Eliot Higgins is the founder of Bellingcat, in our view, one of the best examples of an international investigative collective. Bellingcat has pioneered the use of open-source information to uncover truth in some of the world’s most contested events. What began as a personal blog has grown into a global network of citizen investigators whose work has shed light on issues ranging from exposing the truth about flight MH17, to war crimes in Syria and Ukraine. Higgins and his team have received widespread recognition, including awards in the Netherlands, where Bellingcat was honoured with the Treaties of Nijmegen Medal for their groundbreaking investigation into MH17, a case with deep resonance in Dutch society.
Written by Jos Hummelen
Fighting disinformation in Higgins’ words
As the keynote speaker during the official launch of THETA, Eliot reflected on Bellingcat’s role in a digital landscape where disinformation proliferates with alarming speed. He emphasised that their mission extends far beyond research: it is about equipping citizens to challenge falsehoods, demand accountability and insist on evidence as the foundation of public debate.
Underlining the importance of working together
First, that disinformation is no longer confined to the dark corners of the internet but has entered mainstream discourse, influencing politics, media and society. Second, that transparency and verification are powerful tools: by showing how investigations are conducted step by step, Bellingcat empowers ordinary people to replicate the methods themselves. This, he explained, is central to building resilience against manipulation. Finally, Eliot underlined the importance of collaboration across borders and disciplines, noting that no single actor can address the scale of the disinformation challenge alone. A huge opportunity we at THETA take to heart.
Demanufacturing consent: Disordered discourse in the digital age
At the launch of THETA, Eliot expanded on these ideas in his presentation, ‘Demanufacturing consent: How disordered discourse is destroying democracy.’ He warned that the modern information environment is too vast, complex and fleeting for individuals to grasp directly. Instead, it is shaped by “disordered discourse” – a chaotic mixture of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation that corrodes public debate.
Higgins identified multiple drivers behind this disorder.
- Structural and technological shifts – such as the decline of traditional gatekeepers – and the rise of algorithmic amplification, have fragmented the information ecosystem.
- Psychological and social forces, including cognitive biases and identity-driven
communities, reinforce echo chambers. - Political and economic incentives, meanwhile, encourage actors – from state agencies to self-interested influencers – to weaponize falsehoods for gain.
Higgins illustrated how distorted narratives evolve in stages: from seemingly benign questions, to misrepresentations, to outright conspiracies that find traction within echo chambers. These narratives do not remain on the margins. They are increasingly absorbed by mainstream institutions, a process Higgins described as ‘institutional capture’, where governments, media and other societal pillars begin to reflect and legitimise disordered discourse, eroding the very foundations of democracy.
The goal is to erode trust: Destroy public faith in democratic institutions like the media, judiciary, and elections. A population that trusts nothing is easier to manipulate.
Higgins: “Institutional capture is the process by which disordered discourse is absorbed into the core functions of power.”
The ecosystem of disinformation
According to Eliot Higgins, the journey of a “true believer” into a self-contained reality of disinformation is not a sudden leap, but a gradual process nurtured by a specific ecosystem. This ecosystem is driven by a combination of official state actors, who provide the core narrative from positions of authority; proxy actors, such as state-aligned media, who amplify it with a veneer of independence; and self-interested actors, who exploit the narrative for personal gain. These groups interact in a feedback loop, not only broadcasting the narrative to their audience but also becoming more deeply entrenched in their own distortions.
The pathway to radicalization often begins with legitimate questions about complex world events. These doubts are then exploited, leading an individual into deeper engagement with alternative explanations, typically in the hidden corners of the internet. This is where the crucial shift occurs: from mere curiosity to finding a group identity. Within this community, the belief system becomes central to a person’s sense of belonging. As the group solidifies, it begins to build its own institutions; websites, forums, and media channels that create a parallel information universe.
This stage of institutionalization paves the way for what Higgins calls “discourse absolutism,” the final and most rigid phase. Here, the narrative hardens into an unchallengeable dogma, and any contradictory evidence is reflexively dismissed as a deliberate deception by malevolent forces. Yet, Higgins grounds his analysis in a firm sense of hope. He argues that the power of these mechanisms can be broken by exposing their inner workings and empowering citizens with the tools of verification, championing transparency and evidence as the ultimate antidotes to distortion.
Jackson Hinkle: A Perfect Example
Eliot used the trajectory of American influencer Jackson Hinkle as a tangible case study for the mechanisms of institutional capture and discourse absolutism. Hinkle began as an individual, engaging with anti-establishment politics, but his journey to the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, where he produced content sympathetic to the Russian-backed separatist narrative, marked a key transition. This experience allowed him to position himself as an eyewitness, granting his subsequent commentary a veneer of authenticity. His role evolved significantly when he was invited to defend Russian positions at a United Nations Security Council meeting, an event orchestrated by the Russian delegation.
This platform transformed him from a mere online voice into what Higgins would identify as a proxy actor, an ostensibly independent figure amplifying a state-sponsored narrative to an international audience, thereby lending it a false sense of external legitimacy.
Hinkle’s influence demonstrates how the three driver groups interact. He operates as a self-interested actor building a personal brand and audience, while simultaneously functioning as a valuable proxy for official Russian interests. His content, which often dismisses documented evidence of Russian war crimes as Western propaganda, exemplifies discourse absolutism in practice. The narrative he uses is treated as an absolute truth, impervious to contradictory evidence. His story encapsulates the entire pathway: from initial engagement
with a contrarian worldview, to finding a group identity within a specific political niche, to achieving a form of institutionalization by speaking at one of the world’s most formal institutions.
This progression shows how modern influence operations can elevate individual influencers to become integral components in a larger ecosystem of disinformation, effectively nurturing and validating their beliefs while using them to capture the narrative space of a target audience.
Why this matters for Europe
For The European Trust Alliance, Higgins’ work is a powerful illustration of why building trust in the digital age is both urgent and possible. Disinformation is not a distant problem; it is embedded in Europe’s political and social fabric. But the tools to fight it exist – from open-source investigations to collaborative networks that prioritise truth over manipulation. By bringing together governments, universities, companies, thought leaders and media, THETA shares the same vision that Higgins and Bellingcat embody: a society where evidence prevails over falsehoods, and where trust forms the cornerstone of democracy in the digital era.
