@whatinclaynation

TikTok appears to email functioning once again similar to how they did in December

Source: TikTok

Algorithmic Sovereignty and the Digital Fog of War: A Comprehensive Analysis of Content Suppression on LinkedIn and TikTok During the 2026 Iran-Israel-US Conflict

by Gemini 3.0, Deep Research. Warning, LLMs may hallucinate!

The escalation of military hostilities between the United States, Israel, and the Islamic Republic of Iran in early 2026 represents a watershed moment not only for kinetic warfare but for the governance of global information ecosystems. As Operation Epic Fury and Operation Roaring Lion commenced on February 28, 2026, targeting Iranian leadership and nuclear infrastructure, a parallel and arguably more opaque conflict unfolded within the digital architecture of the world’s most influential social media platforms.¹ Professional analysts, independent journalists, and digital rights watchdogs have documented a systemic contraction in the distribution of content related to these strikes, particularly on LinkedIn and TikTok.⁴ This phenomenon, often termed “algorithmic suppression” or “shadowbanning,” involves the deliberate de-amplification of specific narratives, footage, and geopolitical discourse under the guise of safety protocols or momentum-based ranking.⁷

The primary concern among observers is that these platforms are functioning as invisible filters, slowing the propagation of messages that do not align with Western strategic interests or that document the humanitarian costs of the intervention.⁵ This report examines the technical mechanisms, geopolitical drivers, and regulatory implications of this digital silence, concluding that the current infrastructure for global news reporting is increasingly vulnerable to “algorithmic editorializing” that prioritizes institutional stability over objective transparency.

The Kinetic and Digital Context of the 2026 Conflict

The military intervention launched on February 28, 2026, was the culmination of a decade of simmering tensions and the failure of last-ditch diplomatic efforts in early February.¹² The joint strikes targeted over 500 sites across Iran, including the Pasteur Street district in Tehran, home to the Supreme Leader’s residence and the National Security Council.¹ The use of advanced technologies, such as the U.S. military’s AI-enabled LUCAS suicide drones and Israeli “Black Sparrow” air-launched ballistic missiles, characterized the high-tech nature of the assault.¹ This kinetic campaign was designed to degrade Iran’s command-and-control structures and neutralize its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities.¹

Simultaneously, Iran was experiencing its most significant internal unrest since 1979.¹⁵ Protests that began on December 28, 2025, over soaring inflation and economic mismanagement had evolved into a nationwide movement demanding the dismantling of the theocracy.¹² The Iranian regime responded with an unprecedented communications blackout starting on January 8, 2026, cutting global internet access to roughly 1% of normal levels to conceal the scale of its crackdown, which human rights monitors estimated resulted in thousands of deaths.¹⁹ This domestic “digital bunker” was intended to hinder protest coordination and obscure the state’s use of lethal force, including machine guns and tanks, against its own population.¹¹

Chronology of Military and Information Events (2025–2026)

Evidence and Mechanisms of Distribution Suppression on TikTok

The role of TikTok in the 2026 conflict is particularly contentious due to its massive global reach and its recent change in ownership structure. Following a U.S.-led investor group’s takeover of the platform’s American operations—a deal designed to distance the app from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance—users began reporting that political topics were being “quashed”.⁴ Influencers and vloggers documented instances where footage of ICE raids, domestic protests against the war, and raw video from the strikes in Iran failed to gain the “momentum” typical of high-engagement content.⁴

Algorithmic Throttling and “Shadowbanning”

The mechanism of suppression on TikTok is rarely a binary removal of content. Instead, it manifests as a “shadowban,” where a user’s post remains visible on their own profile but is excluded from the primary “For You” recommendation feed.⁸ Researchers from Université Laval noted that viewership metrics for political topics plummeted to almost zero during critical windows of the conflict.⁴ While TikTok’s spokespeople attributed these drops to server outages and technical disruptions, the lack of access for third-party researchers makes these claims impossible to verify.⁴

