Disinformation map. Results of the study on the quality of coverage of Russia's invasion in Ukraine in leading Spanish media outlets
Photo: Enrique Villarino
Verifying information and the connections of journalists and authors is an important element of information hygiene. For this purpose, the Resurgam analytical community has launched a content analysis-based study on the quality of coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian war in the leading media outlets of several European countries.
Spain was the first subject of our study. Between May and July 2025, Resurgam conducted research on the leading Spanish media outlets. We created a list of authors who unprofessionally spread information about the Russian invasion, violating journalistic standards and deliberately distorting facts, which contributes to the spread of Russian disinformation and the worsening of Spanish-Ukrainian relations.
Research methodology
We selected ten leading Spanish media outlets for the study: El País, El Mundo, La Vanguardia, El Periódico de Catalunya, El Diario, ABC, 20 minutos, La Razón, EFE, and Europa Press. All publications are based in Madrid, with the exception of La Vanguardia and El Periódico de Catalunya, which are located in Barcelona (Catalonia).
The study analysed only articles published in 2024 that covered the topic of the Russian-Ukrainian war.
To obtain the highest quality results, the study was conducted in three stages:
1. Cross-evaluation of articles by three independent individuals according to established criteria
All articles entered into the system received one of three possible ratings from three or more individuals, in accordance with the established criteria.
System look
A green rating indicates constructive coverage of events in the article and correctly structured information in accordance with journalistic standards, such as: 1) reliability; 2) accuracy; 3) separation of facts and comments; 4) the author's awareness and support of the fact that Russia is an aggressor and a violator of international law; 5) respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, which is an element of international law and professional standards.
Yellow rating – neutral coverage of events, which largely complies with standards. The author may present either positive or negative information for our subjective perception. There are minor inaccuracies that do not affect the overall perception of the text and the objectivity of the presentation of facts. Or the article does not include more than one criterion that falls under the category of ‘Manipulative/distorted coverage of events’.
Red rating – manipulative/distorted coverage. Criteria: 1) the information presented in the material does not correspond to the facts; 2) the article is written with the aim of triggering emotions or actions directed against Ukraine and Europe in the reader, and is not intended to inform about any events; 3) the headline does not correspond to the information presented in the article and is taken out of context; 4) the author shows disrespect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine in accordance with international norms; 5) the author avoids condemning Russia for its act of aggression, attempting to ‘whitewash’ the aggressor or equate the victim with the aggressor. 6) and others.
Three assessments for each material were necessary in order to sort the red-rated articles, which were the main object of the study, more thoroughly and accurately.
It should be noted that the participants did not have access to each other's results in order to prevent mutual influence.
2. Expert level of assessment of the collected information
At this level of research, a group of experts from the Resurgam analytical community (specialists in political science, international relations, countering disinformation, philosophy, as well as OSINT specialists) reviewed in greater depth all materials that were classified as red level, or were close to it, or were controversial assessments obtained during the first stage.
This level consisted of the following components:
additional assessment of authors' publications, especially those that fell into the ‘red level’ or were on the verge of this category;
detailed collective analysis of articles with the construction of a ‘narrative map’;
study of the authors' background, determination of the systematic nature of provocative publications outside the scope of the outlined study;
OSINT analysis of contacts and verification of authors for connections with the Russian Federation and possible levels of involvement.
Based on the results of the second level, profiles were created for suspicious authors whose work does not meet journalistic and analytical standards, who spread pro-Russian narratives, use manipulation, show disrespect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, avoid condemning Russia or even use methods to ‘whitewash’ the aggressor and legitimise the occupation war, have suspicious ties or systematic violations.
3. Review level of assessment by independent experts
Its purpose is to objectify the data obtained through external review and recommendations from third-party experts.
Ten people participated in the review: representatives of academic journalism, editors-in-chief of Ukrainian publications, specialists in fact-checking, political psychology and other fields. Decisions on possible adjustments to the research data (first and second levels) were made by a qualified majority. At the same time, the team of the international analytical community Resurgam did not have the right to vote at this stage.
To ensure maximum transparency, representatives of the Spanish Embassy in Ukraine were officially invited to the review meeting. Unfortunately, they did not show up.
In addition, the collected comments were sent to the Spanish media. The purpose of this step was, on the one hand, to obtain their comments, and on the other hand, to listen to their arguments that we were ready to hear.
Based on the results of the work at all three levels, a final report was prepared, part of which was made public.
Research results
The study analysed 1,921 articles published by the ten abovementioned publications in 2024 which covered the Russian–Ukrainian war.
Of these, 1,004 articles (52.3%) were classified as 'green', indicating that they provided objective coverage of the Russian invasion.
Another 731 articles (38%) were classified as yellow, indicating that they mostly met the standards, with only minor inaccuracies or errors that did not affect the overall quality or objectivity.
A total of 186 articles (9.7%) were classified as 'red', as they covered the topic of the Russian invasion in a manipulative manner, spreading pro-Russian narratives and committing other violations defined as 'red'.
Of these, 107 were published without indication of authorship, mostly as reprints — a practice particularly typical of publications such as 20 Minutos, EFE and Europa Press, which operate as news aggregators and consequently have a low threshold for verification and fact-checking.
The remaining 79 materials indicated authorship.
Publication ratings
El Mundo and El País showed the highest level of objectivity and reliability in their coverage of Russia's war against Ukraine. Both publications have a high level of information verification.
