A roundtable titled “Covering Social Cohesion – Strengthening the Capacities of Ukrainian Media” brought together Ukrainian and international journalists, sociologists, civil society leaders, and human rights defenders to discuss challenges and dilemmas facing local media in crisis conditions. Can media contribute to social cohesion, or should they simply document the problems communities face?
How do journalists from regional and hyperlocal media understand social cohesion? Can media strengthen community cohesion, or should they only document challenges communities encounter? What problems prevent newsrooms from working more professionally, especially during wartime, and better meeting audience needs? The discussion was based on research findings about what Ukrainian editors and journalists know about social cohesion and how they view their role in strengthening it in communities. This research was conducted by the NGO “Promotion of Intercultural Cooperation” (PIC) commissioned by IRMI in partnership with the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine as part of the project “Covering Social Cohesion – Strengthening the Capacities of Ukrainian Media” with support from UNESCO and Japan. Researchers Tetiana Kryvosheia, Oleksandra Deineko, and Viktoriia Balasanian presented the results.
Key Research Findings
The research, which included interviews with media experts, focus groups with journalists and civil society representatives, and a survey of 262 journalists from different regions of Ukraine, revealed how Ukrainian media professionals perceive social cohesion and their role in shaping it.
– Understanding the concept: Journalists define social cohesion primarily as mutual assistance (86.6%), having common goals (85%), willingness to overcome difficulties together (83.8%), and active civic participation.
– Perception of their own role: Most respondents (70.9%) believe they should actively contribute to strengthening social cohesion during wartime, with another 22.8% partially agreeing. However, more than a third (35.8%) couldn’t clearly assess media’s impact on social cohesion in Ukraine, indicating limited reflection on this topic in the journalistic community.
– Impact of local and national media: 67.9% believe that local media contribute to strengthening cohesion in communities, while only 22.4% think national media strengthen societal cohesion.
– Content that unites: Journalists identified key topics that strengthen community bonds: stories about mutual assistance during crises (91%), local volunteers and defenders (91%), veteran integration (89%), and community development (81%).
– Content that divides: The most challenging topics that risk weakening cohesion include corruption, mobilization, luxury lifestyles during wartime, religious conflicts, and regional differences.
– Professional challenges: Psychological exhaustion (89.2%), financial instability (83.2%), and staff shortages (79.1%) limit media’s ability to effectively promote social cohesion.
“Comparing our results with previous audience research shows similar views on what strengthens and weakens cohesion in communities,” noted Oleksandra Deineko. “This unity of opinion is manifested primarily in topics whose coverage can help strengthen cohesion at the local level. These studies serve as a roadmap for regional newsrooms seeking to improve communication with their audiences and become a bridge connecting government and civil society.”
Panel Discussions and Expert Perspectives
During the roundtable, several panel discussions took place where journalists and experts shared their views and assessments of the situation.
On Social Cohesion During War
Experts including Hanna Krasnostup from the Ministry of Culture and Strategic Communications, Alyona Horova from the Institute for Peace and Understanding, and journalists Oleh Dereniuha (MykVisti, Mykolaiv) and Viktoriia Shatylo (Thebuchacity, Bucha) discussed practical aspects of maintaining community connections during war. They explored how local media find ways to unite communities despite working in extreme conditions.
On Society and Law During and After War
Oleksandr Pavlychenko from the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, Alyona Lunyova from the ZMINA Human Rights Center, and Yurii Usmanov from the Center for Research on Legal Issues of Transitional Justice discussed the legal framework affecting media operations during war, examining how journalists balance freedom of expression with security considerations during conflict.
On Community-Oriented Media
Journalists Tetiana Luchynska (“Mayak,” Bohodukhiv), Maryna Osipova (“Visnyk Ch,” Chernihiv), Nazarii Vivcharyk (“Procherk,” Cherkasy), and Yuliia Vynokur (TV-4, Ternopil) shared their experiences working with communities, discussing how their understanding of local needs shapes their approach to strengthening social cohesion.
On International Experience
Correspondents Daniel McLaughlin (The Irish Times), Joanna Kakissis (National Public Radio, USA), and Brendan Hoffman (The New York Times) provided valuable international context, explaining how journalists in other conflict zones approach covering social cohesion and offering insights into Ukraine’s unique challenges and opportunities.
Tetiana Kryvosheia, lead researcher from PIC:
“The Ukrainian media sphere is undergoing massive transformations under the pressure of war, economic instability, and information threats. Local and hyperlocal media remain closest to their communities and maintain high levels of trust, but is this enough for their viability? Our research results show that contemporary challenges for regional media extend far beyond financial instability. Journalists face staff shortages, high levels of professional burnout, and limited access to official information. At the same time, they need new knowledge: how to work in digital transformation conditions, how to cover sensitive topics, and how to balance truth with social responsibility.”
