ende from the Netherlands, who has embedded with Russian forces in occupied Ukraine.
The GFCN is also actively promoted by Russian diplomacy, including embassies from Armenia to South Africa to Egypt, which advertised the initiative on the social media platform X and encouraged applications via an email that seems to belong to Sergei Maklakov, Head of the Department for Countering the Spread of False Information at Dialog Regions.
When RSF contacted GFCN, its representatives denied any state affiliation, claiming that “none of the members of our organisation represent specific states” and that its work is out of a “love for the truth.” Despite the systematic presence of Kremlin official figures like Maria Zakharova at the network’s public speeches, the network insists it has never been pressured by authorities.
A misleading name
The GFCN’s name closely mirrors that of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), sowing confusion. “This is part of a long line of tactics from Russia to imitate independent institutions, but in the service of Russia's political interests,” says Angie Drobnic Holan, director of the IFCN.
Independent fact-checkers were quick to raise red flags. Spanish platform Maldita, investigative Italian site Facta, and the fact-checking service of Deutsche Welle (DW) all highlighted the GFCN's lack of transparency and professional standards.
Of 39 GFCN articles analysed by RSF in mid-June 2025, at least 15 primarily served to promote the network and its members, such as their participation in Russian forums. In an article titled “Is ChatGPT Prone to Russian Propaganda?”, the supposed fact-check instead defends Russian state agency TASS and omits findings from institutions like NewsGuard, which show how AI tools can amplify Russian disinformation. “They only present the facts that support their points. That's the difference between independent fact checkers and interested parties who claim to do fact checking, but are really promoting their own propaganda,” explains Holan.
In another case, the GFCN misrepresented the 2024 Eurobarometer on Romanian support for Ukraine. The site claimed “only 22 per cent are ready to provide aid to refugees” from Ukraine, whereas the full study also shows that a total of 69 per cent “agree to provide humanitarian support to the people affected by the war”, with 22 per cent “totally agreeing.” After RSF’s request, the article was edited to clarify that the 22 per cent refers only to the response “totally agree,” and a link to the study was added — without disclosing the modification.
In May, Christelle Néant published a GFCN article stating the seizure of civilian housing in Mariupol by occupying forces as “legal,” omitting any mention of Russian occupation or forced civilian displacement. When questioned by RSF, GFCN said it does not “interfere with an author's personal position or modify how it is presented in her article in any way,” equating opinion with fact-checking and refusing to “argue about terminology.” It even invited RSF to “see everything with your own eyes” in the city located in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories, where, as RSF investigations have shown, independent journalists are arrested — such as the Ukrainian freelancer Victoria Roshchyna, who died in Russian custody in 2024 after her 2023 arrest.
While professional fact-checkers remain vigilant, this misuse of journalism standards and practices still poses a high risk of misleading the public. Olena Churanova, fact-checker at the Ukrainian NGO StopFake and researcher at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, warns that “with such initiatives, media literacy, of course, is also really important here.”
The similar projects emerging in other countries
As GFCN has launched and grown, similar initiatives have surfaced elsewhere.
In Armenia, Face-check.am, launched in October 2024, presents itself as a fact-checking site, without being transparent about its owners and editorial team. Its publications systematically target civil society actors funded by international aid, notably by the Open Society Foundations, and discredit civil rights organisations accused of weakening Armenia.
In Hungary, the pro-government Foundation for Transparent Journalism launched Faktum, a fact-checking site promoting official narratives. Following Hungary’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court, Faktum justified the move by claiming the ICC exercises “selective justice.” On the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the site echoes Kremlin rhetoric, blaming Kyiv for escalation while ignoring Moscow’s refusal to end its war.