El Diario and ABC generally have high standards, but there are a number of authors who systematically violate them.
EFE, Europa Press, and 20 minutos do not indicate the authorship of articles and often do not verify materials that they republish from other publications.
La Razon allows the publication of provocative articles, particularly in the opinion format, often without proper verification.
The Catalan publications La Vanguardia and El Periódico de Catalunya, based in Barcelona, showed the worst level of objectivity and reliability in their coverage of Russia's war against Ukraine. A number of authors from both publications have varying degrees of bias, which often reinforces the pro-Russian narratives they systematically spread.
Next, in descending order, is the rating of publications and the results for each of them separately.
Safe category
1. El Mundo — rating 9.4/10
The publication received a base rating (1st level of research) of 8.4 out of 10 and an editorial rating of 9.4 (the editorial board of the Resurgam analytical community had the opportunity to add or subtract 1 point to/from the base rating or leave it unchanged after conducting the 2nd level of research).
Of the 125 articles analysed, 70% belong to the green level, 27% to the yellow level, and only 3% to the red level. None of the authors of this publication made it to the red list.
Journalists Alberto Rojas, Xavier Colás, Javier Espinosa, Macel Gascón, and Rostyslav Averchuk perform their work professionally and objectively and are added to the category of reliable (green) level.
2. El País – rating 9.3/10
Base rating – 8.3 out of 10 and editorial rating – 9.3. Of the 218 articles analysed, 69% were classified as green, 29% as yellow and 2% as red.
Journalists Cristian Segura, Maria R. Sahuquillo, Óscar Gutiérrez Garrido, Manuel Altozano, Javier G. Cuesta , and Lola Hierro were added to the list of green (reliable) level as those authors who objectively cover the topic of Russia's war against Ukraine.
One of the authors got into the red list –Tommaso Koch.
Attention category
3. El Diario – rating 7.9/10
Basic rating – 7.9, editorial rating – 7.9. Out of 120 articles: 65% are green, 29% are yellow, 6% are red.
The publication is very close to falling into the “safe category”. The publication meets journalistic standards. The vast majority of the publication’s staff journalists study the issues and subjects in detail and describe them objectively, familiarising readers with news, events and their analysis.
The risk area is a number of authors who publish their own articles in the OPINION section. A number of authors fell into the ‘red level’ because of significant violations of journalistic standards, manipulation of facts, and disrespect for Ukraine, its subjectivity and territorial integrity.
Therefore, the information provided by the publication itself is highly reliable, but the editorial policy regarding the quality of publications in the OPINION section is a risk area.
Reliable authors: Iciar Gutierrez, Irene Castro, Dan Sabbagh, Antònia Crespí Ferrer, Shaun Walker, Javier Biosca Azcoiti.
Red (unreliable) authors: José Enrique De Ayala and Enrique Santiago Romero.
4. EFE – rating 7.2/10
This is the only state-owned media outlet on the list of publications we researched. The base rating is 8.2 points, and the editorial rating is 7.2. Of the 85 articles analysed, 72% were rated green, 20% were rated yellow, and 8% were rated red.
In most cases, EFE does not indicate the specific authorship of the materials it distributes, but rather indicates the authorship of publications, like El Mundo, La Razón, El Periódico de Catalunya, El Diario, ABC, and others, etc. Since EFE distributed a large number of red articles from the above-mentioned publications, it was decided to classify EFE as a single author, which requires additional attention when consuming the publication's materials.
A systematic problem with the publication is a series of publications and republications of information purely from Russian sources without evaluation, without alternative comments from Ukraine or other third-party analysts or experts who could verify the information.
Thus, sometimes the publication unknowingly provides a platform and contributes to the spread of Russian disinformation among Spanish readers, as official Russian statements carry a high risk of providing false information or spreading propaganda, especially when there is no context or alternative commentary to verify Russian information.
Some examples (not all) of this problem:
For example, a story that is just a report from the Russian Ministry of Defence: https://efe.com/mundo/2024-02-25/rusia-guerra-ucrania-evolucion-2/
Or an article based solely on statements from Putin's press conference, which carries a high risk of misinforming Spanish readers because of the very nature of such speeches by Russian leaders: https://efe.com/mundo/2024-06-06/putin-defiende-a-trump-y-no-cede-en-ucrania/
5. ABC – rating 6.9/10
Base rating – 6.9, editorial rating – 6.9. Out of 141 articles: 42% – green, 55% – yellow, 3% – red.
The publication complies with journalistic standards. The vast majority of the publication's staff journalists study the issues and subjects in detail and describe them objectively, familiarising readers with news, events and their analysis.
A risk area is the small number of “red level” authors, as they have been found to have committed significant violations of journalistic standards, manipulated facts, and shown disrespect for Ukraine, its subjectivity and territorial integrity.
The information provided by the publication itself is highly reliable. The risk is posed by a small number of authors-reviewers.
Reliable authors Marcel Gascón, Alfons Cabrera, Pablo M. Díez, Ángel Luis Menendez, José Ignacio De La Torre, Juan López Córcoles, Lucía Cabanelas, Pedro Rodríguez.
Red authors: Luis Feliu Bernárdez, Pedro Pitarch.
6. Europa Press – rating 6.5/10
Base rating – 7.5, editorial rating – 6.5. Of 318 articles: 58% are green, 35% are yellow, and 7% are red.
