Video summary

Le côté obscur de l'OSINT

Main summary

Key takeaways

News and Commentary

“Grammar of truth” and why OSINT can be imitated

The episode argues that OSINT (open-source intelligence) investigations are increasingly vulnerable to a “grammar of truth”—a set of visual and narrative conventions (editing styles, maps, timelines, arrows, satellite/phone-image montages, and “scientific” demonstration aesthetics) that make content feel verifiable and rigorous.

Over time, these codes became more standardized—especially around the mid-2010s—notably after:

  • Bellingcat’s MH17 work, and
  • Forensic Architecture’s influence.

As the format standardizes, adversaries can mimic investigation formats.

Example: Bucha (NYT) and alleged reuse by pro-Russian channels

A key example is the New York Times’ open-source investigation into the Bucha massacres (March 2022). The episode claims that pro-Russian Telegram channels allegedly reused the same:

  • imagery,
  • editing rhythm,
  • map zooms,
  • and overall tone,

to reach the opposite conclusion—arguing the event was staged by Ukrainian forces.

Central point: Russian disinformation may not just block OSINT anymore. It can repurpose OSINT’s “forms” while changing the underlying interpretation—disguising propaganda in the style of investigation.

“Grammar of truth” and how it becomes a “shell” of shapes

Alan Deuville explains that “truth” here is not only about factual correctness, but about a visual regime of truth—drawing on Michel Foucault’s concept of “regimes of truth.”

OSINT visuals often rely on recognizable components such as:

  • low-quality smartphone footage presented as “authentic” (sometimes with added clarification),
  • satellite image comparisons and montages to create apparent correspondences,
  • strong visual devices like:
    • big zooms,
    • geometric overlays (e.g., colored circles),
    • timeline structures,
    • motion-design aesthetics,
    • diagram-like emphasis (e.g., red lines/threads).

Because these elements can be learned and reused, the episode warns OSINT can degrade into a “shell” of visual shapes that can be attached to nearly any claim, including false ones.

The standardization is also linked to production ecosystems in which many motion designers have passed through Forensic Architecture, spreading shared production codes across newsrooms.

“Dark OSINT” vs OSINT

Deuville introduces a distinction between:

  • OSINT aligned with democratic/liberal norms (“inquiry and democracy”),
  • “Dark OSINT”: uses of open-source methods and investigation aesthetics for anti-democratic or harmful ends.

“Dark OSINT” is not defined merely by whether outputs are “open.” It is defined by intent and impact, including:

  • harassment and doxxing (e.g., targeting groups with mapped addresses),
  • stalking/identifying individuals,
  • violence-enabling “vigilantism” and population targeting,
  • hostile targeting at scale by malicious actors, sometimes involving states.

The episode emphasizes that open information environments in liberal democracies can enable both:

  • citizen oversight and investigative journalism (a benefit),
  • and foreign interference and malicious operations (a risk).

So the challenge is not to abandon OSINT, but to understand its dual use.

How to evaluate “good” vs “bad” use

The episode argues that ethical differences depend on methodological criteria, especially:

  • transparency of methodology,
  • providing sources,
  • and reproducibility (the scientific ideal of testing whether the same conditions yield the same conclusions).

However, even with reproducibility, OSINT can still produce competing plausible narratives. The episode stresses uncertainty: OSINT should reduce uncertainty, but should not be presented as delivering absolute truth.

Countering post-truth attacks: facts + narrative + training

The discussion broadens to how “truth” is attacked through strategic communication and narrative warfare. Deuville suggests responses include:

  1. Defending factuality Use demonstrable verification to avoid “alternative facts” dynamics.

  2. Moving beyond facts alone to narratives Because audiences and information battles are narrative-driven.

  3. Improving visual and methodological literacy Build OSINT competence as part of digital education—teaching people not just to consume visuals, but to evaluate the claims behind them.

  4. Promoting cross-community dialogue Through workshops/symposia and festivals connecting journalists, motion designers, filmmakers, and OSINT practitioners to evolve investigative practices.

Case discussed: hospital bombing investigation in Gaza

A concrete case discussed is a hospital bombing investigation in Gaza, described in relation to coverage around Israel/Hamas and competing claims.

Point: “declassification” and competing origin narratives can unfold even when evidence is partially accessible.

Reasons for hope

Despite the risks, the episode closes with cautious optimism:

  • stronger international support for the OSINT community,
  • increased attention to strategic communication and storytelling,
  • more collaborations and evolving practices.

Presenters / contributors

  • Guillaume Ludy (host)
  • Alan Deuville (guest; lecturer/researcher; author of Inquiry and Democracy)

Original video