Kenneth Glad
An online media project with a growing international audience has drawn attention following new findings about its origins. The case highlights ongoing concerns about influence, transparency, and accountability in digital spaces.
A Kremlin-aligned podcast managed to attract thousands of paying followers on Western platforms while promoting Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Its removal has sparked renewed scrutiny from journalists and policy analysts over how such content slips through moderation systems.
An investigation by the Kyiv Independent, working with TUA Research, points to a broader issue: Digital platforms, payment systems, and global audiences can combine to sustain political influence operations across borders.
Profits before scrutiny
For years, “Russians With Attitude” operated openly on services like Patreon, Spotify, and Apple Podcasts. Reporting shows its Patreon page alone drew about 5,600 followers, including roughly 1,100 paying subscribers.
With entry-level subscriptions priced at €5.50, estimated monthly earnings exceeded €6,000. Despite rules restricting support for sanctioned actors, the account remained active until March 27, 2026, when Patreon removed it after being presented with evidence tied to fundraising for Russian military units.
Click to display external content from twitter,
- You can always enable and disable third-party content.
You agree to display external third-party content. Personal data may be sent to the provider of the content and other third-party services.
The episode underscores a recurring enforcement problem: Platforms often act only after external reporting rather than proactive detection.
Messaging pipeline
The podcast positioned itself as a commentary project on Russian history and politics, but its tone aligned closely with Kremlin narratives. Its audience was largely English-speaking, with a significant share based in the United States.
Episodes and collaborations extended its reach into online far-right communities. Guests included figures such as Alexander Dugin, while its messaging echoed themes identified by Finnish researcher Jussi Lassila, who has documented how nationalist networks blend ideology with media strategy.
In one episode, “Kirill” said: “But I would just ban it. It’s just rude. I don’t know, it’s against basic human decency. This language, it’s an insult.”
Identities uncovered
The investigation identified the hosts as Kirill Kamenetsky and Eldar Orlov, using open-source intelligence techniques.
Analysts linked email addresses, phone data, and archived accounts, then cross-referenced them with personal details mentioned in podcast episodes.
Kamenetsky had lived in Germany before returning to Russia in 2025, while Orlov operated from Yekaterinburg. Both were active in nationalist online circles long before launching the podcast.
The reporting also found that they had promoted fundraising efforts benefiting Russian military units, including sanctioned groups such as Rusich, with some posts later deleted amid increased scrutiny.
After losing access to Patreon, the hosts shifted to alternative platforms and wrote: “We’re not giving up. Russians don’t surrender.”
The case illustrates a persistent regulatory gap: Even when removed from one platform, politically aligned creators can quickly re-establish themselves elsewhere, maintaining both revenue streams and influence.
Sources: Kyiv Independent, TUA Research