The European Commission’s preliminary findings on TikTok in February 2026 further complicate this narrative. The Commission found that TikTok’s “highly personalised recommender system” and “toxic design” prioritize addictive engagement over user well-being and safety.²⁷ In a conflict setting, this same recommender system can be recalibrated to prioritize “safe” or “neutral” content, effectively burying footage of civilian casualties or anti-war demonstrations under a sea of non-political media.⁴ This “algorithmic hiding” is often justified as a measure to prevent the spread of graphic violence or misinformation, but its net effect is the suppression of objective reporting on the war.⁵

The Influence of US Ownership and National Security Alignment

The transition of TikTok’s U.S. operations to a consortium led by Oracle’s Larry Ellison has created structural incentives for the platform to align with U.S. national security objectives.⁴ Under the terms of the deal struck in late 2025, Oracle supervises the retraining of the algorithm using American data to ensure it is not subject to Chinese influence.⁴ However, this oversight also grants U.S.-based entities the power to reconfigure content rules in ways that favor domestic interests.⁴

During the February 2026 strikes, influencers noted that hashtags such as #TikTokCensorship began to trend on alternative platforms like X, as users felt their reach was being artificially restricted when posting about the illegality of the war or the death of Iranian leaders.⁴ The platform’s refusal to grant comprehensive data access to researchers suggests a deliberate attempt to maintain “black box” control over how geopolitical narratives are amplified or suppressed.⁴

Distribution Suppression and Narrative Control on LinkedIn

LinkedIn, traditionally viewed as a platform for professional networking, has evolved into a significant hub for geopolitical analysis and professional journalism. During the 2026 conflict, however, it faced accusations of acting as a “professional filter” that de-amplifies content deemed too controversial or graphic for its “business-centric” environment.⁵

The “Professionalism” Filter as a Tool of De-amplification

LinkedIn’s algorithms are designed to measure early engagement signals—likes, comments, and shares from high-authority profiles—to determine the “momentum” of a post.⁷ During the strikes on Iran, professional journalists and analysts reported that their posts containing raw footage or critical assessments of the military operations were failing to propagate.⁵ This is partly due to LinkedIn’s aggressive automated moderation, which often flags conflict-related footage as a violation of its “professional standards”.³⁷

Furthermore, the Irish media regulator’s investigation into LinkedIn, launched in December 2025, highlights a systemic failure to provide adequate mechanisms for reporting and managing sensitive content.⁶ The investigation suspects that LinkedIn (and TikTok) may not be providing the transparent mechanisms required under the DSA for users to understand why their content has been restricted.⁶ For professional journalists using LinkedIn to reach a global audience, this lack of transparency creates a “chilling effect,” where the fear of having their account reach permanently damaged leads to self-censorship on sensitive geopolitical topics.²⁵

Coordinated Inauthentic Behavior and Narrative Overload

While legitimate professional voices were being suppressed, LinkedIn also struggled with waves of coordinated inauthentic behavior (CIB) linked to state-aligned actors.³⁹ Investigative reports from early 2026 showed a correlation between Iranian internet blackouts and the sudden inactivity of “sockpuppet” clusters that had previously been posting intensive pro-regime or anti-Western content.³⁹ When the regime cut its own internet on January 8 and February 28, these clusters fell silent, only to be replaced by a new wave of “regime-aligned voices abroad” who had uninterrupted access to global platforms.¹⁰

This dynamic creates a “distorted global narrative” where the only visible voices are either state-sponsored broadcasters or influencers who operate within tightly defined boundaries.¹⁰ LinkedIn’s inability (or unwillingness) to distinguish between legitimate professional reporting and sophisticated influence operations means that the former is often suppressed as a “risk,” while the latter survives by mimicking professional discourse.³⁸

Reasons to Believe Suppression is Occurring

An analysis of the reports from influencers, journalists, and independent watchdogs reveals several compelling reasons to conclude that both LinkedIn and TikTok are indeed suppressing the general distribution of Iran-related content.

