The Latest DOJ Indictment Regarding Tim Pool & Dave Rubin — Or…More Importantly: Revisiting Gray Zone Warfare & Media Narratives
Gray Zone Warfare: Media Narratives and the DOJ Indictment
Gray zone warfare operates in the ambiguous space between peace and conflict, using media narratives to influence public perception and further geopolitical objectives. Traditionally, nations like Russia and China have been at the forefront of these strategies, leveraging the ”media gray zone”to promote their agendas and destabilize rival powers without direct confrontation.A recent Department of Justice (DOJ) indictment reveals how these tactics are evolving in the digital era, with prominent right-wing influencers becoming unwitting participants in a covert Russian disinformation campaign.
A recent Department of Justice (DOJ) indictment sheds new light on how Russia has been influencing the U.S. media landscape through covert funding of independent content creators, further underscoring how gray zone tactics have evolved in the digital era.
DOJ Indictment: Russian Covert Influence on Right-Wing Media
On Wednesday, the DOJ unsealed an indictment against Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, employees of the Russian state-controlled media outlet RT, charging them with acting as unregistered foreign agents in a $10 million scheme. The funds were covertly funneled to Tenet Media, a Tennesee, U.S.-based company that distributed content from Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, and other independent creators. None of these influencers were charged but were unknowingly part of a broader Russian political influence operation.
None of these influencers have been charged, but they are believed to have unknowingly participated in a Russian political disinformation scheme, with their content aligning with narratives that benefited Russian interests — especially concerning U.S. aid to Ukraine and Western political discourse.
How Gray Zone Warfare Shapes Media Narratives
Media in the digital age, plays a crucial role in shaping geopolitical narratives. Countries like Russia have long used disinformation campaigns to create doubt, confusion, and division within target populations.
The DOJ indictment reveals how Russian agents covertly funded American media figures, exploiting the independent media space to advance Russian objectives.
The indictment shows how Russian media employs **gray zone warfare** by embedding covert state messaging within independent media platforms. RT’s covert financing of Tenet Media illustrates this strategy: funding heterodox commentators who unknowingly amplify **anti-Western and pro-Russian narratives, without explicitly endorsing Russia. The DOJ charges reflect an ongoing effort by Russia to use media as a soft power tool, influencing public opinion through seemingly independent voices.
See my article from June 2022 here.
Excerpt #1: Conceptualizing what Winning in the Media Gray Zone looks like:
Excerpt #2: Understanding the Media Gray Zone — Global Norms & Narratives
Russian Strategy: The Broken World Order Narrative (psssst: it seems to work every time)
Russian media often depicts a world where the Western-led global order is in decline, corrupt, and manipulated by elites (NOT disagreeing, by the way…but you know there’s another side here).
How? This narrative aligns with many of the right-wing influencers involved in the DOJ investigation, whose content often critiques Western institutions, media bias, and U.S. foreign policy, including skepticism of aid to Ukraine following Russia’s invasion. I am all for critiquing Western institutions, but once you start to understand how this type of media landscape works after you’ve been around it for a bit, it’s easy to pick up on when you compare it to other types of media.
By positioning Russia as the honest broker defending what’s left of the good ole set of traditional global values, as well as positioning Russia as a country seeking to rectify global inequities, the state’s media strategy becomes an example of gray zone tactics, exploiting dissatisfaction and mistrust within Western societies.
Tim Pool & Dave Rubin — Our Favorite Grifters (I think this probably sends Rubin into permanent retirement — yes?)
Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, and a few other right-wing commentators have responded to the allegations, claiming they were “unaware” of the Russian-backed funding. They have positioned themselves as victims of this scheme. Pool stated on X(formerly Twitter), “I as well as the other personalities and commentators were deceived and are victims.” Rubin echoed a similar sentiment, emphasizing his unawareness of any fraudulent activity. lol.
