Lessons from self-censorship
Independent journalism in Ukraine in the third year of the invasion
Recently, I often return to the memories of the first days of the full-scale invasion, recalling what actions and thoughts prevailed when it seemed that the whole world was collapsing in front of us. I remember very well how at the first emergency meeting of the Zaborona editorial board, where I served as editor-in-chief at that time, several people in the team said that journalism no longer made sense and that we should go help the army.
Photo credit: Ukrinform.
The challenge we, journalists in Ukraine, faced was so great and immense that it was hard to believe that we could cope with it and remain the same as before. I remember writing in the editorial chat: we are all starting a new life now.
Soon after, we learned that our colleague, photographer Max Levin, was killed near Kyiv while working on a report. He was shot by a Russian soldier at close range, wearing a helmet and bulletproof vest with the inscription "PRESS". On the same day, American journalist Brent Renaud was killed in another part of the Kyiv region, filming a movie about the evacuation of Irpin residents. The next day, local FOX News producer Sasha Kuvshynova and her colleague Pierre Zakrzewski were killed in the same area. These were only the first 2 weeks of the war.
Then many realized that in times of war, being a journalist is as important as being a soldier or a firefighter. That media is a critical infrastructure because accurate, truthful information can help people survive, while disinformation or fake news can kill. The Russians also understood this. That's why it became more dangerous to be a journalist during the war than ever before. Press freedom has become one of the key military targets.
Pierre Zakrzewski few days before he was killed near Kyiv, in March 2022.
Did the top Ukraine officials realize this?
Hardly. In the very first days of the full-scale invasion, the Presidential Office of Ukraine, together with the National Security and Defense Council and the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy, launched the United News marathon, which was intended to inform Ukrainians about everything that was happening in the country from the official position. Initially, everyone benefited from this unification: every citizen followed the unfolding of events and understood how the government and the Armed Forces responded to the challenges. However, representatives of TV channels opposed to the government were not included in the marathon, and it soon became clear that one should not expect alternative information on this platform.
But there were few alternatives on other platforms as well: government agencies managed to establish a culture of "informational silence" regarding socially important information. I wrote about this in my column "Has the state of freedom of speech in Ukraine deteriorated during the full-scale invasion?" one year ago on Zaborona. This culture still exists in some form.
Back in March 2023, the then-Minister of Culture and Information Policy Oleksandr Tkachenko, who was also the main curator of the United News marathon, openly spoke about the possibility of introducing military censors in newsrooms. But he was not alone in his desire to control the Ukrainian media. Other statesmen, political observers, and public intellectuals also said that military censorship was needed. For example, Vitaliy Portnikov said during the National Media Talk conference on October 12, 2023, that "the main thing in a state that is fighting for its future during the war is effective military censorship, which does not allow the media and citizens to talk about what is happening in the army and in the war zone." However, he continued this thesis by criticizing the same United News marathon, which has become an instrument of political censorship instead of "effective military censorship."
Meanwhile, the situation with press freedom was only getting worse. In February 2024, it became known that the SBU's National Security Department had been spying on investigative journalists from Bigus.Info and leaked the surveillance video to the public. The journalists quickly discovered who was watching them. It turned out to be the same SBU officers who conducted informal interrogations with Ukrainian journalists in 2023.
It was this department that tried to establish control over Ukrainian and foreign media workers in exchange for military accreditation, which provides access to work in the war zone. Some employees of that department openly tried to recruit or intimidate journalists. This became known internationally: the CPJ Committee to Protect Journalists released a report on the practice of informal interrogations, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau drew attention to the problem with freedom of speech and access to the war zone during a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv. But the Presidential Office did not react to this until the situation with Bigus.Info happened. After that, it became known that some SBU officers involved in the surveillance had been dismissed from their positions in the department. However, not all of them. But the systemic problem remained in place.
Revenues from this publication go to the 2402 Foundation’s campaign to purchase First Aid Kits for the war reporters
Soon after, another event occurred that speaks to the systemic nature of the problem with independent journalism. On April 1, in Kyiv, journalist Yevhen Shulhat of Slidstvo.Info was handed a summons after he had investigated the enrichment of Ilya Vityuk, head of the SBU's cybersecurity department. Journalists believe that the special service tried to intimidate the newsroom so that they would not publish the investigation. However, the journalists didn’t freak out and published everything they had gathered during the investigation and filed a complaint with law enforcement agencies about the SBU's actions.
Courtesy: CPJ
At a journalistic conference in Bucha in May 2024, there was a lot of discussion about the new challenges facing the media in the third year of a full-scale war. At that time, Mykhailo Tkach, an investigator at theUkrayinska Pravda, voiced what most journalists shared at the beginning of the full-scale war: "At the beginning of the war, we said that we would investigate after the victory. But then we realized that there will be no victory if we don't beat them up."
Tkach has long been one of those journalists who have been hitting corrupt officials and pro-Russian collaborators with their investigations - but the cost of such work has increased many times over during the invasion. Ukrayinska Pravda, and especially Tkach and its editor-in-chief Sevgil Musayeva, are regularly intimidated by the subjects of their stories and anonymous "fans." To say that this creates an unhealthy atmosphere of survival is an understatement.
"The internal enemy is winning," Mykhailo Tkach said in Bucha. - "It must be defeated, and then it will be possible to defeat the external enemy.
In late May, we learned that the new leadership of the state agency Ukrinform, judging by the investigation by Ukrayinska Pravda and the materials that followed, received "temnyks", a description of the undesirable topics and speakers, from the Presidential Office of Ukraine, and passed it down to journalists. The temnyks format was actively used during the time of President Viktor Yanukovych before 2014, and its key goal was to control narratives so that all information that went public would go through a certain "filter." This was part of censorship. The return of this practice suggests that people working in media management have a tolerance for wartime power and censorship, which, in my opinion, is also a consequence of self-censorship.
Democracy is in decline all over the world. Press freedom is under constant attack. If independent journalism falls, democracy will fall with it. The safety of journalists is a matter of survival for a society. Therefore, by restricting freedom of speech, we reduce the chances of survival. This is the arithmetic now.
From 2022 to 2024, 17 journalists were killed by the Russian army while performing their duties. Dozens more were injured. Hundreds of journalists have joined the Armed Forces or are currently receiving calls. Up to 30 Ukrainian journalists are in Russian captivity. This all means that the number of experienced journalists is getting smaller, while there is more and more work to do.
According to a recent survey of journalists conducted by the Ilko Kucheriva Democratic Initiatives Foundation at the request of the ZMINA Human Rights Center, 95% of Ukrainian journalists believe that censorship exists in the Ukrainian media. The journalists who admitted the existence of censorship most often stated that it is carried out by various state or local authorities, as well as media owners. Self-censorship by journalists came in third. Such figures indicate not only the level of the problem but also that the problem has finally begun to be recognized.
If at the beginning of the invasion, many believed that journalism no longer made sense, it is becoming increasingly clear that it makes sense even more than before.
Please fill out the survey to help this publication become better
The WarzoneUA newsletter was created without any outside funding; it is an independent publication by the journalist Katerina Sergatskova.
In the comments, you may let me know what in this newsletter resonates with you and what you would like to read about in the future. Only paid subscribers have this option. Recommend this publication to your friends and colleagues if you like it.
Stay tuned,
Katerina Sergatskova