The Guardian spent a year analyzing an online community in which anti-immigration and misinformation circulates. Experts say that such spaces can play a role in radicalization.
Social networks. Photo: Shutterstock
In the summer of 2024, several cities in the UK were shaken by violent protests. It all started from false information spread on social networks. Anger targets were asylum seekers and Muslim communities. Among the incidents was the arson of a hotel where migrant stays, according to The Guardian.
Surprising was that many of those involved were not part of extremist organizations. Some even rejected the far -right label and displayed banners with the message “We are just right. “
A year of analysis of some Facebook groups showed how a community was formed by the distrust of the government, police, justice and the media. In these spaces, nationalist ideas, anti-immigration messages, conspiracy theories and misinformation circulate.
Distrust in institutions
Many of the posts criticize the political leaders and state institutions. Politicians are often called traitors, and police or justice are presented as “in two speeds”. Neither organizations considered neutral, such as the rescue society at sea, do not escape the attacks.
This atmosphere feeds support for populist parties, which take advantage of the lack of confidence in traditional formations. For the disappointed, these groups become a place where they find their validation.
Immigration, central subject
Immigration constantly appears in discussions. About a post from seven analyzes this topic. Some messages are critical of government policies, but many describe migrants as a danger. Expressions such as “men of military age” or “Grooming networks” are used, which suggest threat and cultural incompatibility.
In many cases, migrants are presented as profiteers of the system. Even if explicit hate messages are rarer, they are not missing. Terms such as “parasites” or “primitive” appear in comments that have remained visible for months.
Identity and fear
Another type of speech present in these groups is the nationalist one. Ideas like white and Christian British become second -hand citizens become. This narrative creates fear and strengthens the feeling that national identity is threatened.
Such messages are frequently repeated. Even if they are false, they become credible for some users just because they see them again and again. This repetition makes them believe that ideas are shared by a majority.
“We are not extremists”
After the revolts of 2024, hundreds of posts tried to justify the protests as legitimate or defended the freedom of expression. A well -known example is that of a woman sentenced to prison for asking for a hotel with asylum seekers. In the Facebook groups, many presented it as an ordinary person expressing their dissatisfaction.
This approach shows that many participants are not considered extremists. Not all are party members or organized militants. Many only comment, follow or distribute messages. However, their presence contributes to the spread of a discourse that normalize radical ideas.
The door to the conspirators
In these groups there are many conspiracy theories. The denial of climatic changes, the “great replacement” or the idea that global organizations control the policy.
Often, discussions about immigration become the gateway to such theories. A user who arrives in a group to comment on migration can be exposed quickly to much more radical messages.
Thus, a mechanism that gathers frustrated people is created and directs their anger to a scapegoat. When this process continues, there is a risk of turning into a potential movement.
The network extends
In the summer of 2025, the analyzed groups had over 600 thousand members. Many participated in several communities at the same time. This overlap strengthened the circulation of messages and gave the impression of users that their opinions are widely shared.
Although not all those who enter these groups become radicals, the created environment makes the ideas of extreme right be more and more accepted. Social networks give these messages a huge visibility and create the false consensus.