The publication does not indicate specific authorship and signs all its materials with the general authorship of Europa Press. A systematic problem with this publication, as well as with other aggregators, is the publication (most often republication) of information solely from Russian sources without evaluation, without alternative comments from Ukraine or other third-party analysts and experts who could verify the information.
Some examples (not all):
News consisting solely of a statement by Russian Presidential Spokesperson Peskov: https://www.europapress.es/internacional/noticia-rusia-compara-manifestaciones-georgia-protestas-proeuropeas-2013-ucrania-20241202120056.html
News based solely on statements by Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zakharova about ‘targeted bombing of journalists’: https://www.europapress.es/internacional/noticia-heridos-dos-periodistas-cadena-television-rusa-ntv-donetsk-20240613164849.html
News about ‘phosphorus grenades in Ukraine’ based solely on quotes from TASS and Russian military personnel illegally present on Ukrainian territory: https://www.europapress.es/internacional/noticia-menos-muerto-nuevo-ataque-ruso-donetsk-20240422185450.html
End others.
The publication's information is characterised by a moderate reliability level due to the abovementioned drawbacks.
7. 20 minutos – rating 6.1/10
Base rating – 7.1, editorial rating – 6.1. Of 449 articles: 55% are green, 31% are yellow, and 14% are red.
It has a mixed approach: analytical materials, mainly of its own production, are of high quality, but since the publication partially aggregates news, there are corresponding problems with other similar publications. The green authors: Emilio Ordiz, Jacobo Alcutén, Carlos Pérez Palomino, Lucía Ortega Prieto, Marta Moreno, Miguel Ángel Liso, and Olha Kosova. They are in the reliable category.
Red authors: Francisco Gan Pampols.
Information risk category
8. La Razón – rating 5.4/10
Base rating – 6.4, editorial rating – 5.4. Out of 91 articles: 50% are green, 29% are yellow, and 21% are red.
The publication has significant minus: violations of journalistic standards in both editorial articles and significant problems in reposting information from other sources (most often EFE and Europa Press) without checking the quality of the material and the reliability of the information.
A number of articles in the publication contain false information or mislead the reader, which is why the publication has one of the highest ‘red level’ ratings, despite a significant proportion of high-quality material.
Due to the high risk of materials that do not meet standards and increase the risk of misleading readers or showing disrespect for Ukrainian-Spanish relations, this publication is considered a risk factor.
Reliable authors: Alfredo Biurrun, Álvaro García, Andreína Flores, Carlos Saldaña, Carolina Serrano, Rocío Colomer, Rostyslav Averchuk, Antonio Fernández.
Red authors: Alberto Tejedor, Luis Feliu Bernárdez, Jorge Fernández Díaz
9. La Vanguardia – rating 5.6/10
Base rating – 5.6, editorial rating – 4.6. Of 195 articles: 28% are green, 55% are yellow, and 17% are red.
Reliable authors: Beatriz Navarro, María-Paz López, Catalina Gómez Ángel, Eusebio Val.
Many authors of La Vanguardia have been assigned a red rating, which is more than any other publication in Spain: Gonzalo Aragonés, Manuel Castells, Gemma Saura, Pascal Boniface, Mariano Oliar Ortega, Juan-José López Burniol, Josep M. Colomer, and Jorge Ipiña Pando.
This publication carries the highest information risk due to the number of authors who have been placed in the ‘red zone’ and its high level of coverage, which allows its articles to appear in news aggregators like 20 minutos, EFE and Europa Press.
A number of the publication's articles show clear signs of correlation with the activities of Russian information companies. A number of authors have direct links to Russia through professional, commercial or family contacts.
This publication is a key element of the information risk of misleading Spanish readers about events in Ukraine and misleading Ukrainian readers about the processes of Ukrainian-Spanish relations. A number of authors with high diplomatic, political and military status as officials allow unacceptable manifestations of disrespect for Ukraine as a state, promotion of russian propaganda, and so on.
Nevertheless, there are undoubtedly a number of authors who strive to provide objective coverage of events.
10. El Periódico de Catalunya – rating 5.4/10
Base rating – 5.4, editorial rating – 4.4. Of 195 articles: 21% are green, 65% are yellow, and 14% are red.
Reliable authors: Marc Marginedas, Irene Savio, Mario Saaverda, Ricardo Mir de Francia, Àlex Bustos, Juan José Fernández.
Red authors: Joaquín Rábago, Olga Merino, Ernest Folch, Eliseo Oliveras
This publication poses an information risk of misleading Spanish readers about events in Ukraine and misleading Ukrainian readers about processes related to Ukrainian-Spanish relations. Some authors make unacceptable comments about Ukraine, which is a manifestation of disrespect for the country's subjectivity and territorial integrity.
Some authors systematically distort cause-and-effect relationships, shift focus, and, as a result, whitewash the aggressor.
Some authors are published in publications that have been sanctioned by the National Security and Defence Council as unreliable sources. Due to its lower informational weight and fewer authors classified as “red level”, this publication has a correspondingly lower negative impact than La Vanguardia, but remains a significant element of informational risk.
The principle of spreading ‘information risk’
Less than 10% of the 1,921 articles we analysed fell under the ‘red level’ category. Therefore, the level of information distortion in the Spanish media remains relatively low. More than 55% of ‘red level’ articles (10% of the total) are reprints that have gone through a certain cycle before becoming an information trend.
