Clandestine Campaign To Defund ZeroHedge, The Federalist & Breitbart Traced To Kier Starmer Operation

Very early into the COVID-19 pandemic, ZeroHedge suggested that a little-known Chinese lab in Wuhan might know something about the novel coronavirus sweeping the globe. As a result, and as you know, we were subject to an intense demonetization / deplatforming campaign that included getting kicked off of Twitter, PayPal, Facebook and other platforms, dropped by our advertisers, and targeted by MSM hit pieces which colluded with foreign ‘watchdogs’ to inflict maximum damage. 

These same groups also targeted outlets including The Federalist and Breitbart over various reporting, which suffered similar fates. 

Now, thanks to a new book by investigative journalist Paul Holden that builds on reporting by Matt Taibbi, Paul Thacker and others, we learn that the origin of these campaigns, launched years before the pandemic, was none other than UK Prime Minister Kier Starmer’s political machine, which began targeting left-wing outlets speaking critically of Starmer such as The Canary, and then went after conservative outlets in America – just in time for the 2020 US election.

Documents and internal accounts, many drawn from newly disclosed materials, reveal a coordinated project that operated behind a veil of anonymity, misdirection, and unreported political financing.

This murky operation known as the Stop Funding Fake News (SFFN) was launched and resourced through a think tank, Labour Together, that would later be fined for failing to declare £739,000 in donations between 2018 and 2020. Said funds helped underpin this clandestine anti-media strategy which affected news outlets from the UK to the United States.

At the center of the effort was Morgan McSweeney, a political strategist who has since become Starmer’s chief of staff and, according to public commentary by prominent journalists, one of the most powerful unelected figures in the modern Labour Party.

The newly disclosed materials reveal that SFFN was not in fact some grassroots, anonymous activist collective it claimed to be, but a political weapon forged by senior Labour figures and funded by millionaire donors, including individuals active in pro-Israel political advocacy.

The goal: destabilize independent media ecosystems aligned with Labour’s left under Jeremy Corbyn, elevate Starmer’s leadership bid, and delegitimize outlets – domestic and foreign – that threatened the faction’s consolidation of power.

Publicly, SFFN claimed to be run by anonymous activists. Privately, it was shaped by McSweeney and operated from the same small office suite in South London that housed Labour Together.

SFFN ultimately migrated under the umbrella of the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), an organization that grew out of a corporate shell once controlled solely by McSweeney. 

CCDH would later present SFFN as one of its signature initiatives.

Three Fronts of a Political Offensive

The documents reported by Holden reveal a three-part strategy that reshaped the British political landscape – and reverberated into U.S. media and politics. In a nutshell, this is how the sausage was made:

1. Destabilizing Jeremy Corbyn’s Leadership

SFFN’s narrative interventions were designed to amplify an “antisemitism crisis” that dogged Corbyn, boosting controversies and legitimizing a media ecosystem hostile to Labour’s left. This influence work aligned directly with the political interests of the centrist faction preparing for a post-Corbyn future.

2. Engineering Starmer’s Rise

Labour Together later claimed credit for helping deliver Starmer’s 2020 leadership victory, with McSweeney acting as his campaign chief. After Starmer won the July 2024 general election, McSweeney formally became chief of staff, solidifying the faction’s institutional dominance.

3. Silencing Dissenting Media

SFFN’s most aggressive project was an astroturf campaign against media outlets perceived as ideological threats. Targets spanned both the left (such as The Canary and Evolve Politics) and the right, as noted above. 

In each case, the tactic was the same: identify advertisers appearing on targeted sites, publicly shame them through social media threads, and provide tools – including downloadable blocklists – to automatically exclude those outlets from programmatic advertising networks. The effort succeeded in devastating the business model of some targets; others survived but saw sustained pressure.

We took matters into our own hands, launching our premium service and later the ZeroHedge store in order to keep the lights on (thank you). 

The Breitbart Offensive

Holden reports that SFFN then set their sights on Breitbart in October 2019 – after an anonymous X account tagged the UK Parliament and likened its ads on Breitbart to funding extremism. SFFN ran hard with this – promoting the allegation and labeling Breitbart a “bigoted, conspiracist fake news site.”

Later that day, the Press Association contacted Parliament for comment. Within hours, Parliament suspended the ads. To further legitimize the operation, anti-Corbyn MP Mary Creagh publicly leaned on the Conservative leadership to formalize the ban, citing a list of SFFN-identified sites.

Two weeks later, SFFN announced another victory: the UK Cabinet Office had implemented a “whitelist” that barred Breitbart, The Canary, and a long roster of other outlets from receiving government advertising.

On the 18^th of October 2019, SFFN posted that they had contacted an unnamed journalist about how the UK’s Cabinet Office was advertising on its target websites. The journalist found out that the Cabinet Office “now implemented a ‘whitelist’ meaning the government now only advertises on pre-approved websites. The Canary, Evolve, Rebel, Politicalite, Breitbart etc no longer receive government advertising.” The post ended with three handclap emojis. “Good to see government use its authority to set an example against these dishonest & hateful websites.” –Paul Holden via Drop Site

The campaign extended into the private sector. In 2020, Ford UK publicly stated it was investigating ad placements on Breitbart. By 2021, SFFN was targeting Breitbart’s YouTube monetization and urging advertisers to block the site across Google’s ad infrastructure.

The group’s blocklist eventually included 28 domestic and international sites, among them U.S. outlets aligned with the alt-right and the British far-right figure Tommy Robinson.

