Media portrayals of the Russo-Ukrainian war have differed widely between Ukrainian, Western and Russian media. Russian, Ukrainian, and Western media have all, to various degrees, been accused of propagandizing, spreading disinformation, and of waging an information war.
While Russian and Ukrainian media narratives of the ongoing conflict between the two countries differ considerably, due in part to the extent of government control, their media ecosystems are both dominated by the reliance of much of their populations on television for much of their news. According to Levada Centre, two-thirds of Russians relied on state television for their news in 2021.The Russia-Ukraine information war: How propaganda is being used in two very different ways, Ashleigh Stewart. Global News 29 March 2022 A Research & Branding Group February 2021 poll found that for the first time Ukrainians preferred the Internet as their primary news source instead of television (51% preferred the Internet and 41% TV).
Russian channels have repeatedly used misleading images, false narratives, misrepresentation, suppression, and fabricated news stories, such as 2014's fictional child's crucifixion and 2015's fictional death of a 10-year-old in a shelling. The BBC has reported that Russian state television "appears to employ techniques of psychological conditioning designed to excite extreme emotions of aggression and hatred in the viewer", which, according to The Guardian, is part of a coordinated "informational-psychological war operation".
A regular theme in the Russian media has been that the Ukrainian army, which has many Russian-speaking members, commits "genocide" against Russian speakers who strongly desire Russia to "protect" them from Kyiv. Yet a Gallup poll showed that fewer than 8% of the residents of eastern Ukraine "definitely" wanted Russian protection. They believed Russia's denials of involvement in the Crimean crisis, until Vladimir Putin boasted about the key role of Russian soldiers, and continue denying its involvement in the war in the Donbas region of Ukraine, despite evidence that Russia has regularly shelled across the border.
Media in Russia Russian state media
Media freedom in Russia is highly restricted, and Russian state media presents the official viewpoint of the Russian government.
The BBC has reported that the Russian state media has a "tendency to focus on events in Ukraine to the almost complete exclusion of problems at home." In May 2015, the Slovak monitoring group MEMO 98, Internews Ukraine, and the Yerevan Press Club of Armenia completed a report on Russian TV channels for the Civil Society Forum of the Eastern Partnership. MEMO 98's Rasťo Kužel observed that Russian media "diverted attention from important domestic issues and scared the population with the possibility of a war and the need for Russia to protect itself against an external enemy." Russian state media frequently reported stories that were completely invented, or distorted statements by Ukrainian and Western politicians. News presented as actual events is frequently hearsay, from anonymous blogs, intentionally staged videos, and selectively quoted materials, omitting anything critical of Russia. Accusations of Russophobia (anti-Russian sentiment) are often levied at critics. Writing for , Dmitry Bykov said "the language of today's propaganda has become full of artificial connections. If you're against Russia's covert war in Ukraine then you must be for gluttony, against the motherland, and for soulless American fast food, only protesting against war because you want foie gras." In February 2015, Irina Prokhorova, leader of the opposition party Civic Platform, commented that nationalism and "us vs. them" thinking had grown among Russian media, saying: "If I participate in some talk on television, they start accusing immediately, 'you're not patriotic, you're not a true citizen." Vladislav Inozemtsev wrote "The rhetoric of aggression and arguments justifying the use of force have become part of Russia's standard informational milieu." Maria Alekhina from Pussy Riot also criticized the Russian media's reporting. Edward Lucas and Peter Pomerantsev noted that Russia's portrayal borrowed from Soviet narratives and terminology. "By telling Russians that, as in 1941–1945, they are fighting fascists, the Kremlin aims both to galvanize its own population but also to delegitimize any dissenters: to speak against the war is to betray Russia itself." Accusations of "provocation" appeared frequently in Russian discourse, turning "the dynamics of the conflict ... upside down: the attacker becomes the victim and the victim is accused of starting the conflict." Rossiya Segodnya's state-sponsored disinformation website claimed that Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko had links to Lucifer. The story was later retracted by the original website.
Some Russian media have promoted anti-western and pro-war views: Rossiya 2 aired a short simulation of a Topol-M rocket hitting London while channel 5 simulated a conventional invasion of Warsaw, Berlin and the Baltic states. The Russian media has employed "Soviet language", referring to "traitors", "fascists", and "fifth columns".
Maksim Trudolyubov, writing in Vedomosti, said "Today's state-run media in Russia is a continuation of the KGB but much smarter than previous incarnations. They use modern tools, misinformation, confusion, and conflicting signals to prevent any collective responses and actions of citizens." In 2016 Dmitry Kiselyov admitted using fake documents in his program.
