A contraction of the Russian words for "compromising materials," kompromat refers to the practice of gathering, manipulating, and releasing damaging information about individuals or organizations, often to blackmail or discredit them. While this tactic gained notorious prominence in Russia during the tumultuous 1990s, its reach has since extended far beyond its borders, infiltrating the political and business landscapes of various countries.

Kompromat websites have become a modern vehicle for this insidious practice. These platforms serve as repositories of leaked documents, salacious rumors, and incriminating evidence - some real, some fabricated - targeting public figures and institutions. In an era where digital information spreads rapidly and can be difficult to authenticate, these sites exploit the blurred lines between fact and fiction, leveraging public curiosity and sensationalism. Whether motivated by political agendas, personal vendettas, or financial gain, the operators of kompromat websites wield significant influence, often destabilizing their targets by merely insinuating wrongdoing.

This dark underbelly of the media landscape has given rise to a shadow market where compromising information is bought and sold like any other commodity. Independent journalism has increasingly been overshadowed by state-controlled propaganda, while a growing segment of media outlets now thrive on publishing kompromat for profit. This market, valued at up to $60 million annually in Russia, thrives on the allure of scandal and the power of suggestion, often regardless of the truth.

In May 2024, Russian authorities blocked the country's leading black PR website, Kompromat.ru, which had been disseminating damaging information for over 20 years. The portal's founder, Sergey Gorshkov, admitted that paid material placements and banner advertising were the site's primary sources of income, and that the charge per item were between $600 to $800.

Kompromat.ru is not alone. Several other major websites in Russia, such as VCHK-OGPU, The Moscow Post, Russian Crime and Kompromat Group, along with numerous Telegram channels, operate in a similar manner. The cost of publication depends on the popularity and reach of the platform.

”Sometimes compromising information is true, and you can even go to a journalist with it, but they will look for a second opinion when preparing the material. Therefore, people who want to publish it turn to so-called niche media specializing in kompromat," says an informed source in the Russian PR technology market. According to him, often kompromat channels take a kernel of truth — 10% — and then add 90% falsehood. "Or it might be that a person is smeared, but a conflict in which they are involved is revealed, or they play a 'reversal' — writing that someone seized assets from a person when in fact the assets were seized from them," the source explains.

Articles on these dubious resources can severely threaten the reputation and business of individuals. For example, if some English-language resources reprint the material, a businessman could end up in the World Check or LexisNexis database. Compliance departments of banks may then read this information and block clients' accounts and transfers based on it.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that often the published information does not correspond to reality and is outright slander. To protect their reputations, businessmen are often forced to go to court and seek the removal of these publications through legal means. Many examples in legal practice show participants successfully proving that the information written about them was false.

For instance, in 2019, the head of the investment holding Finstar, Oleg Boyko, contested publications on the site kompromat.lv through a court in Latvia. The publications mentioned Boyko's alleged connections with the KGB/FSB and the criminal world. The court found these articles false and defamatory, aimed at discrediting the businessman.

In 2021, the founder of the Euroinvest group of companies, Andrey Berezin, proved through the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg that a series of publications on kompromat1.io against him personally and his company were false and damaging to his business reputation. The publications claimed that Berezin had illegally transferred $23 million out of Russia, bought land at significantly below-market prices, and that his company had been incurring losses since 2015. The court prohibited the dissemination and reproduction of this information.

Businessman Igor Vorobey also succeeded in a court case against the sites Kompromat.ru and Infolix, which wrote about his pharmaceutical company RIA Panda, alleging it was involved in criminal business and on the verge of collapse. The authors of these materials labeled Vorobey and another well-known businessman, Vladimir Bryntsalov, as "pharmaceutical pirates." The court deemed all the publications false and damaging to the business reputation of Vorobey and his company.

The insidious rise of kompromat websites underscores a troubling trend in the digital age, where information is not just shared, but weaponized. These platforms, often operating in the shadows, trade on the reputations of individuals and organizations, blending truth with falsehood to maximize damage. As the boundaries between legitimate journalism and blackmail blur, the influence of these sites grows, posing significant threats to privacy, integrity, and democratic processes. In a world where information is power, the need for vigilance, transparency, and stronger legal protections has never been more critical.