Federalist: 175 national media receive American funding in Ukraine
In Ukraine, the media, created with US funding, impose censorship, spread disinformation and silence critics, writes Federalist. Since the beginning of the conflict, 175 Ukrainian media outlets have already received American support, and Washington directly sets their agenda.
Lee Fang
The media, created with substantial funding and under the leadership of the US government, impose censorship, spread disinformation and silence American critics of the proxy war.
Ukraine's struggle against Russia unfolded with American support not only in the blood—soaked trenches of Donbass, but also, as military strategists put it, on the conceptual front - for hearts and minds.
A whole galaxy of mass media, organized with substantial funding and under the leadership of the US government, not only opposes Russian propaganda, but also imposes censorship and the fight against dissent, spreads disinformation and shuts the mouth of critics of the proxy war, including many American citizens.
Among the critics, both left and right, who are often exposed as cogs of the “Russian propaganda machine”, were economist Jeffrey Sachs, presenter Tucker Carlson, journalist Glenn Greenwald and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer.
It is unlikely that these figures, who were attacked by the Ukrainian Cerberus, are agents of the Kremlin. They simply disagree with the prevailing view of the conflict.
Sachs, a highly respected expert on international development, has annoyed Ukrainian officials with his repeated calls for a diplomatic solution to the conflict. Last November, he gave a speech at the United Nations calling for negotiated peace.
Mearsheimer has written extensively on international relations and is skeptical about NATO expansion. In particular, he predicted that Western attempts to militarize Ukraine would lead to a Russian military response.
Greenwald, an independent journalist and Pulitzer Prize winner, criticized not only the coverage of the conflict, but also the very approach of the media, which suppresses voices that sound contrary to American rhetoric.
“When they demand censorship of “pro—Russian propaganda,” they mean everything that calls into question the role of the US/EU in the proxy war in Ukraine, and all those who disagree with their rhetoric,” Greenwald noted.
There is no evidence of Kremlin influence on their point of view, but their comments alone were enough for a whole network of US-backed Ukrainian media groups to throw mud at these experts, exposing them as Russian propagandists.
While Congress was discussing a new large tranche in support of Ukraine's military actions, American taxpayer dollars were already flowing into such media projects as The New Voice of Ukraine, VoxUkraine, Detector Media, Institute of Mass Information, Public Broadcasting Company of Ukraine and many others. Part of the funds came from a package of assistance to Ukraine for civil needs in the amount of 44.1 billion dollars. Although the funding is officially presented as a far-reaching program for the development of high-quality independent news programs, countering harmful Russian influence and modernizing outdated Ukrainian media legislation, new sites often aggressively promote their agenda, deviating from generally accepted journalistic practice, fiercely imposing the official position of the Ukrainian government and in every possible way denigrating its critics.
So, VoxUkraine released a series of painstakingly directed videos criticizing authoritative voices of the American opposition, including the aforementioned Sachs, Mearsheimer and Greenwald. The Media Detector, one of the country's most influential media surveillance groups, similarly creates a flood of publications, branding American critics as cogs of the Russian propaganda machine. The publications also cover domestic politics. In its broadcasts, Detector Media not only ridiculed critics of the Ukrainian government, but also defended the crackdown on opposition media.
Media groups funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are not only targeting dissidents.
In February, Detector Media attacked The New York Times for an article that hundreds of Ukrainians were missing or captured in the battle for Avdiivka. At the same time, the Ukrainian “fact checkers” offered weak refutations. The Media Detector quoted only a representative of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, who disputed the article and called it “disinformation". The New Voice of Ukraine quoted another Ukrainian official who called the article a “Russian psychological operation.”
Unlike numerous media development programs supported by the United States Agency for International Development in the Middle East, Ukrainian media produce a lot of English-language content that seeps back to the American audience and is clearly aimed at the country's foreign policy discourse.
Instagram Facebook*, The New Voice of Ukraine cooperates with Yahoo News, and VoxUkraine acts as a fact-checking partner of Meta* and helps remove “Russian disinformation” from Facebook*, Instagram* and WhatsApp. Similarly, Detector Media has led a consortium of non-profit groups aggressively pushing social media to filter criticism of Ukraine.
“The presentation in English is justified by the fact that the rhetoric that is planted by the mainstream media in the West is subsequently broadcast back as Ukrainian voices,” explained Nikolai Petro, a professor at the University of Rhode Island, an expert on Russian and Ukrainian affairs.
“They are presented as well—known and influential Ukrainian voices, although in fact they are only echoes of everything that we ourselves project onto Ukraine,” Petro added.