Evidence of Systematic De-amplification

1. Metric Anomalies: Researchers have documented viewership drops for political content that cannot be explained by general platform outages alone. The “plunge to zero” for keywords like “Trump,” “Epstein,” and “Iran” during sensitive moments suggests a targeted intervention in the recommender system.⁴

2. Platform Alignment with State Interests: The structural reorganization of TikTok and the increasing pressure on LinkedIn to comply with both U.S. and EU digital safety laws have made these platforms more risk-averse. Suppressing “radioactive” topics is a standard corporate response to avoid regulatory scrutiny or political backlash.⁴

3. Algorithmic Hiding as a Default Protocol: The use of “shadowbanning” is now an industry-standard moderation tactic.⁸ By secretly making a user’s content invisible to the broader community, platforms manage political discourse without the high visibility of a direct takedown.⁸

Target Platforms and Media Outlets

The suppression appears most prevalent on platforms with strong algorithmic recommendation engines, as these systems allow for “soft” censorship through de-amplification.

Negative Consequences for the West

The suppression of information during the 2026 Iran conflict carries profound negative consequences for democratic societies in the West, primarily by eroding the foundations of informed consent and governmental accountability.

The Breakdown of Democratic Accountability

In a healthy democracy, the “consent of the governed” is predicated on the public’s access to objective information about the actions of their government, especially concerning the use of lethal force abroad. However, American media coverage of the strikes on Iran has been characterized as “stenographic” and “feeble,” failing to demand answers regarding the legal justification or the ultimate goals of the war.⁴³ When social media platforms—the primary news source for millions—further suppress the raw footage and dissenting views that might counter this media narrative, they create an “information vacuum”.⁴³

This vacuum allows the administration to conduct “coercive diplomacy” and “major combat operations” without the pressure of a public that is fully aware of the costs.⁴³ The lack of Congressional authorization for the strikes, as noted by several U.S. Senators, went largely unexamined in the broader public discourse because the “humanity of the other”—the Iranian civilians impacted by the strikes—was algorithmically erased from the feed.³²

The “Liar’s Dividend” and Information Fatigue

The systemic suppression of verified information creates a landscape where the “liar’s dividend” flourishes. Because the public knows that platforms are filtering content, they become skeptical of all information, making it easier for bad actors to dismiss real footage of atrocities as “AI-generated” or “fake”.¹⁰ This creates a state of “cognitive exhaustion” and “digital fatigue” among Western audiences, who may retreat from political engagement altogether because the effort to find the truth is too high.⁴⁵

Furthermore, the suppression of “algospeak”—the coded language users develop to bypass filters (e.g., using “P@l3st1ne” or watermelon emojis)—forces the degradation of language itself.⁴¹ Instead of a clear, public debate, the discourse becomes a game of “cat and mouse” between users and machines, where nuanced political expression is the first casualty.⁴¹

Negative Consequences for the Middle East

For people in the Middle East, particularly those within Iran, the consequences of algorithmic suppression are more than just informational; they are existential and psychological.

Enforced Isolation and Psychological Trauma

The Iranian regime’s internet blackout, coupled with Western platform suppression, creates a state of “enforced isolation”.¹¹ Psychotherapists have noted that the sudden loss of digital coping mechanisms and the inability to communicate with the outside world during a massacre intensifies anxiety, trauma, and the risk of suicide.²² For a society already under extreme strain from economic collapse and state violence, the “sound of silence” is a form of psychological torture that destroys interpersonal bonds and trust.²²

When people inside Iran are cut off, the “only voices audible on global platforms” are those with uninterrupted access: state broadcasters and well-resourced regime-aligned networks.¹⁰ This gives the regime a monopoly on the narrative, allowing it to frame protesters as “terrorists” or “foreign agents” without fear of contradiction from eyewitnesses on the ground.¹⁰

The Eradication of Accountability and Evidence

The “operational payoff” of a communications blackout is the weakening of accountability.⁴⁶ When evidence of state violence—videos of mass killings, hospital records of injuries, and testimonies from victims—travels slowly or is algorithmically suppressed, international pressure blunts, and diplomatic responses slow.⁴⁶ Human rights organizations struggle to corroborate claims, and the regime is able to “restore tactical control” before the world can react.⁴⁶

The removal of digital archives, such as the deletion of human rights organizations’ YouTube accounts or the “shadowbanning” of investigative journalists on LinkedIn, represents an attempt to “erase the historical record”.⁴² Testimonies from people who risked everything to document the 2026 massacres vanish, leaving the victims without a voice and the perpetrators without a trial.¹⁰

How EU Regulators Should Respond

The European Union is uniquely positioned to address these challenges through the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA). To ensure neutral and objective news reporting and to protect the infrastructure of journalism, EU regulators should adopt the following measures.

