Even if something so simple as that message finds its way into a future story, that will be enough
In a series of closed-door gatherings stretching from Los Angeles to Brussels to Paris, NATO has been meeting quietly with screenwriters, directors, and producers — inviting the architects of popular imagination into conversations about European security. The initiative, with a London session still ahead, raises one of the oldest questions in the relationship between power and art: where does education end and persuasion begin. That three entertainment projects are already said to have emerged from these meetings suggests the alliance is not merely informing storytellers, but hoping to become part of the stories themselves.
- NATO has convened at least three secret briefings with film and television professionals, operating under confidentiality rules that shield attendees while allowing the alliance's framing of global security to circulate freely.
- Critics within the creative community are sounding alarms, with award-winning screenwriter Alan O'Gorman calling the initiative outright propaganda and warning that countries like Ireland are being softened toward NATO through coordinated media and government messaging.
- A deeper anxiety runs beneath the outrage: that writers granted access to semi-classified briefings may mistake authority for truth, losing the critical distance that gives their work its integrity.
- Three development projects reportedly already inspired by these meetings suggest the strategy is producing results before the London session has even taken place.
- NATO insists the meetings respond to industry interest rather than drive it, but a think-tank report explicitly urging governments to use cultural figures as instruments of defense messaging complicates that claim.
- The Writers' Guild of Great Britain has defended passing along the invitation while distancing itself from endorsement — a careful posture that itself reflects the unresolved tension at the heart of the story.
NATO has been quietly convening closed-door meetings with screenwriters, directors, and producers in Los Angeles, Brussels, and Paris, with a London session planned next month involving members of the Writers' Guild of Great Britain. The stated subject is the evolving security situation in Europe, and all sessions operate under Chatham House rules — attendees may share what they learn, but not who said it.
The initiative has already drawn fire. Documents reviewed by the Guardian include a WGGB email suggesting three separate entertainment projects are now in development that were inspired, at least in part, by these conversations. Alliance officials noted that even if NATO's message about cooperation "finds its way into a future story, that will be enough" — a line that critics say reveals the true purpose of the exercise.
Screenwriter Alan O'Gorman, fresh from winning best film at the 2026 Irish Film & Television Awards, called the effort "outrageous" and "clearly propaganda," situating it within a broader campaign to warm public opinion in historically non-aligned countries like Ireland toward NATO membership and defense spending. Other invited writers, he said, felt their craft was being recruited into military service.
Producer and screenwriter Faisal A Qureshi raised a subtler concern: that the seduction of insider access — the feeling of being trusted with sensitive information — could quietly erode a writer's critical instincts. "They've just been given something that has the veneer of truth given to it by an authority that rarely deals with the public," he said.
The current meetings appear to build on a 2024 template in which eight screenwriters, including veterans of Friends and Law and Order, were brought to NATO headquarters to meet then-secretary general Jens Stoltenberg. A recent report from the Centre for European Reform made the strategic logic explicit, urging governments to engage cultural figures specifically to build public support for defense investment.
NATO frames the sessions as a response to industry curiosity rather than an outreach campaign. The Writers' Guild says it passed along the invitation without endorsement, trusting its members to think for themselves. But the documented unease among those invited — and the projects already taking shape — suggests the line between dialogue and influence operation may be harder to hold than either institution is willing to admit.
NATO has been holding closed-door meetings with screenwriters, directors, and producers across Europe and the US, according to documents reviewed by the Guardian. The alliance has already convened gatherings in Los Angeles, Brussels, and Paris, with another scheduled for London next month where it plans to meet with members of the Writers' Guild of Great Britain. The stated topic is the "evolving security situation in Europe and beyond," and the meetings operate under Chatham House rules, meaning attendees can share information but identities remain confidential.
The initiative has triggered sharp criticism from some in the creative community who see it as a coordinated effort to embed NATO messaging into entertainment. A WGGB email obtained by the Guardian suggests the meetings have already borne fruit: three separate projects are reportedly in development that were "inspired, at least in part" by these conversations. The email from organizers noted that even if NATO's core message about cooperation and alliance-building "finds its way into a future story, that will be enough." James Appathurai, NATO's deputy assistant secretary general for hybrid, cyber and new technology, is expected to attend the London session alongside other alliance officials.
