Ukraine

Media Influence Matrix Country Profile

Ukraine’s media and information ecosystem has undergone profound transformation over the past decade. A system once defined by intense oligarchic competition in national television and an uneven print and digital landscape has been reshaped by the country’s struggle against Russian aggression, the acceleration of regulatory reform, and shifting audience behavior. The full-scale invasion in 2022 forced media institutions, regulators, and journalists into an emergency environment, altering longstanding ownership patterns, funding structures, and distribution networks. Oligarchic influence over major broadcasters has weakened considerably, while the state has introduced wartime broadcasting arrangements, strengthened public service media, and intensified cooperation with European institutions. At the same time, digital platforms have become indispensable sources of news and information, making Ukraine’s public sphere both resilient and deeply vulnerable to manipulation.

Regulation and Policy Influence

Ukraine’s regulatory system has long been more institutionally developed than those of many neighboring states, but the war has placed extraordinary strain on its structures. The National Council of Television and Radio Broadcasting remains the central regulatory authority for audiovisual media, overseeing licensing and compliance, while the State Committee for Television and Radio Broadcasting and several self-regulatory bodies contribute to rulemaking and professional standards. Over the past several years, these institutions have been tasked with navigating a dramatically altered environment shaped by martial law, information blackouts in frontline regions, and the strategic imperative to counter Russian propaganda.

The adoption of the new Law “On Media”, designed to harmonize domestic legislation with EU requirements, marks a major milestone. The law modernizes definitions of online media, strengthens regulatory oversight of audiovisual services, and introduces clearer rules regarding ownership transparency and journalistic accountability. Implementation, however, is complicated by wartime conditions, which constrain institutional independence and require balancing media freedom with national security imperatives.

Public service media reforms have gained urgency. The national public broadcaster, Suspilne (UA:PBC), has assumed a critical role during wartime, offering trusted information and maintaining editorial independence under extreme pressure. Despite this progress, the broadcaster remains structurally vulnerable, relying on state funding and project-based support while facing constant demands for expanded wartime communication duties.

The wartime national television “telethon”, a coordinated broadcasting effort across multiple major TV groups, has temporarily reshaped the entire media system. It ensures unified emergency information, but raises questions about long-term plurality, editorial autonomy, and the future of the commercial TV market once wartime arrangements are lifted.

Ukraine’s regulatory system is thus evolving along two axes: the strengthening of legal frameworks aligned with European standards, and the parallel introduction of war-driven measures that centralize information flows and elevate security considerations. Maintaining a balance between these pressures will be central to the future of the country’s media governance.

See Ukraine in State Media Monitor.

Provenance and Funding

Before the full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s media landscape was dominated by four national TV groups linked to powerful oligarchs. The legacy MIM funding report documented the central role of these conglomerates, showing how ownership structures reflected political alliances and business interests. Since 2022, however, this configuration has changed dramatically. A combination of sanctions, asset freezes, political reforms, and wartime pressures has weakened the oligarchs’ hold on the media system. In the most significant shift, Rinat Akhmetov closed his Media Group Ukraine, relinquishing one of the country’s most influential television portfolios. Other oligarchs, including Ihor Kolomoisky and Dmytro Firtash, have lost substantial influence due to legal constraints, sanctions, or forced divestment of media holdings.

The economics of the media sector have also been transformed by the war. Advertising revenues collapsed in the early months of the invasion, and although some segments have stabilized, the market remains unpredictable. Broadcasters have shifted toward diversified business strategies that incorporate digital production, branded content, and platform monetization. At the same time, many independent outlets, particularly regional media, face existential financial challenges, operating with minimal staff and relying on grants, donor support, or reader contributions.

Philanthropic and donor funding has become a lifeline for public interest journalism. Grants from international media-support organizations sustain investigative reporting, fact-checking initiatives, and local journalism projects that would otherwise be financially unsustainable. This increasing dependence on donors has brought new forms of stability but also introduced uncertainty about long-term sustainability.

Public service media occupies a complex position. Suspilne has expanded its operations and audience share during the war, benefiting from increased public trust, but it remains heavily dependent on state funding and financial support from international partners. Ensuring the broadcaster’s independence and viability will be central to the future of Ukraine’s media system.

Overall, Ukraine’s funding landscape has moved from a model shaped overwhelmingly by oligarchic financial power toward a more fragmented environment defined by donor support, digital monetization, and persistent economic fragility. The long-term consequences of this transition remain uncertain.

See Legacy MIM report: https://journalismresearch.org/2021/03/media-influence-matrix-ukraine-funding-journalism/

Technology, Platforms and the Information Environment

Ukraine’s technological and information environment has been deeply influenced by rapid digitization and the pressures of wartime communication. Even before 2022, Ukraine exhibited strong digital connectivity and some of the most affordable broadband prices globally, although significant urban–rural disparities persisted. Mobile internet usage has increased steadily, supported by competitive telecommunications operators, including Kyivstar, Vodafone, Lifecell, and Ukrtelecom, each contributing to high mobile penetration and growing data consumption.

Digital platforms have become the dominant channels for news distribution. Telegram, Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Google Search shape information flows on a daily basis. Telegram occupies a particularly influential role during the war, serving simultaneously as a source of rapid updates, a tool for emergency coordination, and a conduit for misinformation and anonymous influence operations. The importance of platform-mediated communication has grown as television infrastructure has been damaged, local media have lost capacity, and audiences rely increasingly on digital sources.

The platform environment has amplified both resilience and vulnerability. Ukrainian users have leveraged social media for documentation, civic mobilization, and global advocacy, while the same networks have been exploited for disinformation campaigns, including efforts by Russian state actors and other malign networks. This dual role has pushed platform governance, content moderation, and algorithmic transparency to the center of public debate.

AI adoption is progressing unevenly. Larger newsrooms have begun experimenting with automation, multilingual content workflows, and AI-assisted verification tools, while smaller outlets face resource constraints that limit technological uptake. National policy discussions on digital resilience, AI governance, and information integrity have accelerated, but comprehensive frameworks remain under development.

Despite the challenges, Ukraine’s digital public sphere remains remarkably active and adaptive, sustained by strong civil society engagement and innovative journalistic practices, even as it is tested by the pressures of war and the dominance of global platforms.

See Legacy MIM report on technology and information environment: https://journalismresearch.org/2021/12/media-influence-matrix-ukraine-technology-public-sphere-and-journalism/

Key Companies and Institutions

  • Suspilne (UA:PBC) — the national public broadcaster, central to wartime information provision and trusted journalism.
  • StarLight Media — major television and digital content group reshaped by the war’s economic pressures.
  • 1+1 Media — influential broadcaster whose ownership structure has changed under new legal and political constraints.
  • Inter Media Group — formerly one of the largest TV groups, now weakened by sanctions and the loss of oligarch support.
  • Kyivstar, Vodafone, Lifecell, Ukrtelecom — major telecom operators ensuring connectivity and shaping access to digital information.
  • Leading digital-born outlets, including investigative and regional newsrooms, which play a critical role despite significant financial and security challenges.