The Guardian reported that London Mayor Sadiq Khan cited Valent's ULEZ investigation in a major speech — a moment that demonstrated what intelligence-led exposure of disinformation campaigns can achieve when it reaches the people who need it.
The Guardian reported that London Mayor Sadiq Khan had referenced Valent's investigation into coordinated anti-ULEZ activity in a major speech on climate and clean air policy. The citation marked a significant moment: a sitting mayor publicly acknowledging that the opposition his administration was facing online was not organic, but engineered — and naming the intelligence work that had exposed it.
Our 2023 investigation into ULEZ-related disinformation had mapped a network of inauthentic accounts amplifying false and misleading claims about Khan's clean air policy across social media platforms. The investigation identified Seeders, Spreaders, and Validators operating in coordinated patterns — manufacturing the appearance of widespread public opposition where none existed at that scale organically.
What the Guardian's coverage illustrated is the chain from investigation to impact. We identified the network. We published our findings. Those findings reached the mayor's communications team. The mayor cited them publicly, in a context that reframed the political debate around his policy.
This is what disinformation intelligence is for. It's not just about knowing that a campaign exists — it's about being able to act on that knowledge in a way that changes the dynamic. In this case, the mayor was able to demonstrate to a public audience that the opposition he faced was manufactured, not genuine — and that the narratives being amplified against his policy were the output of a coordinated network, not a reflection of authentic public sentiment.
The Guardian piece examined the broader context of disinformation in UK domestic politics, using the ULEZ case as a window into how coordinated influence operations are increasingly targeting policy debates at the local and regional level. This is a trend we've tracked closely: the tactics pioneered in national election interference have diffused downward through the political system, and are now being deployed against planning decisions, local authorities, and individual politicians.
The implication for communications teams at every level of government is clear: the threat is no longer confined to national elections. It is present in any context where a policy decision creates opponents with sufficient motivation and resources to run a coordinated campaign.