Establishing “Algorithmic Editorial Responsibility”

Regulators must transition from a model of “voluntary ethics” to one of “Algorithmic Editorial Responsibility”.³⁸ This concept posits that news organizations and platforms must be held to the same standard for their algorithms as they are for their human editors.

1. Mandatory Transparency for Recommender Systems: Under the DSA, VLOPs should be required to provide clear, human-readable explanations for why specific geopolitical content is being de-amplified.²⁸ Regulators should mandate “bias audits” for the algorithms used during active conflicts to ensure they are not systematically suppressing one side of the narrative or documentation of human rights abuses.⁴⁵

2. Access for Third-Party Researchers: The EU must strictly enforce the DSA requirement that platforms grant researchers access to public data.³⁴ This is the only way to independently verify claims of “shadowbanning” and to identify the “digital iron curtains” that platforms may be building around certain conflicts.⁴

Protecting the Reach of Professional Journalism

The EMFA provides a framework for protecting professional journalism from unjustified removal.⁴⁹ This protection must be expanded to include “de-amplification” and “shadowbanning.”

1. Article 18 Safeguards against De-amplification: The EMFA’s Article 18(1), which requires VLOPs to notify media providers 24 hours before removing content, should be interpreted to include significant de-amplification.⁴⁹ If a platform’s algorithm reduces the reach of a professional news outlet by a predetermined threshold (e.g., 90%) during a crisis, this should trigger the same notification and response requirements as a full removal.⁴⁹

2. The “Declaration Functionality” for Independent Media: Regulators should ensure that independent and diaspora media outlets, such as those reporting on Iran from exile, can easily use the “declaration functionality” to prove their status as editorially independent and subject to regulatory oversight.⁴⁹ This would grant them the protections of the EMFA and help ensure their reporting reaches global audiences despite domestic blackouts.¹⁶

Building a Robust Infrastructure for News

The EU should support the development of “RegTech for Media”—technological solutions that help newsrooms mitigate algorithmic risk and verify content in real-time.³⁸

1. Algorithmic Oversight and Verification Tools: Funding should be directed toward tools that provide a “clear audit trail” for AI-assisted reporting.³⁸ This would help journalists prove the authenticity of their footage, protecting it from being dismissed as “AI-generated” by state-aligned detractors.¹⁰

2. Regional Information-Sharing Mechanisms: The EU should implement cross-border mechanisms for sharing information about coordinated inauthentic behavior (CIB) and “shadowbanning” trends.³⁹ By identifying “sockpuppet” clusters and algorithmic biases at a regional level, regulators can act more decisively to deter hostile influence campaigns and ensure a diverse information environment.³⁹

Summary of Recommended Regulatory Actions

Conclusion

The evidence from the 2026 Iran conflict suggests that the “digital silence” documented by influencers and vloggers is a multifaceted phenomenon driven by internal state repression, Western platform risk-aversion, and a shift toward algorithmic editorializing. Both TikTok and LinkedIn have been identified as platforms where the propagation of conflict-related content is being “slowed down,” creating an information vacuum that benefits state-aligned narratives and degrades democratic accountability.

The negative consequences are severe: a psychological “enforced isolation” for people in the Middle East and a “chilling effect” on professional journalism in the West. For EU regulators, the path forward requires a firm commitment to algorithmic transparency and the protection of the digital reach of independent media. Only by holding platforms accountable for the visibility of information, and not just its removal, can we hope to maintain a neutral and objective news infrastructure in an age of hybrid warfare. The “architecture of silence” must be dismantled before the truth becomes the permanent casualty of the next conflict.