The signs of this process are quite consistent: 1. The publication producing the article must have a certain level of informational influence. Meaning, it's usually a small publication.
2. Usually, information that carries informational risk is produced in the Opinion section, where the author, essentially using the publication's name, gets the necessary publicity.
Since other publications and news aggregators (like EFE, Europa Press, and others) republish this as information from La Vanguardia, the reader gets lost at this stage, not realising that it's just as an Opinion section .
3. Once the article has been published, at least, on one news aggregator portal, the information is exchanged between them, resulting in the final disappearance of authorship and affiliation with Opinion, and reaching millions of people.
4. The information/distortion/ disinformation/fake news then gets the status of an ‘information trend’ and is thus legitimised in the media.
How this looks in the case of Spain can be seen in the diagram below:
Top authors of the green (reliable) level
*This list is not complete (the full list is available at the link). We are grateful to everyone whom we are unable to mention in this article for their objective and professional coverage of events, analysis and information work.
Alberto Rojas
A journalist for El Mundo who specialises in covering military conflicts. Since the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Alberto Rojas has been actively covering events in Ukraine, producing numerous reports from the combat zone. In October 2024, Rojas published the book Vivir la guerra: La guerra de Ucrania desde las trincheras (Living the War: The War in Ukraine from the Trenches), in which he describes his experience of being in Ukraine during the war. In February 2025, Russia opened a criminal case against Alberto Rojas, accusing him of allegedly illegally crossing the border in the Kursk region together with Ukrainian military personnel.
The study analysed 44 articles by Alberto Rojas published in 2024. Thirty-two of them were classified as green and 12 as yellow. The author received a base score of 8.6 out of 10.
Cristian Segura
A highly qualified correspondent for EL PAÍS who gathers information directly from the field. He is systematically present in Ukraine, studying the details and repeatedly making dangerous trips to the combat zone. Despite occasional minor inaccuracies, these do not affect the quality of the coverage or the journalist's contribution to reporting on events in Ukraine for Spanish readers.
The study analysed 88 articles by Christian Segura published in 2024. Fifty-one of them were classified as green, 34 as yellow and three as red. The author received a base score of 7.7 out of 10.
Emilio Ordiz
Journalist for the publication 20 minutos, where he covers current events and political processes taking place in the European Union.
33 articles analysed: 23 green, 10 yellow. Base score – 8.5.
Maria R. Sahuquillo
Journalist for El País, who has been covering Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine since 2022, reporting from the combat zone, such as Bakhmut, Kherson, Lyman, Kupiansk, etc. She also analyses the political and economic consequences of the war for Europe, particularly from the perspective of the European Union. Maria Sahuquillo currently works in Brussels, where she heads the El País office, continuing to cover the Russian-Ukrainian war.
19 articles analysed: 17 green, 2 yellow. Base score: 9.5.
Iciar Gutierrez
A journalist for El Diario who specialises in international news. In particular, Iciar Gutierrez covers the Russian invasion of Ukraine, focusing on the humanitarian consequences and political aspects.
16 articles analysed: 12 green and 4 yellow. Base score – 8.8.
Óscar Gutiérrez Garrido
Journalist for El País, specialising in international conflicts, terrorism and political crises. He has been working in the international department of El País since 2011, coordinating coverage of events in Africa and the Middle East. Óscar Gutiérrez Garrido has been covering the situation in Ukraine, particularly since 2024, when he became a special correspondent in Kyiv.
13 articles analysed: 11 green, 2 yellow. Base rating: 9.2.
Irene Castro
Journalist for El Diario, specialising in covering political events, particularly in the European Union.
All 10 articles analysed are green. Base rating: 10.
Manuel Altozano
Former journalist for El País, covering international politics. Worked as a special correspondent in Kyiv.
All 10 articles analysed were rated as completely reliable. Base rating – 10.
Javier G. Cuesta
Journalist for El País, working as a correspondent in Moscow. Specialises in covering events related to the war in Ukraine, Russian domestic politics and international relations.
Of the 15 articles analysed, 9 are green and 6 are yellow. Base rating – 8.
Lola Hierro
Journalist for El País, working in the international department, mainly covering events in Africa and crisis situations around the world. Lola Hierro has repeatedly covered events in Ukraine. She has been to Kyiv and eastern Ukraine, particularly Kramatorsk and Sloviansk, where she covered the situation.
12 articles analysed: 8 green, 4 yellow. Base score: 8.3.
Beatriz Navarro
Former reporter for La Vanguardia, covering events in Washington and Brussels. Nowadays works as deputy spokesperson for the President of the European Council.
11 articles analysed: 8 green, 3 yellow. Base rating – 8.6.
List of authors with a red (unreliable) rating
For more details, please visit the following address to view and download the full research files for each author.
Gonzalo Aragonés
Preliminary conclusion: the journalist's work shows signs of mild pro-Russian bias.
His reporting systematically ignores Russia's responsibility for the aggression against Ukraine. This is a systematic pattern, since the author took a similar approach when covering Russia's invasion of Georgia.
The author legitimises Russia's position by referring mainly to Russian sources and statements by Russian officials without providing context, analysis or alternative comments from the Ukrainian side, and so on.
This approach contributes to the spread and legitimisation of Russian propaganda. The author omits the fact that most of the Russian Federation's official statements are either propaganda or disinformation and are used in information and psychological operations.
There are signs of ‘ordered’ Russian articles on cultural topics.
