Wars are being fought today on two fronts, on the battlefield and online. Iran was at a disadvantage in the recent war when it came to traditional online media. But Tehran’s most effective information weapon was not a television channel, a newspaper, or a spokesperson; it was a series of artificial intelligence (AI)- generated animations that went viral on social media, enabling Iran to frame the narrative around the war.
In the process, Iran has pioneered what could be one of the most lasting innovations shaping the future of information warfare.
For example, on March 10, 2026, Iranian state television aired an AI-generated LEGO animation that depicted the devil and Benjamin Netanyahu handing US President Donald Trump a binder marked Epstein Files. President Trump then hit a button to fire a missile at a girls’ school in Iran. The video was posted by an Iranian digital media house called Explosive Media, and within an hour it had millions of views.
Iran’s information-warfare strategy differed from the AI-generated content that has circulated on social media since 2022. Notably, AI-generated deepfakes try to replicate actual video or audio until they are fact-checked, at which point their influence might diminish. The Iranian AI animations, by contrast, provided an entertaining and emotional account of real events from an Iranian perspective.
Another novel feature of Iran’s information warfare campaign was that each day, an Iranian AI animation was released to the world, presenting the latest developments, sometimes before the traditional news media could report on it. The format of the animations also amplified their visibility on social media. The Lego genre made them quite popular among Western audiences.
But perhaps the most unique aspect was not just the AI-generated animations, but rather the decentralised approach to creating and sharing them. Despite several strikes on Iranian broadcasting facilities, Israeli and American airstrikes were not able to halt Iran’s information warfare campaign. The reason was that Explosive Media was not a traditional broadcasting network, but a decentralised digital studio. There was no traditional broadcasting building or transmitting tower to bomb.
What used to require a big production house, expensive equipment and significant financial resources can now be done by a small digital team with commercially available AI tools. Even when Explosive Media’s accounts were blocked on social media platforms, the animations reappeared on new accounts. Social media handles of Iranian embassies worldwide also shared memes based on the AI animations. The algorithms that promote controversial and engaging content ultimately helped to promote the animations, even after multiple attempts to silence them.
Traditional barriers to having a global online presence are slowly eroding as decentralised digital media houses increasingly create and publish AI-generated content at a fraction of the cost of traditional methods.
However, technological innovation is not the only reason for the success of Iran’s information warfare campaign. This approach is more effective for an actor who can convincingly portray itself as the victim. AI-generated animations can set the tone for how audiences process what comes next. When mainstream media report the news, many people have already made up their minds about which side to believe, and facts have to fight against the emotional bias the animations have generated.
Interestingly, the impact of the Iranian animations cannot be attributed to visuals alone, but to how they helped shape perceptions of Iran as the victim among social media users in both developed and developing countries. Therefore, AI animations can not only advance a narrative but also lend credibility to actors who utilise them more effectively.
For instance, the White House also created AI-generated content during the war, but it did not have as much engagement as the Iranian animations. Even if the US had followed the same LEGO-style animations approach, it is doubtful that it would have been as successful. In other words, AI may amplify a narrative, but it cannot manufacture credibility where audiences are unwilling to accept it.
The long-term implications of AI animations are quite troubling. The characters don’t need to be LEGO-themed, but can be adapted to suit different audiences based on what they know, like or are familiar with. For example, political parties can use them against opponents during election campaigns. More concerning, terrorists and other violent groups can utilise them for propaganda and recruitment. Their long-term effects on democratic politics, public trust and information integrity are also unclear. What is becoming increasingly clear is that the traditional model of shaping public opinion through television networks, newspaper headlines and official spokesmen is steadily losing its dominance.
The Iranian experience indicates that the future of information warfare may not be determined by the biggest broadcasting infrastructure, but by the ability to create emotionally charged stories in a unique style, using decentralised digital networks. Television stations can be destroyed by airstrikes, and social media accounts can be suspended, but neither is enough to stop a communication model that can quickly regenerate itself without a physical centralised point of failure.
The challenge for governments is no longer just how to deal with AI-generated content, but how to tackle decentralised digital media ecosystems that regenerate faster than they can be suppressed.
The writer is a research assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. He can be reached at: [email protected]