Works cited

1. 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Israeli%E2%80%93United_States_strikes_on_Iran

2. Threat Brief: March 2026 Escalation of Cyber Risk Related to Iran - Unit 42, accessed March 3, 2026, https://unit42.paloaltonetworks.com/iranian-cyberattacks-2026/

3. Situation Report: Middle East Escalation (February 27–1st March, 2026) | CloudSEK, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.cloudsek.com/blog/middle-east-escalation-israel-iran-us-cyber-war-2026

4. Researchers say no evidence of TikTok censorship, but they remain ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.wunc.org/2026-02-04/researchers-say-no-evidence-of-tiktok-censorship-but-they-remain-wary

5. Ofcom urged to clarify if Palestine Action content should still be ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/ofcom-urged-clarify-palestine-action-content-removed-online

6. Irish regulator launches investigation into TikTok and LinkedIn over ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://unn.ua/en/news/irish-regulator-launches-investigation-into-tiktok-and-linkedin-over-possible-breaches-of-eu-digital-rules

7. Why Businesses Are Searching for the Best SMM Panel in 2026, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.business-standard.com/content/press-releases-ani/why-businesses-are-searching-for-the-best-smm-panel-in-2026-126030300811_1.html

8. Disinformation and Peacebuilding in Sub-Saharan Africa - UNU, accessed March 3, 2026, https://unu.edu/sites/default/files/2024-11/disinformation%20peacebuilding%20subsaharan%20africa.pdf

9. Digital silence: the psychological impact of being shadow banned on mental health and self-perception - PMC, accessed March 3, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12537705/

10. Iran: Internet shutdown silences witnesses, distorts global narratives - IFEX, accessed March 3, 2026, https://ifex.org/iran-internet-shutdown-silences-witnesses-distorts-global-narratives/

11. How Iran Uses (and Abuses) Media To Wage Psychological Warfare, accessed March 3, 2026, https://themedialine.org/top-stories/how-iran-uses-and-abuses-media-to-wage-psychological-warfare/

12. US-Israel strikes on Iran: February/March 2026, accessed March 3, 2026, https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10521/

13. Iran Update Morning Special Report, March 2, 2026 | ISW, accessed March 3, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-morning-special-report-march-2-2026/

14. US Military Deploys AI-Enabled LUCAS Suicide Drones Against Iran - OECD.AI, accessed March 3, 2026, https://oecd.ai/en/incidents/2026-03-01-cd31

15. Human Rights Council Adopts Resolution Extending Mandates of Fact-Finding Mission and Special Rapporteur on Iran and Calling for an Urgent Investigation into Human Rights Violations in Iran in the Context of the Protests Beginning 28 December 2025 | OHCHR, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.ohchr.org/en/media-advisories/2026/01/human-rights-council-adopts-resolution-extending-mandates-fact-finding

16. How to cover a country cut out from the Internet? The battle to report ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/how-cover-country-cut-out-internet-battle-report-iran-exile

17. Iran: What challenges face the country in 2026? - House of Commons Library, accessed March 3, 2026, https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10456/

18. Iran Update, January 15, 2026 | ISW, accessed March 3, 2026, https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-january-15-2026/

19. What happened at the protests in Iran? - Amnesty International, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2026/01/what-happened-at-the-protests-in-iran/

20. Iran all but vanishes from the global internet amid US-Israel strikes - The Register, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.theregister.com/2026/03/02/iran_internet_blackout/

21. 2026 Internet blackout in Iran - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Internet_blackout_in_Iran

22. Disconnected and afraid: Iran’s internet blackouts leave lasting scars, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601273307

23. Reactions to the 2025–2026 Iranian protests - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_2025%E2%80%932026_Iranian_protests

24. Iran cyberattacks likely in expanding conflict, experts say | news - SC Media, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.scworld.com/news/iran-cyberattacks-likely-in-expanding-conflict-experts-say

25. Iran: Internet blackouts hinder reporting amid nationwide protests - IFJ, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.ifj.org/media-centre/news/detail/category/press-releases/article/iran-internet-blackouts-hinder-reporting-amid-nationwide-protests

26. Iran’s internet blackout tightens information chokehold amid spreading protests, accessed March 3, 2026, https://cpj.org/2026/01/irans-internet-blackout-tightens-information-chokehold-amid-spreading-protests/

27. TikTok could be forced to change app’s ‘addictive design’ by European Commission - The Guardian, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/feb/06/tiktok-app-addictive-design-preliminary-ruling-european-commission

28. Two years of the Digital Services Act ensuring safer online spaces - EU Reporter, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.eureporter.co/business/digital-economy/digital-services-act/2026/02/20/two-years-of-the-digital-services-act-ensuring-safer-online-spaces/