Interesting to note that while these influencers were officially unaware of the funding’s origins, their content did align, much of the time, with the goals of gray zone operations, amplifying narratives that question U.S. policies and support Russia’s geopolitical goals. Again — we’re totally okay with anything that questions US foreign policy — but as we’ve been trying to say for years over here — PSA: SOMETIMES THERE ARE BAD ACTORS ON THE OTHER SIDE TOO!
Sidenote — China’s Role: A Different Gray Zone Approach
In contrast to Russia’s confrontational strategy, China’s media gray zone tactics focus on portraying a functioning global order that benefits from China’s participation and leadership. Chinese media does not directly undermine the global order but instead works to legitimize China’s growing influence within it, positioning itself as a responsible and cooperative global power.
So? What’s next for the role of media in shaping geopolitical narratives? What’s an influence peddler to do now that the Russian plan has been uncovered?! We’ll have to see what else comes out of this investigation, but I’m sure you can name a few additional right-wing commentators who were unwittingly looped in with this operation.
The DOJ’s findings reveal how right-wing influencers, including Pool and Rubin, were unknowingly drawn into this conflict, their platforms used to amplify narratives that serve foreign interests. This indictment reinforces the critical role media plays in shaping the geopolitical landscape — and how gray zone warfare relies on narratives that exploit existing societal divides.
Second Look: Reviewing my June 2022 Article on Gray Zone Warfare and Russian Media Influence Operations
The Russian government’s efforts to manipulate public opinion in the West have escalated in recent years, with a particular focus on shaping online discourse. The DOJ’s latest findings highlight a subtle and concerning form of influence involving media figures like Tim Pool and Dave Rubin. While neither knowingly participated, their platforms were used to advance Russian geopolitical interests through covert funding from intermediaries.
For years, Russia has engaged in information warfare, aiming to destabilize democratic institutions by fostering division, distrust, and confusion. By supporting independent media figures who challenge mainstream narratives, Russia can further its goals without overtly controlling the content. In the case of Pool and Rubin, their questioning of Western institutions and mainstream media aligned with Russia’s efforts to weaken trust in democratic processes, even though they remained unaware of any foreign involvement.
The Role of Independent Media in Gray Zone Warfare
Tim Pool and Dave Rubin have built large followings through their alternative takes on current events, often challenging dominant media narratives. Pool, formerly a journalist at Vice, and Rubin, host of “The Rubin Report,” are viewed by many as voices of reason in a polarized media environment. However, their platforms were inadvertently used to disseminate narratives that supported Russian interests — such as skepticism toward U.S. aid to Ukraine and critiques of Western institutions.
The DOJ indictment underscores how Russia’s gray zone tactics target independent media, supporting voices that amplify its broader geopolitical objectives without directly promoting pro-Russian content. This method allows for subtle manipulation of public discourse while minimizing detection.
How “Unwitting” Influence Happens
Russian influence in this case is not overt; rather, it operates through third-party organizations that obscure the source of the funding. By financing media figures who share perspectives that align with Russian goals — such as questioning mainstream narratives or promoting skepticism toward U.S. institutions — Russia can indirectly shape public opinion. While Pool and Rubin claim to maintain editorial independence, their content was amplified by intermediaries whose funding traced back to the Russian state.
Implications of the DOJ’s Findings
The revelations that Tim Pool and Dave Rubin were “unknowingly funded” through intermediaries highlight the increasing complexity of modern influence campaigns. This underscores the importance of transparency in media funding, especially as states like Russia continue to leverage “soft power” to influence foreign populations. The case raises questions about how public figures can protect themselves from unwitting participation in geopolitical strategies.
Moving Forward: Ensuring Transparency and Accountability
As foreign influence operations become more sophisticated, it’s vital for media personalities and platforms to be vigilant about where their funding originates. Greater transparency and accountability in media funding are essential to preventing public figures from being co-opted into covert influence operations. In light of these revelations, consumers must remain critical of the media they consume, while creators must prioritize transparency in their financial relationships.