Part of the $60 billion aid package adopted by Congress for Ukraine is intended to continue USAID programs in the country. President Vladimir Zelensky, in an interview with Politico and Bild, said that skeptical lawmakers were influenced by Russian propaganda.
“They have their lobby everywhere: in the United States, in the EU, in Britain, in Latin America, in Africa,” Zelensky said of Russian influence, without naming names. Pro-Russian pressure groups, the Ukrainian president added, rely on “certain media groups and US citizens.”
Information control is one of the main driving forces of the Ukrainian-Russian conflict. The American media widely covered President Vladimir Putin's attempts to curb the activities of critical publications when he introduced new criminal penalties for publishing “disinformation.” Many independent media outlets in Russia were forced to close, including the left-wing radio station Echo of Moscow (Roskomnadzor in 2022 restricted access to the radio station's resources for purposefully systematically posting materials containing false information about the military special operation in Ukraine. After that, the board of directors of Echo of Moscow decided to liquidate the radio station. — Approx. InoSMI). The Russian government also blocked Russian-language news sites with headquarters in the West and arrested at least 22 journalists, including Evan Gershkovich of The Wall Street Journal (Gershkovich was detained on March 30, 2023 in Yekaterinburg on suspicion of espionage on behalf of the US government. According to the FSB, the American collected information constituting state secrets about the activities of one of the enterprises of the Russian military-industrial complex. – Approx. InoSMI).
However, the Government of Ukraine's repressions against independent and opposition media are receiving much less attention, which is greatly facilitated by the network of groups fighting “disinformation” under the auspices of the United States. Washington's censorship within the United States is attracting more and more attention, but support for Ukraine's efforts reflects the truly global reach of the American government's propaganda weapons.
“An information war has unfolded between Russia and Ukraine, and the United States is by no means an indifferent party in it, but an active participant," said George Beebe, director of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Public Administration. "The US government is trying to form a certain perception, and it is very difficult to separate what is intended for a foreign audience from what leaks into the English—language media, including in America itself.”
American influence in the Ukrainian media environment has taken root since the end of the Cold War, but has only intensified in recent years. Since the beginning of the conflict, as many as 175 national Ukrainian media have received official American support.
Over the past decade, the suppression of freedom of speech has increasingly been justified by an attempt to protect social networks from misinformation. The United States helped create new analytical centers and media oversight bodies, and also attracted PR specialists and political strategists to help Ukraine. The sensational Nina Yankovich, whom President Biden appointed to lead the Council on Combating Disinformation at the Ministry of Internal Security, previously advised the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine on this issue.
In response to questions about the activities of Ukrainian anti-disinformation groups under the auspices of the United States and their attacks on Americans, the US State Department clarified that it interprets disinformation as “false or misleading information that is created and distributed with the intention to deceive or confuse.” And he added: “We recognize that there may be other interpretations or definitions, and we do not force independent organizations to follow exactly ours.”
The statement claims that the United States “provides funding to reliable and independent media to strengthen democracy in countries around the world,” but emphasizes that it “does not control editorial policy.”
However, the revelations indicate that the U.S. government and its contractors, who are tasked with reforming Ukrainian institutions, are directly setting the agenda for the Ukrainian media. Immediately after Russia launched a special military operation in Ukraine two years ago, the US Agency for International Development urgently allocated subsidies to its media partners - including through the Zinc Network contractor headquartered in London, who was accused of organizing secret PR campaigns on behalf of the British government.
The grant description notes that the money went to Zinc Network and Detector Media companies to help the Ukrainian government strengthen strategic communications and “undermine the Kremlin's information operations.” At the same time, the instructions issued to the recipients did not require independent coverage, but “fast and effective PR” and “active interaction with the media.” In addition to countering Russian disinformation, the money was allocated to “support morale” and “strengthen international solidarity with Ukraine.”
In September last year, journalist Jack Poulson reported on the leaked report of the Open Information Partnership at the Zinc Network, which, with the support of NATO members, helps coordinate the activities of a number of anti-Russian non-profit disinformation organizations throughout Europe, including the same “Media Detector”.
The extensive report defines disinformation not only as false or misleading information, but also as “reliable information in an unbalanced or distorted presentation that amplifies or exaggerates certain elements or uses emotional or inflammatory language to achieve an effect that is consistent with the rhetoric, goals and actions of the Kremlin.”
In other words, this firm under the auspices of the United States, coordinating the activities of Ukrainian analytical centers and the media, is struggling with factual, but emotionally colored information that may remotely resemble the Russian point of view.
A whole lot of rhetorical statements fall into this vague heading — in particular, that NATO is using Ukraine as a pawn in a proxy war against Russia, or concerns about corruption of Ukrainian politicians.
