The real stake of the disinformation that appeared after a Russian drone hit a block in Galati. Alarmist messages given even before the incident

While the authorities confirmed that the drone was of Russian origin and explained its route, so-called “alternative explanations” multiplied on social networks. It is becoming increasingly difficult to agree on clear facts as well, even when supported by verifiable technical data. Instead of a debate about the implications of the incident, the discussion quickly moves into the area of ​​total suspicion.

In the night from Thursday to Friday, a Russian-made drone hit an apartment block in Galati and injured two people. It is, without a doubt, the most serious incident on Romanian territory since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. A military object launched in the context of a war located a few kilometers from the country's borders reached a residential area and directly affected Romanian civilians.

However, just a few hours after the incident, some of the public discussion online did not focus on what happened, how it was possible and what measures are needed to prevent such an episode from happening again. Instead, social media flooded with alternative theories (or “alternative facts,” as someone in the Trump administration called them)—a euphemism for misinformation.

No wonder. There are more and more indications that Romania is targeted by hybrid war operations, built around themes that have been carefully cultivated over time precisely to erode public confidence both in verified information and in the state's ability to ensure citizens' security.

Social media is the best terrain, and the apartment block strike generated exactly the desired effect in such incidents: fear, uncertainty and confusion. The online space was quickly flooded with conspiracy theories, the main one being that it was a “false flag” operation and that the drone belonged to Ukraine and was part of a plan to draw NATO into the war.

The goal is for no one to be sure what really happened

The stake of such campaigns is not necessarily to convince the public that Ukraine is responsible, but to cultivate doubt and relativize the facts. The goal is for no one to be sure what really happened and who is responsible.

The tone was, of course, set by a few public figures who routinely propagate pro-Russia narratives.

Tristan Tate, investigated by DIICOT for human trafficking, wrote on X that “Ukraine probably attacked Romania to steal more money from the European Union. They redirected a Russian drone or, more likely, targeted Galațiul themselves. I appeal to Romanians not to fall into these traps.” His post has over 800,000 views.

BobbyD, another figure known online for disinformation, couldn't help it and quickly posted a video in which he was “just asking questions”: “Is it a stray drone? Or one that knows where it's going?”; “How can a drone disappear from radar?”; “How was it established so quickly that it was a Russian drone? On what basis was this established?!”; “Who benefits from this? Who cares if Romania wakes up in the morning with 70 people evacuated from their homes?!”.

In the comments, BobbyD also adds that “I forgot! The deadline for SAFE is May 31st, so something had to be bought!”, thus suggesting that the drone incident is an excuse for the government to make more military purchases.

The same narrative with the purchase of weapons was also promoted by Diana Șoșoăcă through a post on Facebook entitled: “ROMANIANS HAVE THE RIGHT TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH: THEY CAME TO THE POINT OF ATTENTION TO THE LIFE OF A CHILD AND ITS MOTHER TO MOTIVATE THE PURCHASE OF WEAPONS”.

Coordinated networks of social media pages

This is exactly the narrative that the Kremlin propagates, both directly, through Vladimir Putin, and through the voice of the Russian Embassy in Bucharest.

Besides, we also have data that show us the extent of the phenomenon. Funky Citizens identified two coordinated networks of social media pages that began sharing alarmist messages even before the incident. One of them promoted false information about an alleged Russian drone arriving in Romania and the evacuation of the population, and the other amplified messages about preparing a 72-hour emergency backpack, using references to the authorities to give them credibility.

According to Funky Citizens, the timing and distribution of the messages suggests coordinated campaigns capable of reaching millions of users.

The analysis of more than 14,000 posts published around the time of the incident shows that online discussions focused on the impact of the drone, the reactions of the authorities, the origin of the device and Romania's ability to defend its airspace. In parallel, numerous conspiratorial or speculative narratives circulated, which questioned Russia's responsibility, minimized the seriousness of the incident, or tried to exploit the event politically.

Comment on the page of the Russian Embassy: “A false flag operation carried out by Romania itself”

A simple look at the Facebook or TikTok comment sections of major news publications shows us that this campaign is effective. For example, on a video posted on TikTok by Digi24 with the moment when the drone explodes, the comment with the most likes belongs to a person who asks: “How do you know it's a Russian drone?”, and the next with the number of likes clearly says: “Ukrainian drone like all before, false flag attacks to plunge Romania into war.”

And this narrative is constantly repeated in a large number of comments online, including, not surprisingly, the post of the Russian Embassy in Bucharest on Facebook. There, Russian officials also dispute the information that the drone is Russian: “All this indicates that, in reality, there has been a new provocation by the Kiev regime, which is trying by all means to draw NATO into a war with Russia.”

The comment with the most likes, almost 3000, says that “Not even the Ukrainians launched the drone, it's a false flag operation done by Romania itself, to have reason to launch the SAFE program”; another comment with thousands of likes says that “We, the majority population of Romania, are not interested in the war with Ukraine, we do not want to supply arms and money to Ukraine”.

A distribution infrastructure where suspicion is omnipresent

What is important to note in this type of reaction is not only the volume of misinformation, but the speed with which it is organized around already familiar explanations. In just a few hours, the Galati incident was absorbed into an already existing narrative ecosystem: “false flag”, “NATO wants war”, “Ukraine is deliberately provoking”, “authorities are hiding the truth”. They are patterns of interpretation that are constantly recycled and applied almost automatically to any sensitive geopolitical event.

These narratives don't just circulate in fringe areas of the internet, but are amplified by high-visibility actors like influencers or political figures, and the results are seen in the comments people leave on pages with massive audiences. We are talking about a distribution infrastructure where suspicion is omnipresent. Phrasing like “I'm just asking”, as BobbyD suggests, works exactly as a mechanism to avoid responsibility, but also as a tool to inoculate doubt.

Perhaps the most serious consequence is the erosion of the ability to reach a minimum consensus on the facts. Any incident can be instantly reinterpreted as covert operation, provocation or manipulation. In such an environment, the institutions that try to provide clarification are seen only as interested actors in the same competition of narratives. And the defective way in which Romanian politicians constantly choose to communicate in such situations only deepens the problem.