The study analysed 61 articles by Gonzalo Aragonés published in 2024. Six of them were classified as green, 40 as yellow, and 15 as red. The author received a base score of 4.3 out of 10.
Risk factors:
The author's long stay in Russia creates risks of bias; the author lives in the Russian Federation, has published commercial articles, and kept a diary about life in Moscow.
He systematically avoids using terms that describe the actions of the Russian Federation just as ‘occupation’ and ‘aggression’.
Like in the case of Georgia and Ukraine, the author uses the classic technique of latent framing, where the key aggressor is not named, and attention is shifted to the tragic atmosphere, historical allusions, and the suffering of “ordinary people” without specifying the cause of this suffering.
Francisco Gan Pampols
Lieutenant General in the reserve. Since November 2024, he has been Vice-President of the Valencian Government for Economic and Social Recovery after the Major Flood (DANA).
Current conclusion: the author systematically expresses disrespect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and its internationally recognised borders, which is unacceptable for a Spanish official in the context of legal and diplomatic relations with Ukraine.
The author is prone to spreading pro-Russian narratives, for instance: civil war in Ukraine in 2014, a government coup in Ukraine in 2014, the West has lost, etc.
The author constantly exaggerates Russia's military and economic capabilities and, conversely, downplays Ukraine's military achievements. This may be a purely personal opinion, but the risks to the objectivity of the author's articles are compounded by the systematic substitution of cause-and-effect relationships and the use of latent pro-Russian framing and shifting focus.
The author's personal bias influences his expert conclusions, distorting the objective coverage of events.
Given the author's high status, he has a significant influence on Spanish society, is a frequent contributor to articles and a guest on various Spanish programmes.
13 articles analysed: 3 – green, 5 – yellow, 5 – red. Base rating – 4.2.
Alberto Tejedor
Current conclusion: the author retransmits Russian narratives, like: Russia's invasion of Ukraine was provoked by the United States and Great Britain; Ukraine is a puppet in the hands of the United States and Great Britain; Ukraine is losing the war. The author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war and uses exclusively Russian sources in his assessment of the military situation.
He provides unconfirmed information. He makes significant errors in the subject he describes.
Consciously or unconsciously contributed to Russia's information and psychological campaign around the ‘completely destroyed Pivdenmash’ and the ‘Oreshnik’ rocket.
9 articles analysed: 2 – green, 3 – yellow, 4 – red. Base rating – 3.9.
Joaquín Rábago
Editor-in-chief/columnist for a number of Spanish media outlets: La Casa de mi Tía, El Día, La Opinión de Málaga, El Periódico, and others. Specialises in geopolitical and international analysis. Access to the La Casa de mi Tía website is prohibited by current Ukrainian legislation.
Current conclusion: the author systematically uses Russian narratives and provides unconfirmed information, which is mainly generated in the Russian media. He treats the victim of aggression with contempt. He ignores cause-and-effect relationships.
He blames Ukraine, who is acting in self-defence, for Russia's invasion of Ukraine (paradox).
Risk elements:
Was translated by little-known Russian media outlets.
He is a representative of the European Peace Project, which accuses the EU of dragging European countries into war with Russia, while at the same time harshly condemning Israel in the war in Gaza (at the same time, there is no condemnation of Russia for its invasion of Ukraine).
The leaders of this project are people who have repeatedly spoken out against NATO, denied Ukraine's right to self-defence against Russia, and advocated for the stop of arms supplies to Ukraine (Ulrike Guerot, Isabelle Casel, Peter van Stigt). Representatives of this organisation also claim that Ukraine started the war, not Russia.
In the context of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, they only talk about the “war in Ukraine,” which the EU wants to bring to other European countries.
By 9 May 2025, this project had published a video showing how people in Europe do not want war. At the same time, there were shots of foreign journalists filming their video on Red Square in Moscow.
The European Peace Project, to which Joaquín Rabago belongs, has repeatedly been accused of having ties to Russia and its special services.
Pedro Pitarch Bartolomé
Lieutenant General of the Spanish Army (retired). He is the author of articles in ABC, La Razón, and COPE, where he comments on strategic and political issues, particularly regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Current conclusion: the author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war in favour of Russia, emphasising Ukraine's problems and exaggerating Russia's capabilities. The author creates false and manipulative cause-and-effect relationships in his analysis of the Russian-Ukrainian war. He avoids condemning the actions of the Russian Federation. He shows disrespect for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
7 articles analysed: 4 – yellow, 3 – red. Base rating – 2.9.
The author uses the narrative that Russia is conducting a limited military operation – the so-called ‘special military operation’ – against Ukraine, rather than a full-scale war.
Risk elements
In February 2013, General Pedro Pitarch was one of the speakers at the seminar “EU-Russia: towards a post-crisis agenda”, held at the Real Instituto Elcano with the support of the Polish and EU delegations. The seminar was devoted to the current state of relations between the EU and Russia and possible ways to improve cooperation.
Manuel Castells
Spanish post-Marxist sociologist. Minister of Education in 2020-2021 in the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez. He periodically writes articles for La Vanguardia in the opinion format.
The author constantly spreads pro-Russian narratives, for example: the ineffectiveness of Western sanctions against Russia, the need to negotiate with Russia due to its possession of nuclear weapons, etc. The author constantly exaggerates Russia's military and economic capabilities and, conversely, underestimates Ukraine's capabilities. The author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war in favour of Russia. To strengthen his arguments, he appeals to emotions.
