A Polish journalist, Andrzej Gajcy, reports that PiS-affiliated figures Anna Plakwicz and Piotr Matczuk are tied to a controversial PiS site that referenced Auschwitz imagery. Michał Moskal, who directs the PiS Presidential Office, responded to the claims via social media, urging caution in interpreting the report.
The site, Recht en Recht, faced sharp criticism for displaying images from the Auschwitz-Birkenau extermination camp. Observers say the project did not appear by chance; rather, it seems to have been organized by senior members of the ruling party who coordinated the work with external public relations specialists and online reputation firms. Sources within the media landscape suggest that additional sites of a similar nature might be planned as part of a broader information operation.
According to the referenced accounts, the individuals named in the Onet article, including Anna Plakwicz and Piotr Matczuk, were reportedly involved in coordinating flare-ups and public messaging around the site. The involvement of PR professionals in shaping the narrative has drawn attention and sparked discussions about the boundaries of political communication and media ethics.
Moskal’s response
Michał Moskal rejected Onet’s claims on Twitter, stating that the allegations were unfounded and that the production of the video materials credited to those individuals was not connected to them in any way.
In a later statement, a spokesperson for the PiS leadership asserted that the report placed by the publication misrepresented the roles of those named and misunderstood the origin of the material. The comments underscored a broader debate about misinformation, media scrutiny, and the responsibilities of political actors in managing information campaigns.
Observers noted that the discussion took on a polemical tone, with some arguing that the coverage aimed to discredit party members while others warned about the risks of sensational reporting. The dispute highlighted how political factions navigate media environments, especially when allegations surface about the use of provocative imagery to gain attention.
– The exchange continued across social platforms, with supporters and critics alike weighing in on the implications for public discourse. The conversation raised questions about the accountability of media outlets and the transparency of sources involved in publishing sensitive content.
tkwl/Onet/Twitter
READ ALSO:
— PiS comments on controversial remarks: the online debate intensifies. Critics push back, claiming double standards in political rhetoric.
— A defender argues that the narrative surrounding the PiS site reflects broader tensions in political communication and the need for clearer media ethics in coverage of sensitive historical topics.
Source: wPolityce