Riots and the far right: The global network behind the violence

Published

7 months ago

October 15, 2024

admin

The narrow medieval streets and canals of Strasbourg in France, on the border with Germany, have little in common with Southport in the UK. Yet the stabbing of three little girls there resonated for one man here. And his subsequent posts on social media resonated around the world – and back to the UK

In a business park on the edge of town, Silvano Trotta runs a successful telecoms business. But from his large private office, filled with miniature cars and pictures of his family, he spends much of his time posting online.

He came to prominence during COVID, publishing anti-vax posts, and getting banned from YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, before subsequently being reinstated on Elon Musk’s rebranded X, where he posts mainly about immigration.

Trotta is bespectacled, genial, and unafraid of controversial views.

When the Southport stabbings happened on 29 July, he posted false information to the messaging app Telegram that they were carried out by an immigrant who had arrived on a small boat and gave the false name Ali Al Shakati. Our investigation shows that his post was one of the most influential of any of those making similar misleading claims on Telegram.

Trotta shrugs it off when I point out that this was entirely false.

“Who doesn’t make mistakes? But whatever happened, he is still a migrant, even if he was born in Wales.”

I’ve come to Strasbourg because what happened here is crucial to understanding what happened in the UK riots.

We’ve worked with Prose, an open-source intelligence start-up, to understand the online conversation around Southport on Telegram, the app where the stabbings were discussed, the narrative was developed, and the riots were organised.

Previous reporting has highlighted specific pieces of misinformation that fuelled the riots: the fake name from news publisher Channel 3 Now, which they subsequently retracted and apologised for, and the individual bad actors in Telegram groups abroad.

But now Sky News can reveal the full story.

Prose monitors more than 10,000 extremist and conspiracist groups on Telegram, every day collecting and archiving everything they post. Together, we looked at how active those groups were around Southport, starting on the day of the stabbings and for two weeks afterwards, looking at 11,051 total messages from 1,496 different chats and channels.

And what we found belies the idea that this was just a British reaction to a British issue. Out of the top 20 most influential accounts, in terms of reach, views and interaction, only six were from the UK. The rest were based abroad.

“While all the action is happening on the ground and people in Britain are dealing with the consequences of this misinformation,” says Al Baker, managing director of Prose, “the people stoking the violence, the people flooding Telegram and other platforms of misinformation are largely based outside the UK.”

What it shows is the nature of the new far-right – not a tightly organised hierarchy based in a specific location, but an international network of influencers and followers, working together almost like a swarm to stir up trouble.

And it is extremely worrying for the security services. The head of MI5 Ken McCallum last week told Sky News that, compared to traditional radicalisation, the extreme right instead relies on a “pick and mix ideology” where people pull on hatred and misinformation from mostly online sources.

Rather than specific organisations, it is, he said, a “crowd-sourced model”.

Bristol, Saturday, 3 August and the streets were seething. A confrontation between protesters and counter-protestors turned into a running battle, first at Castle Park, and then down to the bridge below. Police horses repeatedly charged the rioters. They threw bottles back: I got one in the head while I was reporting.

The skirmishes continued outside the centre, up towards a hill and a hotel which houses asylum seekers. Eventually, it died away.

Those who took part though were left with the consequences: several were sentenced to years in prison. But they were not far-right extremists, as is traditionally understood.

“The unrest has been fuelled by disinformation that has been circulating, particularly on social media,” the judge said in his remarks.

One of those convicted for violent disorder was Dominic Capaldi, 34. He handed himself into the police.

Capaldi’s neighbour David Lomax told us that he “is just a caring bloke and a very quiet chap”.

“He got dragged into it somehow, and he didn’t realise what he was getting dragged into.

“And a lot of these people that do all these things, they don’t come from Bristol.”

Inciting those on the ground was a specific goal of the online far-right, according to Mr Baker, at Prose.

“These are communities which are expressly specifically and in a very dedicated and organised fashion devoted to exploiting racial divisions internationally,” Baker says.

“Any incident which could plausibly involve an immigrant, a Muslim, someone who isn’t white, regardless of whether in fact they did it or not, these communities are going to kick into action and try and stoke up division and racial hatred.”

This network map shows how those groups interact.

The points in the red cluster are UK-based, English-speaking accounts on Telegram, during the two weeks after the Southport murders. And they’re dwarfed by other groups. The purple is non-UK-based English-speaking accounts. Orange shows German, for example. Dark blue is pro-Russian accounts. Below them, in yellow, are Russian-speaking accounts.