Due to the author's high status, he can have a significant impact on the distortion of the Spanish media field and cause tangible damage to Spanish-Ukrainian relations.
Three articles analysed: 1 – yellow, 2 – red. Base rating – 1.7.
Risk factor:
He has close academic and personal ties with the Russian Federation. He was a visiting professor at the Higher School of Economics (Moscow) and the University of Humanities (Yekaterinburg). Until 2015, he was a member of the International Advisory Board of the Higher School of Economics (Moscow).
He is an invited speaker and participant in more than 20 scientific conferences and events, some of which were held with the support of the President of the Russian Federation.
Together with his Russian wife, Emma Kiselova*, who was a deputy director of the Institute of Economics at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Novosibirsk, Manuel has published over 30 monographs and essays on Russia and various aspects of Russian society.
Detailed information can be found in the CV of the author Manuel Castells.
In the 1990s and 2000s, he was an advisor to the Russian government and headed the International Committee of Experts to provide advice on political and social transformations in Russia, in particular preparing expert reports for then-President Putin.
José Enrique de Ayala
Retired Brigadier General. Member of the Advisory Board of the Foreign Policy Observatory (Observatorio de Política Exterior), the Council on European Affairs (Consejo de Asuntos Europeos) and the Security and Defence Council of Fundación Alternativas. International policy analyst, author of numerous columns — mainly in El Diario, but also in Hojas de Debate and other publications — in which he analysed the war in Ukraine, its origins and development.
Current conclusion: the author constantly spreads pro-Russian narratives, like: the threat from Russia is artificially constructed by defence companies for their own benefit, Anglo-Saxon countries are using Ukraine to weaken Russia and the European Union, and Western military aid to Ukraine will not change the course of the war.
The author assesses the Russian-Ukrainian war one-sidedly in favour of Russia, avoiding condemnation of the Russian Federation for its aggression against Ukraine and violation of international norms.
Ideological bias and pacifist views influence the author's expert conclusions, leading to a distortion of objective coverage of events.
Two articles analysed belong to the red level. Base rating: -0.
Risk elements:
Due to the need to defend the ideological concept of pacifism, the author consciously or unconsciously commits actions that are unacceptable for a professional analyst: providing provocative data to confirm his own opinion without references and the possibility of verification, intimidating the reader, and appealing to emotions.
Due to the need to prove the effectiveness of his own theory, he ignores cause-and-effect relationships: that Russia is a violator of international law; that the increase in countries' defence spending is a consequence of Russia's aggressive actions, not a cause of war.
Luis Feliu Bernárdez
Retired Brigadier General of the Spanish Army. Columnist for La Razon, also published in ABC.
Current conclusion: the author constantly promotes pro-Russian narratives, like that: the government coup in Ukraine in 2014; civil war in Ukraine; Ukraine being artificially created; NATO expansion being the main reason for Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, ignoring Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2014; Ukraine is a puppet of the West.
The author ignores the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014. The author directly lobbies for the restoration of trade and economic relations between Europe and Russia without taking into account the current context, which indicates potential bias. The author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war in favour of Russia, systematically promotes the need for concessions from Ukraine, and avoids condemning Russia.
He shows disrespect for Ukraine's sovereignty and subjectivity, manipulates generalisations, and spreads provocative information without sources.
Two articles analysed belong to the red level. Base rating: 0
Jordi Calvo Rufanges
Economist, director and expert at the Delàs Peace Research Centre, former vice-president of the International Peace Bureau (IBM) (3 October 2015-15 October 2022). Currently a member of its board. Columnist for El Diario.
Current conclusion: the author spreads pro-Russian narratives, for example: NATO expansion is the reason for Russia's invasion of Ukraine; the threat from Russia is artificially constructed by defence companies for their own benefit.
The author promotes the need for Ukrainian concessions. Ideological bias and pacifist views influence the author's expert conclusions, distorting the objective coverage of events.
The probable cause of the author's bias is his ties to Russia and participation in questionable organisations.
Risk elements
Jordi Calvo Rufangues is vice-president of the International Peace Bureau, which is notable for the fact that one of its board members is Russian (Oleg Bodrov advocates for the demilitarisation of the Baltic Sea), as well as a Russian woman (Asya Maruket, a human rights activist in the Russian Federation), who is a member of the Bureau's council, but there are no Ukrainians in the leadership or on the council of the Bureau. This organisation has a long history and has been repeatedly accused of collaborating with Soviet intelligence.
In Ukraine, the Ukrainian Pacifist Movement is associated with the Bureau, which in 2022 stated: ‘We condemn any military support provided by Russia and NATO countries to hostile radicals in Ukraine.
One of the bureau's former directors, Sean McBride (1974-1985), actively collaborated with Soviet intelligence and passed on information about the British army, for which he was awarded the International Lenin Peace Prize in 1975. In the 1980s, US intelligence listed the International Peace Bureau among the organisations working for the benefit of the USSR.
One of the partners and donors of this organisation's activities is the Austrian Trade Union Federation (ATUF), chaired by Wolfgang Katzian, who managed the Austria football club, sponsored by Gazprom. In 2018, the ATUF adopted a five-year programme of cooperation and dialogue development with Russia. Katsian later joined the Austrian-Russian Friendship Society, which was financed by the Russian special services through the notorious Jan Masalek.