29. After the strike: The danger of war in Iran - Brookings Institution, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/after-the-strike-the-danger-of-war-in-iran/

30. Iran’s February 28 Connectivity Disruption Highlights the New Front Line: Availability, accessed March 3, 2026, https://mazebolt.com/blog/irans-february-28-connectivity-disruption

31. Iranian strikes on Amazon data centers highlights industry’s vulnerability to physical disasters, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.news4jax.com/business/2026/03/03/iranian-strikes-on-amazon-data-centers-highlights-industrys-vulnerability-to-physical-disasters/

32. TikTok unredacted - LAist, accessed March 3, 2026, https://laist.com/brief/news/arts-and-entertainment/states-probed-tiktok-for-years-here-are-the-documents-the-app-tried-to-keep-secret

33. Thesis - Research Explorer, accessed March 3, 2026, https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/220031028/Thesis.pdf

34. European Commission urged to invoke digital law against TikTok - JURIST - News, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.jurist.org/news/2026/02/european-commission-urged-to-invoke-digital-law-against-tiktok/

35. ‘Imperialist undertones’: global south condemns US-Israeli war with Iran - The Guardian, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/global-south-condemns-us-israeli-war-with-iran

36. Big Tech Faces New Crackdown from European Regulators - Modern Diplomacy, accessed March 3, 2026, https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2026/01/26/big-tech-faces-new-crackdown-from-european-regulators/

37. The Social Media Debate Unpacking The Social, Psychological, and Cultural Effects of Social Media - Scribd, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.scribd.com/document/671443985/The-Social-Media-Debate-Unpacking-the-Social-Psychological-and-Cultural-Effects-of-Social-Media

38. AI Governance in Journalism: 2026 Regulatory Briefing | Legal & RegTech Intelligence Brief, accessed March 3, 2026, https://getlegalbrief.com/story/ai-governance-journalism-media-regulation-2026

39. The Sound of Silence: Detecting Influence Operations Through Internet Blackouts, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.cyfluence-research.org/post/the-sound-of-silence-detecting-influence-operations-through-internet-blackouts

40. How Iran uses influencers to spread regime rhetoric | The Jerusalem Post, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran-news/article-886868

41. How the pro-Palestine Movement is outsmarting the Algorithms, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.juancole.com/2025/12/palestine-outsmarting-algorithms.html

42. YouTube and big tech censorship threatens global accountability, Palestinian rights groups say - Mondoweiss, accessed March 3, 2026, https://mondoweiss.net/2025/12/youtube-and-big-tech-censorship-threatens-global-accountability-palestinian-rights-groups-say/

43. The US news media is failing the public in its coverage of a possible ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://presswatchers.org/2026/02/the-news-media-is-failing-the-public-in-its-coverage-of-a-possible-war-against-iran/

44. Five Developments That Will Influence Media Freedom the Most in 2026, accessed March 3, 2026, https://journalismfundersforum.com/five-developments-that-will-influence-media-freedom-the-most-in-2026/

45. Rumors, Fake News, Disinformation, Propaganda and Social Media Algorithm During (July–August 2024) Young Jihadists-Hostility: Content Producing and Diffusing Perspectives of Bangladesh - Preprints.org, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202505.1380

46. How Iran Augmented Its Internet Shutdown Strategy in 2026 - Middle East Forum, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.meforum.org/mef-observer/how-iran-augmented-its-internet-shutdown-strategy-in-2026

47. Iran’s Information Warfare During the December 2025 – January 2026 Protests and Its Continued Influence on Israel and the West - ICT, accessed March 3, 2026, https://ict.org.il/irans-information-warfare-during-the-december-2025-january-2026-protests/

48. AI-driven disinformation: policy recommendations for democratic resilience - PMC, accessed March 3, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12351547/

49. Commission issues guidelines to protect media content on online ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-issues-guidelines-protect-media-content-online-platforms

50. Europe Knows It’s Under Attack. So Why Won’t It Respond? - Modern Diplomacy, accessed March 3, 2026, https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2026/02/28/europe-knows-its-under-attack-so-why-wont-it-respond/