Angelina Soldatenko, Head of IRMI:
“This is our second study on social cohesion commissioned by IRMI – the first was in partnership with Fondation Hirondelle. At that time, we studied the perception of social cohesion in 23 Ukrainian communities, mostly frontline ones. Today, lively discussion centered on comparing these two studies – the public demand for quality information on one hand, and journalists’ view of their role and capabilities in covering social cohesion on the other. Local media undoubtedly were and remain an important source of information needed by people during war, a platform for communication, and for uniting communities forcibly separated by evacuation. The level of trust in them remains quite high.”
Frontline Media and Divided Communities
The key panel “Frontline Media and Communities Divided by War,” moderated by Liubov Rakovytsia, head of the Donbas Media Forum organizing committee and head of NGO “DII-Ukraine,” featured journalists from frontline regions and communities divided by war. Svitlana Zalizetska (RIA Pivden, Melitopol), Oleksii Pasiuha (Vorskla, Velyka Pysarivka), Svitlana Karpenko (Trudova Slava, Orikhiv), and Maksym Zabielia (Ridne Misto, Myrnograd) shared their experiences working in communities divided by occupation or under constant threat. The discussion highlighted the unique challenges journalists face in frontline regions, including maintaining communication with dispersed audiences, covering the sensitive topic of collaboration, and finding ways to unite communities physically divided by war.
During a brainstorming session, participants developed strategies for covering sensitive issues that media often avoid.
Journalists Speak
Oleksandra Shylova (PTV, Poltava):
“These days were so valuable for me! I think we write and film too little about displaced people in communities. Not about humanitarian aid that can be obtained somewhere, but about how they should preserve their identity, and how we should help them do that.”
Olena Astrakhovych (TRK GRAD, Odesa):
“The need to cover opposing views and positions will grow over time. For example, regarding people in occupied territories, collaborators, and similar issues. I’m grateful to our foreign colleagues and experts for their experience. Also, I think by covering the work of various civil society organizations, we can give them the opportunity to unite projects and efforts.”
Svitlana Karpenko (Trudova Slava, Orikhiv):
“We media from the south and east don’t consider ourselves heroes. We simply stay with our communities, do our duty – we can’t do otherwise. And we’ve never expected support from the state. All we want is for it to create conditions that would allow us to work normally. This includes Ukrposhta and taxation. I think we’ll eventually reach something through joint efforts.”
Maksym Zabielia (Ridne Misto, Myrnograd):
“Thanks to these two thorough studies, we’ve been able to explore the topic of social cohesion more deeply. How exactly do we cover community problems? How much attention do we give them? What different perspectives should we perhaps bring to this? How can we find new opportunities to unite communities, especially for those occupied or divided by the frontline? I thank colleagues for the unity I feel here, for the words of support. You realize you’re not fighting alone.”
Svitlana Zalizetska (RIA Pivden, Melitopol):
“The topic of social cohesion is very relevant for us. It turns out that our audience has dispersed. What do people think and say about those who stayed and those who left? That’s why yesterday’s discussion about collaboration, in which I also participated, was very valuable. Today as well – these are topics that unite and divide communities. There was a situation where we didn’t intend to intervene in the story of displaced people, we were just following a story, but we ended up raising the issue and influencing the fate of elderly people. I’d like to continue this story as part of this project, because the community is already following the lives of this displaced couple. But will the solution to this problem remain isolated, or will the authorities open a geriatric department in general?”
Maryna Osypova (Visnyk Ch, Chernihiv):
“We’ve always written on social cohesion topics and will certainly continue to do so. Throughout this major project, I want to understand for myself how to cover topics that we all frankly avoid right now. In particular, religion, LGBTQ, and others. We don’t understand how to make these unifying, so we don’t write about them. So my goal is to understand this aspect.”
Nataliia Popovych (Horodok TV and Radio Press Center, Horodok, Khmelnytskyi region):
“Every time during IRMI trainings, we undergo a certain transformation. General ideas narrow down to specific themes, then to concrete details. Also, during the training, you communicate with colleagues and begin to notice things you didn’t see before, though they were right under your feet. These two days, listening to colleagues, I felt proud of them. They show what quality journalism can be, especially in this difficult time. IRMI is involved in many ways – supporting some with knowledge, preserving newsrooms elsewhere. This has given us the opportunity to demonstrate how important local journalism is.”
The Ukrainian version of the research report is available for download.
The project was developed and is being implemented by the NGO “Institute for Regional Media and Information” in partnership with UNESCO and with the support of Japan. The program is part of UNESCO’s broader efforts to support the safety of journalists and freedom of speech in Ukraine. Our partners in the project are the National Union of Journalists of Ukraine (NUJU) and the NGO “Promotion of Intercultural Cooperation.”