Gemma Saura
Journalist for La Vanguardia. She writes for the A fondo section, dedicated to reports and journalistic investigations (since 2021).
The author's article El dilema de los refugiados ucranianos: o van al frente o se quedan sin papeles (The dilemma of Ukrainian refugees: either go to the front or remain without documents) focuses exclusively on the emotional aspect through private negativity. One-sided coverage of the issue. The structure of the article, its oversaturation with negativity and one-sided coverage raise suspicions of bias. The article contains significant statistical errors that affect the understanding of the material.
1 article analysed, classified as red level. Base rating – 0.
Pascal Boniface
Founding director of the French Institute for International and Strategic Relations (IRIS), based in Paris.
The author has suspicious ties to Russia (more details can be found in the main research document), which may influence his expert assessments. The author does not support increased military aid to Ukraine and believes that Ukraine is not important for French foreign policy.
1 article analysed, classified as red. Base rating – 0.
Juan-José Lopez Burniol
Lawyer and notary. Former vice-president of the la Caixa Foundation (since March 2017). Columnist for La Vanguardia.
The author likely has a commercial interest in easing sanctions against Russia. Manipulates historical facts. Attempts to separate Putin from the Russian Federation as the basis for arguing for only “limited sanctions” and the easing of sanctions.
1 article analysed, classified as red level. Base rating – 0.
Josep Maria Colomer
Political scientist and economist. Researches issues like the development of political institutions, democratisation processes, electoral systems, the development of nations and empires, international institutions, US politics, and the European Union. Columnist for La Vanguardia.
Current conclusion: this author uses questionable arguments that are consistent with Russian narratives. He propagates a view of the situation from the perspective of Russian interests, resulting in the author showing disrespect for the subjectivity of other countries, justifying the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation, and spreading unconfirmed information that is popular in the Russian segment of the Internet. A potential reason for the author's actions may be his long-standing academic and commercial-academic ties with the Russian Federation, which the author did not break despite Russia's aggression against Georgia and later Ukraine.
One article analysed, which belongs to the red level. Base rating – 0.
Risk factors
Josep Maria has as scientific publications at MGIMO (2007). Has publications in Russian.
Also had short articles in the media ‘Free Europe’, published in Russian with the mark ‘Moscow’.
In 2013, he participated in the New Eurasia grant competition of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation as an invited judge.
After Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2016 and 2018, the author participated in the Russian Science Foundation, which was created and is funded on the initiative of the President of the Russian Federation. The author acted as a judge (and was probably part of a group of experts).
Olga Merino
Spanish journalist, columnist and writer. From 1993 to 1998, she lived and worked in Moscow as a reporter for the Catalan publication El Periodico de Catalunya.
Current conclusion: the author covers the Russian-Ukrainian war in a biased manner in favour of Russia, focusing on Ukraine's problems. The author downplays the threat posed by Russia to Europe. The author's cultural bias and her long-term residence in Russia influence her expert assessments and distort her objective coverage of events. It is likely that the author uses mainly Russian sources to cover the war, like the one article that was analysed, which belongs to the red level. Base rating – 0.
Risk elements
In Russia (in the 1990s), the author met ‘Yuri Kryuchkov’, whom she calls her ‘russian brother. He was her translator (he previously worked at Interfax in the Russian Federation), and she is still in contact with him.
Translators provided to journalists in the USSR were very often KGB agents. Moreover, the building where she lived was completely under KGB surveillance, and she was aware of this.
It is also clear that she worked with photographers and other staff who were Russian.
Yuri Kryuchkov was present for ‘unknown reasons’ in the voting room next to Zhirinovsky when he cast his vote in the Russian presidential election after the collapse of the USSR.
After the start of the full-scale war, she openly stated that she loves Russia, ‘despite Putin’.
Before the start of the full-scale invasion (19 February 2022), in the context of the publication of her book on the USSR/RF, she spoke about Russia and the ‘Ukrainian crisis’.
She is published in Russian foreign media.
Ernest Folch
Catalan journalist, editor and literary publisher. Columnist for El Periodico de Catalunya.
Preliminary conclusion: the author uses a number of manipulations that create the impression that Ukraine is deliberately rejecting peace and that Ukraine is an undemocratic country. This leads the reader to think, “Why support such a country?” or creates a basis for equating the victim with the aggressor.
At the same time, the author avoids condemning Russia's aggression, equating the victim with the aggressor.
1 article analysed, classified as red level. Base rating – 0.
Risk element
The author's limited expert knowledge on a sensitive topic as the Russian Federation's invasion of Ukraine is a barrier that distorts objective facts. International relations, politics and related topics are not the author's area of expertise, as the author specialises in sports. It is precisely this limitation in the subject of analysis (as the Russian invasion) that is the main risk in the author's publication.
Also, the lack of references to sources of information casts doubt on the sources from which the author obtains data on the Russian invasion.
Eliseo Oliveras
Journalist, writer and photographer. Specialises in the European Union (EU), economics and international politics. Columnist for El Periodico de Catalunya.
Current conclusion: the author reinforces the narrative that Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO's ‘provocative’ expansion.
The author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war in favour of Russia, exaggerates the capabilities of the Russian economy, provides incomplete statistics that are critical to understanding the situation, and focuses exclusively on Ukraine's problems.
