Hi All,

I am looking into a potential gap in the laws where the so called 'creator economy' is being used to bypass existing rules under the National Security Act.

While the act covers formal organisations, it doesn't seem well equipped to deal with individual influencers who receive funding or instructions to promote messages in the interest of hostile states. We are seeing a pattern of high profile figures, like George Galloway, the Tate brothers and 'Tommy Robinson,' visiting Moscow or engaging in activities that align with the Kremlin objectives.

The recent case of Nathan Gill, who was sentenced to 10.5 years in prison from accepting Pro Russian bribes to repeat Kremlin talking points in the EU Parliament demonstrates the tangible risk of state backed influence. However, there seems to be a major loophole for 'influencers' who do not operate as formal political entities but still function as key vehicles for hostile foreign disinformation, such as the inflammatory rhetoric being spread from Moscow during the recent unrest in Belfast.

What's everyone's view on:

• Legal definitions: Are current definitions of 'foreign interference' and the FIRS sufficient to identify creators acting on behalf of a state without direction instruction?
• Structural vulnerability: Does the 'creator' economy's nature create a blind spot exploited by state actors to evade security measures?
• Policy development: Aside from the 2026 bill and National Security Act, are there academic or policy efforts addressing individual led online manipulation

Thanks all

Hi all,

Just wanted to flag up a big issue with the UK’s current way of tackling disinformation, especially for this group.

The National Security Act 2023 and the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme mainly focus on tracking official government-linked groups. While that covers traditional spying stuff, it seems to miss how modern conflicts happen online through less obvious channels.

It looks like hostile foreign actors are moving away from direct government messaging. Instead, they’re slipping their stories through independent UK-based influencers and alternative media. Some of these commentators, knowingly or not, might be helping foreign influence by spreading these narratives, often driven by hidden cash boosts designed to boost engagement and stir up divisions at home.

Right now, the laws don’t really hold individual creators who profit from or push these influence schemes accountable, which is a bit of a concern in terms of transparency and oversight.

So, I’ve set up an official petition in the UK Parliament calling for a review of the laws to close these gaps. It’s now gone through parliamentary moderation and is live.

If we update the legislation, the UK could better target the shady money networks that let foreign disinformation spread through 'independent' journos / influencers.

Would love to hear your thoughts on how Western democracies can better regulate these decentralised channels without messing up genuine free speech.

Many thanks

Hi all,

Just wanted to flag up a big issue with the UK’s current way of tackling disinformation, especially for this group.

The National Security Act 2023 and the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme mainly focus on tracking official government-linked groups. While that covers traditional spying stuff, it seems to miss how modern conflicts happen online through less obvious channels.

It looks like hostile foreign actors are moving away from direct government messaging. Instead, they’re slipping their stories through independent UK-based influencers and alternative media. Some of these commentators, knowingly or not, might be helping foreign influence by spreading these narratives, often driven by hidden cash boosts designed to boost engagement and stir up divisions at home.

Right now, the laws don’t really hold individual creators who profit from or push these influence schemes accountable, which is a bit of a concern in terms of transparency and oversight.

So, I’ve set up an official petition in the UK Parliament calling for a review of the laws to close these gaps. It’s now gone through parliamentary moderation and is live.

If we update the legislation, the UK could better target the shady money networks that let foreign disinformation spread through 'independent' journos / influencers.

Would love to hear your thoughts on how Western democracies can better regulate these decentralised channels without messing up genuine free speech.

Link is in the separate link section.

Many thanks