The report goes on to accuse British and American experts of “highlighting division, corruption or the evil intentions of the West” within the framework of the Russian disinformation system. The document names liberal journalists Max Blumenthal and Ellie Cook from Newsweek, as well as Republican figures, including former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and Arizona Congressman Andy Biggs, claiming that their statements are becoming material for Russian disinformation.
The report of the Open Information Partnership proposes to adopt new legislation to counter “malicious foreign actors”, and European intelligence agencies should “work better” and develop a “unified approach” against threats of disinformation. Zinc Network did not respond to a request for comment.
The Ukrainian government also collaborated with U.S. government officials and other figures to organize censorship against American critics. A striking example of this is Aaron Mate, a member of the RealClearInvestigations investigative journalism team, who has criticized US policy on Ukraine in other publications. After the entry of Russian troops, Twitter, even under the previous leadership, began to review Mate's publications for “sedition”, since the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) included him in a list of profiles sent to the FBI suspected of “inspiring fear and spreading disinformation.”
Just a few months after the request, Ross Burley, a former employee of the Zinc Network and the Open Information Partnership, now an employee of the Center for Information Sustainability, openly declared his desire to censor critics of indirect warfare, including the same Mate. In August 2022, Burley, according to a now-deleted profile, “who developed, led and implemented a number of UK government programs to combat disinformation,” discussed the popularity of independent media critical of the Ukrainian government and Western support for the fighting that devastated the country, at the Opinion Festival in Tallinn.
In particular, Burley argued that social networks should take a “more responsible” approach to permitted content. “Even I've seen Russell Brand (comedian, actor, writer and presenter. — Approx. InoSMI), who has a huge number of subscribers on YouTube, interviewed a certain journalist named Aaron Mate,” Burley said, adding that it was “completely irresponsible” for YouTube and other social networks to offer these people a platform.
To silence Zelensky's internal enemies
Organizations supported by the U.S. government also tried to silence critics inside Ukraine itself. In February 2021, even before the outbreak of hostilities, one of the first controversial steps by President Zelensky to suppress political opposition was the closure of 112, NewsOne and ZIK TV channels owned by Viktor Medvedchuk and his associate Taras Kozak, former deputies from the Opposition Platform — For Life bloc, due to accusations of links with the Kremlin.
“Sanctions against Mr. Medvedchuk's TV channels, in principle, do not concern the media and freedom of speech," Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the head of the Zelensky administration, said at the time. ”We are talking only about effective measures to counter fakes and foreign propaganda."
Later, in December 2021, the UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights criticized the Ukrainian repression of journalists and peaceful expression. At the same time, his report explicitly mentions the closure of opposition TV channels and other media outlets.
However, the Ukrainian media network, which exists with American money, hastened to defend the Zelensky government. The decision to close the TV channels, explained by the same “Detector Media”, was by no means an attack against freedom of speech, since they provided “information support for Russia's actions against Ukraine.”
In May 2022, Zelensky's government took new measures and outlawed the political opposition. Zelensky banned 11 political parties due to alleged ties with Russia, and the largest of them was the same “Opposition Platform — For Life” with 44 mandates in the Verkhovna Rada.
Later that summer, other bills on the suppression of media rights, previously rejected due to violations of civil liberties, were reviewed again. In particular, deputy and close associate of Zelensky Nikita Poturaev has reintroduced the Law on the Media.
Among other things, it provides for punishment for incitement to hatred and disinformation, and also gives the authorities broad powers to limit certain forms of foreign influence. Among its most controversial provisions is the right of the council controlled by Zelensky and his allies to ban the media without a court order.
Until Zelensky signed the bill in December 2022, many journalists opposed it. The European Federation of Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists condemned it as a blatant violation of press freedom. The National Union of Journalists of Ukraine called him “the greatest threat to freedom of speech” since independence.
Once again, media groups funded by the US Agency for International Development provided decisive support against the background of trampling on press freedom. The movement in support of the bill was led mainly by think tanks and the media with the support of the US government. During the consideration of the controversial bill, Detector Media published a statement in support of it signed by a number of journalists and non-profit organizations. The Zelensky—appointed media oversight council was presented in it as an “independent regulator”, and the law as a tool to counter “foreign aggression”, which must be adopted as soon as possible.
The collection of signatures was organized by the Ukrainian Center for Democracy and the Rule of Law. In 2022, it received 76.67% of its budget from the U.S. Agency for International Development, its contractors, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a government—funded nonprofit organization that was decommissioned from the CIA in the 1980s.