Conclusion: The Role of Media in Gray Zone Warfare
The DOJ indictment illustrates how gray zone warfare leverages media to destabilize everyday conversations within a society. Russia’s covert funding of Tenet Media allowed it to exploit independent commentators to advance narratives that align with its geopolitical objectives. Figures like Tim Pool and Dave Rubin, while unwitting participants, underscore the growing need for vigilance in an increasingly complex media landscape. As Russia and other nations continue to refine these strategies, the role of media in shaping public perception remains a critical component of modern geopolitics.
Gray Zone Warfare: Media Narratives and the DOJ Indictment
Gray zone warfare operates in the ambiguous space between peace and conflict, using media narratives to subtly influence public perception and further geopolitical objectives. Nations like Russia have increasingly relied on this strategy to destabilize rivals without direct confrontation. A recent Department of Justice (DOJ) indictment reveals how these tactics are evolving in the digital era, with prominent right-wing influencers becoming unwitting participants in a covert Russian disinformation campaign.
DOJ Indictment: Russian Covert Influence on Right-Wing Media
On Wednesday, the DOJ unsealed an indictment against Kostiantyn Kalashnikov and Elena Afanasyeva, employees of the Russian state-controlled media outlet RT, charging them with acting as unregistered foreign agents in a $10 million scheme. The funds were covertly funneled to Tenet Media, a U.S.-based company that distributed content from Tim Pool, Dave Rubin, Benny Johnson, and other independent creators. None of these influencers were charged but were unknowingly part of a broader Russian political influence operation.
Article Update: Russian Government Influence and Unwitting Participants in Media
The Russian government’s efforts to manipulate public opinion in the West have escalated in recent years, with a particular focus on shaping online discourse. The DOJ's latest findings highlight a subtle and concerning form of influence involving media figures like Tim Pool and Dave Rubin. While neither knowingly participated, their platforms were used to advance Russian geopolitical interests through covert funding from intermediaries.
For years, Russia has engaged in information warfare, aiming to destabilize democratic institutions by fostering division, distrust, and confusion. By supporting independent media figures who challenge mainstream narratives, Russia can further its goals without overtly controlling the content. In the case of Pool and Rubin, their questioning of Western institutions and mainstream media aligned with Russia’s efforts to weaken trust in democratic processes, even though they remained unaware of any foreign involvement.
The Role of Independent Media in Gray Zone Warfare
Tim Pool and Dave Rubin have built large followings through their alternative takes on current events, often challenging dominant media narratives. Pool, formerly a journalist at Vice, and Rubin, host of "The Rubin Report," are viewed by many as voices of reason in a polarized media environment. However, their platforms were inadvertently used to disseminate narratives that supported Russian interests—such as skepticism toward U.S. aid to Ukraine and critiques of Western institutions.
The DOJ indictment underscores how Russia’s gray zone tactics target independent media, supporting voices that amplify its broader geopolitical objectives without directly promoting pro-Russian content. This method allows for subtle manipulation of public discourse while minimizing detection.
In case we hear otherwise, (& frankly, as tempted as I am to state that they knew more than what we’re hearing) the “official” position is that Tim Pool and Dave Rubin truly were “unwitting participants” in terms of knowing the extent of Russian influence operators within the media landscape.
Russian influence in this case is not overt; rather, it operates through third-party organizations that obscure the source of the funding. By financing media figures who share perspectives that align with Russian goals—such as questioning mainstream narratives or promoting skepticism toward U.S. institutions—Russia can indirectly shape public opinion. While Pool and Rubin maintain editorial independence, their content was amplified by intermediaries whose funding traced back to the Russian state.
Implications of the DOJ’s Findings
The revelations that Tim Pool and Dave Rubin were unknowingly funded through intermediaries highlight the increasing complexity of modern influence campaigns. This underscores the importance of transparency in media funding, especially as states like Russia continue to leverage "soft power" to influence foreign populations. The case raises questions about how public figures can protect themselves from unwitting participation in geopolitical strategies.