Euromaidan State Russian media consistently portray the fighting in Ukraine as instigated by successive Ukrainian governments following the 2014 ouster of Viktor Yanukovych, the fourth president of Ukraine, during the pro-European Euromaidan protest movement. Euromaidan, described as controlled by "ultranationalist", "fascist", "neo-Nazi", and "anti-Semitic" elements, and the Right Sector, described as a "far-right nationalist group" commonly featured in Russian media. The revolution has been depicted as a violent "coup d'etat" fomented by the West to overthrow the elected government of Ukraine. At the same time, reporting on a Euromaidan protest attended by hundreds of thousands people, Channel One Russia said that the protests were "dying out" with "only a few hundred" attending. Police brutality against Euromaidan supporters wasn't mentioned in Russian media. Russian state media claimed that Western countries, particularly the United States, orchestrated events in Ukraine to harm Russia.
The European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement was depicted as a weapon against the Kremlin, protesters as paid stooges of the United States, and the Vilnius summit as akin to the Munich Agreement.
Descriptions of the Ukrainian government as "illegitimate" or "self-appointed" and the country as "fascist" were common in Russian reports during much of the conflict, but had declined sharply by the end of 2015.
After the Ukrainian parliament voted to choose Arseniy Yatsenyuk as transitional Prime Minister, RT described the Ukrainian government as "coup-appointed". After the election of Petro Poroshenko as president, Russian news outlets regularly described the Ukrainian government as a "junta, "fascist", and "illegitimate". Kiselyov's two-hour Sunday show Vesti Nedeli "developed a near single-minded fixation on Ukraine" and presented the post-Maidan authorities as "fascist usurpers", "propped up" by NATO. Ukraine was often portrayed as "irreparably dysfunctional", "artificial", "deeply divided", or a failed state.
Russian state media claimed that Kyiv authorities had allowed total anarchy to take root in Ukraine and that the country was under the control of "banderovtsy", followers of Ukrainian nationalist Stepan Bandera. According to Boris Nemtsov's report, Putin. War, the rhetoric of World War II was projected onto the crisis, with Russia presented as fighting against "fascism". Eastern Ukrainians were portrayed as seeking Russia's intervention and protection, despite a Gallup poll showing that less than 20% of residents agreed. The Ukrainian government was accused by Russian media of "genocide" and "pogroms" against the large Russian-speaking population in eastern and southern Ukraine. These "pogroms" were said to have been directed at churches and synagogues, though local Jewish communities denied that any pogroms had taken place.
Russia-1 and RIA Novosti claimed in 2014 that the "pogroms" and "anarchy" resulted in a "humanitarian crisis" in Ukraine, and predicted that refugees would "flood in". In early March 2014, prior to the war in Donbas, Russian channels said large numbers of refugees were fleeing the "chaos" in Ukraine and portrayed the new Kyiv authorities as "fascists". RT declared that Russian military intervention was "aimed only at saving Russian lives". Channel One presented footage from a Shehyni border crossing between Ukraine and Poland, as Ukrainians escaping to Russia. Russian state channels depicted Donbas civilians as under attack by Ukrainian forces and made no mention of insurgents firing from residential areas. They described the Ukrainian army's operations as "punitive" and presented the war in Donbas as a "civil war".
News presented as actual events is frequently hearsay, from anonymous blogs, intentionally staged videos, and selectively quoted materials, omitting anything critical of Russia.
Russian fighters On Russian citizens fighting against Ukraine, Russian media "repeated the official line that the troops (were) "volunteers" or had traveled to Ukraine on leave rather than in any official capacity" and described foreigners fighting for Ukraine as "mercenaries". There were frequent mentions of "Slavonic unity" and "Russian brotherhood". A group of Russian nationalists prepared an international exhibition Material Evidence, presented with highly anti-Western and pro-Russian bias.
Russian media claimed that western media ignored the apparent "violence", and that demonstrators in Crimea were protesting for democratic rights. Russian sources consistently refer to the events as the "Russian Spring", harking back to pro-democracy movements like the Prague Spring and Arab Spring. The annexation of Crimea was portrayed as the will of the people and a "reunification". Pro-Russian protesters in eastern Ukraine, including those who were armed and had taken journalists hostage, were portrayed as peaceful "pro-federalization" activists.
In an interview with Deutsche Welle, OSCE observer Paul Picard said: "We often see how Russian media outlets manipulate our statements. They say that we have not seen Russian troops crossing the borders. But that only applies to two border crossings. We have no idea what is going on at the others" (Russia had refused to allow the OSCE to expand its mission.)
During the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, Russian media echoed the Russian government's assertions that Russian troops were not involved, and that Ukrainian nationalists from western Ukraine and Kyiv were assaulting and killing Russians in Crimea. They claimed that a bus in Simferopol carried members of Right Sector who attacked Crimean residents, although footage showed a bus with Crimean license plates transporting men armed with Russian weapons after roads to Crimea had been blocked by Russian soldiers. Russia 24 used footage of Maidan Nezalezhnosti in Kyiv to support its claims of chaos in Simferopol, Crimea. Claims of violence and suppression against Russian-speakers in Ukraine were used to justify the Russian military intervention in Crimea.
Ukrainians "fascists"