And although the online far-right may be more shapeless, less structured, than the traditional version, it still contains the hardcore element.

“There are very extreme groups who routinely funnel information into these broader networks who were clearly, specifically, indirectly trying to incite a race war on the back of the Southport murders,” Mr Baker from Prose says.

“The core of these communities are very serious people, including members of proscribed terrorist organisations, extreme neo-Nazi groups. The word ‘Nazis’ and the word ‘fascist’ is overused.

“But when I describe the groups that were influencing the tactics and the targets of the rioters, these are fully paid-up neo-Nazis who want to see the extermination of non-white people.”

Along with Telegram, X was also used to fuel the riots.

Here, research shared exclusively with Sky News by Ned Mendez, director of consultancy Clash Digital, found a similar emphasis on non-UK accounts. The most widely shared and retweeted content on Twitter/X during the initial three days of the unrest was primarily authored by non-domestic accounts from the USA and Europe, which repurposed local incidents to push inflammatory and divisive content into the UK discourse.

Jacqui McDonald knows exactly how that works. She’s a freelance journalist who was covering a vigil in Southport the day after the attack and posted a video of the crowd that gathered to mourn together.

Amy Mek, an online influencer based in the US and known for promoting anti-immigration views, ripped Ms McDonald’s video and reposted it with her own comments, in which she said the Islamic community usually “swarm the streets” and “seize control of public spaces”.

This was the single most widely shared piece of content on X during the unrest. The original video earned 11,000 views; the repurposed content got 5.5million views in a few days.

I meet Jacqui in the square where she filmed the vigil. Tributes to the girls still stand – dolls tied to lampposts, handwritten cards in the flowerbeds. I show her Amy Mek’s post on X.

“It wasn’t true at all to what was happening in her language, the inflammatory use of what she was saying and the way she framed that video wasn’t what we were seeing in front of us,” she says.

“We were seeing a respectful, peaceful, quiet vigil for those children who had died that day.”

That is one of the tragedies of the riots, that they eclipsed the grief the town felt – and still feels.

Read more from Sky’s Data and Forensics team
How the far right hijacked Southport protests
Far-right outnumbers anti-racist movement on engagement

We asked several accounts for comment, including Amy Mek. She told us she rejected the labels far-right, hard-right and conspiracist, saying these were based on “biased generalisations” and added: “I unequivocally reject any form of violence that took place during the riots.”

She said Jacqui McDonald’s video had been sent to her as a tip and had assumed that the person who sent it had taken the footage. She said she was upset to hear it had originated from a freelance journalist and would ensure they received proper credit, along with a public statement.

“Just as I had no control over how the tipster’s video came to me without proper attribution, I also had no control over how others used or interpreted my content,” Mek said.

We also approached X but received no reply, while Telegram spokesperson Remi Vaughan told us: “Telegram is not a place to spread violent content. Moderators removed UK groups and channels calling for violence when they were discovered in August…

“To dissuade criminal misuse of Telegram, IP Addresses and phone numbers of criminals who violate our rules can be disclosed to the authorities in response to valid legal requests. We are ready to cooperate with the UK government through the appropriate channels.”

The concern is that it may all happen again, that the online far-right remains active – as the head of MI5 warned – and that this wasn’t a one-off but a playbook, one that will be more effective next time.

“Large swathes of the online far-right see Southport as a missed opportunity,” Mr Baker says. “There is a huge amount of recrimination, people blaming one another for how quickly the riots fizzled out.”

“And I think we should be very concerned that they’re not going to make the same mistake twice.”

Southport is a memorial – and it is a warning.

The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

UK

My week with Prince William, the quiet disruptor

Published

3 hours ago

May 25, 2025

admin

My week with Prince William, the quiet disruptor

Photographed in a beam of sunlight, Prince William walked through Westminster Abbey with the King behind him.

The ornate robes of the Order of the Bath service, two weeks ago, felt like a world away from the more modern image he wants to portray.

But as a man bestowed with so many traditional titles, it’s a new role he’s shaping for himself that is more intriguing – William, the quiet disruptor.

In a week when Time Magazine named the Prince and Princess of Wales in its top 100 philanthropists list for “modernising royal philanthropy”, I spent the week following the prince on various engagements.