The author promotes the position that Ukraine's accession to NATO is ‘impossible,’ which may be his personal opinion as an analyst (which is acceptable), but the risk lies in the lack of balance in the presentation of information, the excessive focus on the needs of the aggressor, and the actual denial of consideration of the victim's needs in the search for security options.
1 article analysed, classified as red level. Base rating – 0.
Jorge Ipiña Pando
Preliminary conclusion: a non-specialist without relevant education interprets such sensitive issuesas war. Through the ‘Cards’ section.
La Vanguardia ignored requests to comment on the author’s professional level, the reasons for his publication, and the results of the editorial review.
One article analysed, classified as red. Base rating – 0.
Mariano Oliar Ortega
No information about the author is available. Likewise, the previous author, Mariano Oliar Ortega attempts to comment on sensitive issues such as war through the ‘Cards’ section in La Vanguardia.
La Vanguardia ignored requests to provide at least general information about the author and his professional level.
One article analysed, which belongs to the red level. Base rating – 0.
Enrique Santiago Romero
Secretary General of the Communist Party of Spain since April 2018. Since 2019, he has been a member of the 13th Congress of Deputies (the lower house of the Spanish Parliament).
The author spreads pro-Russian narratives, like: the Russian-Ukrainian war was provoked and is being supported by defence companies for profit; the Revolution of Dignity was a government coup, and so on. The author presents a one-sided view of the Russian-Ukrainian war in favour of Russia. The author's political and ideological bias influences expert assessments, distorting the objective coverage of events.
One article analysed, classified as red level. Base rating – 0.
Key conclusions
Over 20% of all red-level authors are retired generals of the Spanish Armed Forces (4 authors out of 19). They are: Francisco Gan Pampols, José Enrique de Ayala, Pedro Pitarch Bartolomé, and Luis Feliu Bernárdez.
Despite their military careers, these Spanish generals are predominantly pacifists. This ideological bias influences the authors' expert conclusions, distorting the objective coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Most often, this leads to a conscious or unconscious substitution of cause-and-effect relationships, as a result, to the “whitewashing” or “justification of the aggressor.” A side effect of this is a lack of respect for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In addition to authors with military careers, authors Enrique Santiago Romero, Jordi Calvo Rufanges, and others also profess pacifist principles.
Through the prism of pacifism, authors very often spread narratives in their materials that the threat from Russia is artificially constructed by defence companies for their own benefit, Anglo-Saxon countries are using Ukraine to weaken Russia and the European Union, Western military aid to Ukraine will not change the course of the war, and NATO expansion was the reason for Russia's invasion. Russia should be part of Europe. Ultimately, this leads to a lack of subjectivity in the description of the invasion of Ukraine, whitewashing the aggressor, avoiding condemnation of the aggressor, and equating the aggressor with the victim. By placing peace as an absolute value, such authors misunderstand the cause-and-effect relationships of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, ignore Russia's violations of international law, and promote the position that Ukraine should make concessions or capitulate for peace now.
The Resurgam analytical community does not question the value of peace. However, in such cases, the ideology of pacifism plays as an argument in favour of Russia and its aggression, which leads to the conclusion that Moscow benefits from strengthening pacifist sentiments in Europe in order to weaken European support for Ukraine and thus weaken Ukraine's ability to defend itself against the aggressor. This means that Russian propaganda will try to inflate, and may already have been inflating, pacifist sentiments in Europe for a long time. Also, the description of drawbacks in the authors' publications is not limited to the categories described above.
Most of the red-level authors identified in this study work or write opinion pieces in publications based in Catalonia, a region with strong autonomist moods, which Russia always tries to reinforce with separatist sentiments in order to destabilise the internal situation in target states. This leads to the conclusion that Russia is likely trying to influence the information environment in such regions, in particular through regional publications.
Most of the red-level materials and authors are published in opinion formats. Many authors wrote only one such article in 2024, commenting on the topic of Russia's war against Ukraine. Most of them appeared between February and May 2024, when the Russians were successful in the combat zone and made some progress after taking Avdiivka. They also appeared during discussions and the granting of permission to Ukraine to use Western weapons to launch defensive strikes deep into Russia.
It is likely that the articles published during this period were intended to reinforce sceptical attitudes towards Ukraine in Spanish society during a difficult period for Ukraine.
On the contrary, reliable materials: authors write about Ukraine systematically throughout the year, travel there, and study facts and materials on the ground. Therefore, various assumptions can be made as to why certain authors feel the need to write an article about Ukraine once a year (and most often in the opinion section) — and it ultimately ends up in the ‘red level’ of our assessment, while authors who systematically cover events in Ukraine have a consistent interest and seek ways to deepen their knowledge of what they write about, and their materials consistently meet high standards.
Overall, only one in ten articles showed signs of violations and poor-quality reporting on events in Ukraine. At the same time, most of the materials come from one specific publication – La Vanguardia.
For illustration, 8 out of 21 authors who ended up in the ‘red zone’ are associated with this publication. This publication is large and influential enough to allow its materials to be picked up by other ‘aggregate news’ publications, thereby creating an ‘information trend.’
Although the publication condemns the Russian invasion of Ukraine and many journalists and analysts do their job well, the negative trend described above is probably explained by the conflict of interest between the owners of the publication and their management of other assets.
As a result, the owners of La Vanguardia are interested in easing the pressure of sanctions on the Kremlin in order to maintain commercial ties in other areas (outside the publishing business) where their interests are represented. This aspect will be presented in a separate article in the future, as it deserves a detailed analysis.