Political narratives in the spirit of russian propaganda – report presentation
Russian propaganda operates not only through media and politics. Its influence reaches much deeper — into the world of academia. The latest report by the Mieroszewski Centre, “Political Narratives in the Spirit of Russian Propaganda. A Report on Their Presence in Polish Academic Literature, 2014–2024”, reveals that Kremlin-style narratives — from “corrupt Ukraine” to “Crimea – forever Russian” — also appear in Polish scholarly publications.
They are most often presented critically or descriptively, and only rarely endorsed. Yet their very presence in academic discourse means that they can — often unintentionally — amplify Russian framing in public debate.
Authored by Dr Ernest Wyciszkiewicz and Dr Bartłomiej Gajos, the report is the first systematic study in Poland to analyze the occurrence of pro-Russian narratives in academic literature in the social sciences and humanities. The researchers examined over 208,000 publications from 2014–2024, using AI-based text-mining tools and their own catalogue of 44 narratives derived from Russian propaganda discourse.
The identified narratives fall into four main functional categories:
- delegitimizing Ukraine (e.g. “corrupt Ukraine,” “divided Ukraine,” “Ukraine as a Western puppet”),
- legitimizing Russian actions (e.g. “protection of Russian-speaking minorities,” “Crimea has always been Russian”),
- discrediting the West (e.g. “the West provoked the war,” “Poland as an American pawn”),
- demobilizing Poles (e.g. “this is not our war,” “nothing depends on us”).
The authors’ conclusion is clear: although academia strives for objectivity, it also participates — often unconsciously — in the narrative war. The report is not an accusation against scholars but a diagnosis of linguistic mechanisms that may reinforce Russian frames of interpretation even when used with good intentions.
Debating responsibility for language
The report’s launch took place on 4 November 2025 in the Column Hall of the University of Warsaw’s Faculty of History.
he discussion featured:
- Dr Ernest Wyciszkiewicz and Dr Bartłomiej Gajos – authors of the report,
- Prof. Agnieszka Legucka – Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
- Kamil Basaj – INFO OPS Polska Foundation.
The debate was moderated by journalist Arleta Bojke and opened by Prof. Andrzej Szeptycki, Deputy Minister of Science and Higher Education.
The discussion began with a crucial question: Is there also an information war within academia? Participants agreed that this phenomenon demands reflection — and that awareness of language has become a form of defense.
“We don’t want to stigmatize scholars. This report is about a phenomenon, not about guilt. Quoting Putin to analyze his rhetoric doesn’t mean endorsing his views. But every narrative — even an academic one — shapes how society understands the world.”
– Dr Ernest Wyciszkiewicz
Prof. Agnieszka Legucka explained why the authors deliberately chose the term narrative rather than disinformation:
“The word disinformation closes the conversation — it implies guilt. Narrative allows us to study processes, emotions, and language without assigning blame. It’s not about who lies, but about how stories are told.”
A War over emotions, not facts
In the next part of the discussion, participants examined the nature of Russian information warfare, which — as Kamil Basaj noted — aims less at persuasion than at discouragement and demoralization.
“The goal of Russian information operations is not to convince us that Russia is right. The goal is to weaken us — to sow fear, apathy, and a sense that nothing matters. A demotivated society won’t defend its values.”
Dr Bartłomiej Gajos presented the analytical findings: out of thousands of publications, 377 contained fragments aligned with Russian narratives, and 90–95% of AI-identified cases proved accurate upon manual verification. Most examples were descriptive or critical in tone.
“These narratives rarely appear alone. If Ukraine is described as corrupt, it is usually also divided, failed, or fascist. Together, they form a coherent story — one that delegitimizes the state’s very existence.”
– Dr Bartłomiej Gajos
Education, technology, and awareness
In the final segment, participants discussed the need to strengthen informational resilience and responsibility in a world shaped by algorithms.
“The new battlefield is algorithmic. Russian operators flood cyberspace with so much data that algorithms — not people — decide what we see. We no longer choose whom to trust — the algorithm does it for us.”
– Kamil Basaj
Prof. Legucka emphasized that countering propaganda requires education, not censorship.
“We’re in an information war where narratives, not facts, win. If we don’t tell our own story, we lose it — told in someone else’s language.”
The authors called for the digitalization of Polish academia and a stronger presence of credible research online.
“We must feed the internet with truth. Algorithms have no conscience, but they have statistics — they show what exists in greater quantity.”
– Dr Ernest Wyciszkiewicz
Awareness over censorship
The panel concluded that resilience to propaganda must be built not through bans but through awareness and communication culture. The report ends with a set of recommendations: linguistic guidelines, the principle of strategic silence (avoiding amplification of false content), and the need for critical media education in schools and universities.
“Censorship is not the answer. The only effective defense is awareness — understanding that not every message is neutral, and taking responsibility for our words.”
– Dr Bartłomiej Gajos
The full report “Political narratives in the spirit of Russian propaganda. A report on their presence in Polish academic literature, 2014–2024” is available on our website here.