None of them particularly headline-grabbing, but all examples of how he’s setting out to do things differently, or underlining the challenges, and potential criticisms, he faces doing things his own way.

Take Tuesday, for example.

We weren’t expecting him to turn up as we waited at the Soho Hotel in London to watch a new series of films about the dangers faced by wildlife rangers, a project described as “the brainchild” of Prince William.

But all of a sudden, there he was in the room, taking the mic to explain what it really means to him.

Speaking about his drive to “give a voice to the voiceless”, it was indicative of what feels like a greater desire from him to articulate more publicly what he stands for.

Since November, when he described how he wanted to carry out his duties with “a smaller r in the royal”, you’ve got the sense William, and his team, have further wanted to cement in our minds where he sees his role.

From conversations this week, with those who work closely with him, the word “convening” came up time and again; the prince doesn’t want to waste what he knows is a unique position, to bring people together, start conversations and support those who are already doing amazing things in their communities.

Shifting the dial

But this isn’t just about him personally.

This is now a man whose vision for the monarchy, I’m told, is increasingly driven by a desire to “shift the dial on global leadership” where others may be failing.

With palace sources telling me he’d be more than happy to “be acknowledged” as a quiet disruptor, despite the criticism his new ways of working might bring.

Those who’ve known him a long time will tell you this compulsion to do things differently has been there for some time.

Dr Tessy Ojo, the chief executive from The Diana Award, has worked with Prince William and Prince Harry for over 20 years.

She said: “They would never do royal engagements from the sense of cutting the ribbon or simply being poster people. We were very clearly warned if you wanted any form of engagement, it almost had to have a whole strategy behind it.”

She told me she has always sensed how much William appreciates the responsibility that comes with his role, especially in a world where “there’s a massive demand on leadership… there’s a lot of distrust on leaders”.

“What people wanted 40 years ago from their monarch is completely different,” she said.

“I think it’s super important that as the heir, as the next monarch, he’s very in tune with what the people want, and what people expect. And being able to be that 21st century monarch, who is a present dad, but also a leader who understands how to use your leadership for social good”.

A modern royal

Wednesday, and William walked into a sweaty, but infectiously positive, community hall in Leith in Edinburgh.

No ribbon cutting here, but this is the kind of visit the prince now sees as a big deal, “impact” the buzz word ahead of any engagement now.

A very lively game of football launching what they hope will be a long-term tie-up between the Royal Foundation (their charitable trust), Leith community centre and Street Soccer Scotland.

On Thursday, the sight of a guard of honour saluting the prince and princess, as the national anthem was played alongside HMS Glasgow, just emphasised the regular handbrake turns they face from the more relaxed to the formal, as they want to make the monarchy feel connected and relevant.

Then there is family to consider, in a way that past generations just haven’t.

Their working diaries are now arranged around their children. They’ve made no secret of that.

On paper, it means fewer engagements compared to other members of the family, and it has led to mutterings of that word no one within the palace wants to hear: “workshy”.

Making an impact?

But talking to people in Glasgow, away from the royal visit, I overwhelmingly found most thought William was setting a good example by putting family first.

What people were less clear on was his “social impact” work and what that is all about.

The community projects may not necessarily grab as much attention as William and his advisors want, but what will be fascinating to watch is the potential long-term impact of this new kind of ethos.

As the Prince and Princess of Wales stood on the steps of Buckingham Palace at a garden party on Tuesday, pausing for the national anthem, you can’t help but wonder whether those traditional elements of royal life could face a shake-up when one day he leads the firm full time.

Understandably, no one likes to talk about transition, and Prince William certainly doesn’t shout about his thoughts on what will come.

But as heir, his vision for the future and what royal leadership should look like could have huge consequences for the institution.

An impact far more significant and lasting than the noisy disruptions it’s faced from other family members in recent years.

UK

South Western Railway: First renationalised train service starts today… with replacement bus

Published

3 hours ago

May 25, 2025

admin

South Western Railway: First renationalised train service starts today... with replacement bus

South Western Railway (SWR) has been renationalised this weekend as part of the government’s transition towards Great British Railways.

The train operator officially came under public ownership at around 2am on Sunday – and the first journey, the 5.36am from Woking, was partly a rail replacement bus service due to engineering works.

So what difference will renationalisation make to passengers and will journeys be cheaper?

What is nationalisation?

Nationalisation means the government taking control of industries or companies, taking them from private to public ownership.

