The Director of NASK (Research and Academic Computer Network) has admitted that the institute informed the public about alleged foreign funding of an online hate campaign in support of Rafał Trzaskowski based solely on three publicly available journalistic analyses. It has since emerged that NASK’s official communication regarding the illegal campaign—orchestrated by individuals linked to Akcja Demokracja—was entirely false.
Last week, NASK’s Disinformation Analysis Center issued a statement suggesting that political advertisements on Facebook in Poland—promoting Rafał Trzaskowski and attacking Karol Nawrocki and Sławomir Mentzen—were likely funded from abroad. According to the statement, entities involved in the campaign had “spent more on political content in the past seven days than any electoral committee,” and the actions “seemed intended to support one candidate while discrediting others.” The matter is currently under investigation by Poland’s Internal Security Agency (ABW). NASK claimed in its statement that the advertisements had been blocked by META (the parent company of Facebook) following NASK’s intervention.
However, during a session of the parliamentary digitization committee held on Tuesday, this entire narrative collapsed. The NASK statement was revealed to be a fabrication.
META Was Right
When questioned by opposition MPs, Jakub Turowski, a representative of META, explained that individuals submitting political or social advertisements must verify their identity and provide valid identification corresponding to the country in which they wish to publish.
“In the case of the two mentioned pages, we conducted an investigation and confirmed that the administrators met the identity and location requirements necessary to run political advertisements in Poland. As a result, META did not take any action against these pages or the ads published on them,”
he stated.
Turowski’s further comments contradicted NASK’s version of events even more directly:
“META did not take any steps to block the advertisements following NASK’s intervention. According to our records, NASK submitted a report concerning two pages, followed by a report on four specific advertisements,”
he said.
He added that META had sent a request to NASK asking for a correction of the false information. That request has not yet been fulfilled.
When questioned by MPs, NASK Director Radosław Nielek conceded that META’s account was accurate:
“The information on our website about META blocking the ads following our intervention came from the fact that after we reported the matter to META, the accounts became inactive and inaccessible. These campaigns effectively stopped. Hence the phrasing. But I must acknowledge that META took no direct action regarding the ads,”
he admitted.
NASK’s Source: Journalistic Articles
Nielek also explained the origin of NASK’s claim about foreign funding. It turns out it came from publicly available journalistic reports, including one posted on X.
“NASK uses open sources available to the general public, just like journalists do. (…) Three analyses concerning the financing of the advertisements appeared in the public sphere. One, posted on X, suggested Russian funding. A second, from WP.pl, indicated Hungarian involvement. A third analysis pointed to American sources. These were three journalistic analyses,”
Nielek stated.
He added that NASK’s communication was based on “a similar process of connecting the dots” as those analyses.
When MPs sought further clarification, Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Paweł Olszewski intervened, stating:
“There are ongoing efforts to confirm or rule out the possibility of foreign funding. NASK identified such a possibility but is not a special service agency and therefore cannot establish it conclusively.”
A Meeting Without Oversight
This was not the only controversy. PiS MP Janusz Cieszyński asked Director Nielek whether he was aware that an individual responsible for promoting a Cypriot cryptocurrency platform—listed by the Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) as a warning—had attended a NASK meeting on disinformation with Digital Affairs Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski.
“Were you aware of who was present at that meeting?” he asked.
Nielek explained that NASK allowed anyone to attend the event without vetting participants:
“It was an open event, and anyone could attend. We invited interested influencers. All were admitted. We did not check their background or political affiliations. There were people there involved in cryptocurrency, lifestyle content, etc.,”
he said.
The committee hearing painted a troubling picture of NASK’s operations.
Director Nielek commented that the law governing research institutes does not grant NASK any special authority for disinformation analysis:
“NASK uses open sources accessible to journalists. In fact, it has fewer tools at its disposal than journalists. NASK is not a special service and does not have investigative powers,”
he said.
He also noted that the institute relies on a publicly available advertisement library for its research. He then presented alarming statistics: 54% of NASK’s reports to Facebook are rejected, as are over 70% of reports to TikTok and a staggering 89% to X.