Screenwriter Alan O'Gorman, who won best film at the 2026 Irish Film & Television Awards for his work on Christy, called the initiative "outrageous" and "clearly propaganda." He objected to what he saw as NATO attempting to shape entertainment narratives in its favor, particularly in a moment when he believes the alliance is using media and government channels to build support in countries like Ireland that have historically remained outside its structure. "I see it in an Irish context, where there's been a push through some of the media and government to present NATO in a positive light," he said. O'Gorman reported that other screenwriters invited to the meeting felt offended at the prospect of their art being weaponized to support military interests.
Faisal A Qureshi, a screenwriter and producer with more than two decades in the industry, initially planned to attend out of curiosity but withdrew due to scheduling conflicts. He articulated a deeper concern: that creatives invited into these briefings risk being seduced by access to classified or semi-classified information, developing a false sense of insider knowledge that could compromise their critical judgment. "They've just been given something that has the veneer of truth given to it by an authority that rarely deals with the public," Qureshi said, questioning whether writers would sufficiently challenge the narratives presented to them in such settings.
The meetings are not entirely new. In 2024, eight screenwriters—including writers from Friends and Law and Order—were invited to NATO headquarters in Brussels by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where they met then-general secretary Jens Stoltenberg. That initiative appears to have been the template for the current series. NATO's own statement framed the meetings as responsive to interest from the entertainment industry itself, describing them as "a series of sessions for writers of fiction" that include "engagement with representatives of NATO, civil society and the thinktank community."
The broader context for these meetings is a deliberate push by NATO supporters to deepen ties with cultural institutions. Earlier this year, the Centre for European Reform released a report urging governments to engage with cultural leaders, including screenwriters and producers, specifically to build public backing for increased defense spending and to "better tell the story of why these investments in defence are needed." The report frames cultural engagement as a strategic tool for shaping public opinion on military and security matters.
The Writers' Guild of Great Britain defended its role in passing along the invitation, stating that it regularly receives requests from third parties about events of potential professional interest and that the invitation represented no endorsement. The guild emphasized that its members are "free thinkers" capable of deciding for themselves what to take from such sessions. Yet the very existence of the meetings—and the documented concern among invitees—suggests a tension between NATO's interest in shaping narratives and the creative community's anxiety about being enlisted in that project. What happens in London next month will likely clarify whether these conversations represent genuine dialogue or a more calculated effort to influence the stories that millions of people watch.
Citações Notáveis
I thought it was tone deaf and crazy to present this as some sort of positive opportunity. A lot of people have friends and family from countries that are not in NATO, that have suffered under wars that NATO has joined and propagated.— Alan O'Gorman, screenwriter
The risk for any creative who dips into this unattributable world of intelligence or military briefings is that they can get seduced into thinking they now have some secret knowledge.— Faisal A Qureshi, screenwriter and producer
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why would NATO care what gets written into a TV show or film?
Because stories shape how people understand the world. If audiences see NATO portrayed as necessary and reasonable in their entertainment, that shifts public opinion on defense spending and military involvement without anyone realizing they're being persuaded.
But screenwriters aren't politicians. They're artists. Why would they take orders from a military alliance?
They wouldn't take orders. That's the subtlety. NATO isn't asking them to write propaganda. It's giving them access, information, a sense of being inside something important. The hope is that when they sit down to write, some of that perspective naturally bleeds into the work.
And the screenwriters who are upset—what's their actual concern?
That they're being used. That NATO is trying to manufacture consent by making entertainment serve a political purpose. Some of them come from countries that have suffered from NATO interventions, or they have family in non-NATO nations. They see this as soft power dressed up as conversation.
Is there evidence it's working? That these meetings actually change what gets written?
The email mentions three projects already in development inspired by the conversations. But we don't know what those projects are or how directly NATO influenced them. That's part of what makes this unsettling—it's opaque.
What would a screenwriter actually gain from attending?
Information, access, a sense of being trusted with something important. But as one producer pointed out, that can be dangerous. You get briefed by people with authority, told things that sound true, and you might not interrogate it the way you would information from other sources.
So this is about trust and authority?
Exactly. NATO has credibility that a random source doesn't. When an official tells you something in a closed room, it carries weight. The risk is that you internalize it without questioning it, and then it shapes the stories you tell to millions of people.