Weaponizing the Image of Grassroots Activism

Throughout 2019, SFFN steadfastly refused to disclose who ran the operation, claiming its activists faced undefined risks. Interviews and profiles repeated the fiction that it was just a small band of concerned citizens.

Yet from its inception, SFFN was powered by political professionals. It was launched only after McSweeney and CCDH’s Imran Ahmed recruited television personality Rachel Riley to front the campaign. Labour Together’s funds and office space supported its rollout. The project was effectively shielded from legal accountability by its anonymity, even as it issued sweeping defamatory accusations against its targets.

McSweeney and Ahmed asked if Riley would front a campaign to tackle The Canary. She agreed “with alacrity,” according to an account by two Sunday Times journalists. Her celebrity endorsement lifted SFFN out of obscurity and powered its success. She would later become a patron of CCDH and now lists herself on X as an “ambassador” of the organization. –Paul Holden via Drop Site

One of SFFN’s earliest and most consequential victims was The Canary. Though independently regulated and later cleared of allegations of racism or incitement, the outlet lost crucial advertising revenue and shed staff. Former employees described a chilling effect across the left media ecosystem as prominent commentators distanced themselves from a now-toxic brand.

The attack’s success was openly celebrated within liberal circles; commentators hailed SFFN for restoring “objective reality in politics,” even as its covert origins remained concealed.

CCDH, Twitter Files, and the Attempt to Rewrite History

The political sensitivity surrounding SFFN resurfaced in 2024, when leaked emails from CCDH showed repeated internal discussions about targeting Elon Musk’s Twitter. Amid the backlash, CCDH sources insisted McSweeney had played no operational role in the organization – a claim contradicted by company records showing he was the sole director of its precursor entity for more than a year and remained formally involved until April 2020.

In 2024, Matt Taibbi and Paul Thacker reported on emails leaked from within CCDH. They showed that, for over a year, CCDH’s internal team meetings included the action item: ‘kill Musk’s Twitter.’ ‘This is war,’ Musk posted in response. In the furor that followed, The Guardian was told that McSweeney had played no operational role in CCDH, which now claims ownership of the SFFN project. Imran Ahmed, who later claimed credit for both SFFN and CCDH on Twitter, claimed that McSweeney had simply gifted him a “shell company” (Brixton Endeavours) that was then converted into CCDH, and which later absorbed SFFN . The response was canny in not stipulating whether McSweeney had any operational role in SFFN. –Paul Holden via Drop Site

CCDH’s later retellings cast SFFN as an example of its “global” anti-hate strategies. One of its leaders described the financial approach explicitly: if news sites rely on advertising, “within a couple of months, you can completely eviscerate the economic base of a website.” SFFN had been the proving ground.

In 2023, Paul Thacker wrote in Tablet:

In March of 2021 a nonprofit group called the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) released a report about online misinformation. Founded in the U.K. by a former Labour Party political figure named Imran Ahmed, the CCDH was virtually unknown at the time in the U.S., but that was about to change. The report quickly reached the hands of executives at Twitter. “COVID-19 misinfo enforcement team is planning on taking action on a handful of accounts surfaced by the CCDH report,” a Twitter official wrote on March 31. One account they eventually took action against belonged to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was then running against Joe Biden for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president.

A few months later, the same report was being cited by the Biden administration. At a press briefing in July 2021, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki quoted from the CCDH report in a briefing where she accused Facebook of undermining federal vaccine policies. “There’s about 12 people who are producing 65% of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms,” Psaki claimed, citing the CCDH’s work, while warning social media companies to shut down these “misinformation” accounts. “They’re killing people,” President Biden told a reporter a short time later, leveling the charge of murder against Facebook for its alleged role in providing a platform for “vaccine misinformation.”

Facebook’s Vice President Monika Bickert later criticized CCDH’s claims for being free of evidence—failing to define the term “anti-vaxx,” for example—and neglecting to explain how they came up with their numbers and conclusions. But it had little effect. By then the report had popularized the idea of a “disinformation dozen,” a narrative that hardened as it was promoted by countless news outlets, fact checkers, and social media accounts devoted to round-the-clock attacks on “disinformation.”

More recently, the CCDH has popped up again, leading the battle against Twitter’s new owner, Elon Musk, who has been cast as a champion of racists and antisemites. “The CCDH has been at the forefront of reporting on the hate proliferating on X/Twitter since Musk completed his takeover in late October 2022,” Ahmed wrote last month in The Observer. In a number of publications over the past year, the group has repeatedly blamed Musk for allowing his platform to spread hate speech. Once again, these efforts have been uncritically amplified in the press and in a letter to Musk from House Democrats that reiterates Ahmed’s claims, and cites him and CCDH.

Meanwhile, last month it was reported that the Trump White House plans to deport Imran Ahmed – who Thacker says should be prosecuted before that’s done. You can read Holden’s entire report over at Drop Site News, even though Ryan Grimm (formerly of HuffPost and The Intercept) is a massive dick who hates us for some reason.

💥NEW: How PM Keir Starmer’s Machine Quietly Moved to Cripple Breitbart, The Federalist, ZeroHedge, and Left Independent Outlets

On Breaking Points, Ryan introduces Drop Site’s latest investigation, adapted from Paul Holden’s book, exposing how Keir Starmer and his chief of… pic.twitter.com/NVPDm7aWmw

— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) December 4, 2025