England’s railway lines are currently run by train operating companies as franchises under fixed-term contracts, but Labour have said they want to take control of the lines when those fixed terms end.

In its manifesto, the party vowed to return rail journeys to public ownership within five years by establishing Great British Railways (GBR) to run both the network tracks and trains.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, who travelled on the first renationalised departure from London Waterloo, said, before boarding, it was “a new dawn for our railways” and “a watershed moment”.

“But I know that most users of the railway don’t spend much time thinking about who runs the trains – they just want them to work,” she added. “That’s why operators will have to meet rigorous performance standards and earn the right to be called Great British Railways.”

How will ticket prices be affected?

Labour have argued cutting off payments flowing into the private sector could save the taxpayer £150m a year.

But the government has not explicitly promised the savings made from nationalisation will be used to subsidise fees.

It is unlikely rail fares will fall as a result of nationalisation, rail analyst William Barter told Sky News.

“The government could mandate fare cuts if it wanted to, but there’s no sign it wants to,” he said.

“At the moment, I’m sure they would want to keep the money rather than give it back to passengers. The current operator aims to maximise revenue, and there’s no reason the government would want them to do anything differently under government control.”

What difference will it make for passengers?

Britain’s railways are frequently plagued by delays, cuts to services and timetable issues, but Mr Barter said nationalisation will make very little day-to-day difference to passengers.

There was “no reason to think” the move would improve issues around delays and cancellation of services, he said.

“It’s going to be the same people, the same management,” he explained.

“The facts of what the operator has to deal with in terms of revenue, infrastructure, reliability, all the rest of it – they haven’t changed.”

Which services are next to be nationalised?

In the longer term, the move is likely to bring “a degree of certainty compared with relatively short-term franchises”, Mr Barter said, noting the government would only want to renationalise a franchise “because in one way or another something very bad is going on in that franchise, so in a way it can only get better”.

It also means the government will have greater accountability for fixing problems with punctuality and cancellations.

Mr Barter said: “If this is the government’s baby, then they’re going to do their best to make sure it doesn’t fail. So rather than having a franchise holder they can use as a political scapegoat, it’s theirs now.”

He added: “In the short term, I don’t think you’d expect to see any sort of change. Long term, you’ll see stability and integration bringing about gradual benefits. There’s not a silver bullet of that sort here.”

Britain’s railway services were privatised in the mid-1990s.

Now, all services run by private companies will be renationalised as contracts reach the end of their minimum terms, with the process due to be completed by the end of 2027.

The next operator’s services to be brought under public control will be c2c – which runs between London and Essex – on 20 July, with Greater Anglia following in October, before seven more companies transfer over when their franchises end in the future.

Operators that were already under public ownership are LNER, Northern, Southeastern and TransPennine Express.

UK

Former BBC executive and presenter Alan Yentob dies

Published

5 hours ago

May 25, 2025

admin

Former BBC executive and presenter Alan Yentob dies

Alan Yentob, the former BBC presenter and executive, has died aged 78.

A statement from his family, shared by the BBC, said Yentob died on Saturday.

His wife Philippa Walker said: “For Jacob, Bella and I, every day with Alan held the promise of something unexpected. Our life was exciting, he was exciting.

“He was curious, funny, annoying, late, and creative in every cell of his body. But more than that, he was the kindest of men and a profoundly moral man. He leaves in his wake a trail of love a mile wide.”

Yentob joined the BBC as a trainee in 1968 and held a number of positions – including controller of BBC One and BBC Two, director of television, and head of music and art.

He was also the director of BBC drama, entertainment, and children’s TV.

Yentob launched CBBC and CBeebies, and his drama commissions included Pride And Prejudice and Middlemarch.

The TV executive was made a Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) by the King in 2024 for services to the arts and media.

In a tribute, the BBC’s director-general Tim Davie said: “Alan Yentob was a towering figure in British broadcasting and the arts. A creative force and a cultural visionary, he shaped decades of programming at the BBC and beyond, with a passion for storytelling and public service that leave a lasting legacy.

“Above all, Alan was a true original. His passion wasn’t performative – it was personal. He believed in the power of culture to enrich, challenge and connect us.”

BBC Radio 4 presenter Amol Rajan described him on Instagram as “such a unique and kind man: an improbable impresario from unlikely origins who became a towering figure in the culture of post-war Britain.

“I commend his spirit to the living.”