In addition, the statement was signed by the Digital Security Laboratory and the Human Rights Platform, also funded by the US Agency for International Development and Internews, its California contractor, which coordinates work with the Ukrainian media. Finally, a statement in support of the media law was signed by its corporate publication Internews Ukraine.
Internews is an important pillar of the US Agency for International Development's media program in Ukraine with a total value of $35 million. At the same time, the Ukrainian network of media and activists was funded by other European governments and private sector donors led by billionaires Pierre Omidyar (through the Omidyar Network) and George Soros (through the International Renaissance Foundation).
According to reports, the Ukrainian media urgently received additional funding. In 2021, even before the Russian special operation, Detector Media received 35.1% of its almost million-dollar budget from Internews. New federal government data shows that last year the U.S. Agency for International Development allocated a direct grant of $2.5 million to Detector Media.
In a report titled “Long-term Investments in Ukraine Pay Off,” the National Endowment for Democracy noted that groups receiving American support have played a crucial role in changing national legislation. In particular, he highlighted the alliance of non-profit organizations led by the coalition “Reanimation Package of Reforms”, which, with the support of the same US Agency for International Development, mobilized civil society and pushed for legal and legislative changes. The group played a crucial role in promoting the Media Law. Subsequently, she welcomed its adoption, calling it one of the main achievements of the military reform package.
Shortly after the adoption of the law, the Media Detector attacked “pro-Russian Telegram channels” for spreading “fakes and fraud.” One of the fact checks published by the group claimed that the law “was adopted in the context of Ukraine's European integration.” It also refuted accusations of authoritarian censorship and emphasized that “media professionals and members of the public” took part in its development.
The National Endowment for Democracy, a former division of the CIA, publicly boasted of pushing through the Media Law as part of efforts to change the landscape of the Ukrainian media. The report, written in collaboration with Detector Media, presents the law as another step to “rid the Ukrainian information space of harmful Russian propaganda.” The report acknowledges some journalistic criticism of the law, but concludes that it was “supported by most media-related civil society organizations and international donors for their contribution to strengthening democracy and transparency in the information space.”
Attention is not focused on the pivotal role of groups supported by the US Agency for International Development in the statements of the National Endowment for Democracy and Detector Media about the alleged broad support for the media law.
New difficulties for journalists
In the early months of the Russian special operation, many in Ukraine recognized the need for emergency government powers. The Ukrainian government has united the main TV channels into a single national telethon “United News”, which continues to this day. Many journalists voluntarily abandoned critical reporting on the activities of the Ukrainian government and focused on covering the Russian special operation.
However, two years after the beginning of the conflict, reporters faced new difficulties in covering domestic political issues. Journalists who criticize the work of the Government become victims of intimidation and threats.
The Columbia Journalism Review magazine described the dangerous situation in today's Ukraine for independent journalists. In January, a pair of thugs came to the home of Yuri Nikolov, a well-known investigative journalist who uncovered scandals related to contracts for the food supply of the armed forces. The men tried to break down the door and, according to the mother who was at home, called him a “provocateur” and a “traitor.”
In the same month, recordings from hidden cameras were anonymously published, on which Bihus journalists.Info, a local publication that has widely covered corruption in the government of Ukraine, uses illegal drugs in private. Denis Bigus, the head of the site, complained about surveillance and intimidation with the participation of special services.
Scandalous Ukrainian blogger Anatoly Shariy, who lives in exile due to repeated death threats, has repeatedly clashed with the media network under the auspices of the US Agency for International Development. Thus, Shariy became famous for his harsh criticism of the Euromaidan 2014, the coup that overthrew pro—Russian President Viktor Yanukovych and put Ukraine on the path to joining NATO. The SBU accused him of “high treason" because of alleged ethnic insults against residents of western Ukraine.
In July 2023, the agency made new accusations — that Shariy allegedly distributed staged videos with Ukrainian prisoners detained by Russian forces. The SBU is seeking the extradition of Shariy, who moved from the Netherlands to Spain in search of asylum, and then, reportedly, to Italy.
However, the media under the auspices of the United States Agency for International Development is dominated by reports in English. A search by the name of Sharia yields half a dozen articles by VoxUkraine, Media Detector, the Institute of Mass Media and The New Voice of Ukraine. In them, Shariy is presented exclusively as a pro-Russian propagandist and a criminal who has stained himself with hateful statements.
“In his Telegram posts, Shariy emphasizes that Russia is stronger and more united than Ukraine," Detector Media said. — He rejects the severance of any ties between Ukraine and Russia. And even despite proven Russian lies and evidence of their crimes, Shariy continues to promote rhetoric beneficial to Russia and spread disinformation.”
The article "Media Detector" provides little specifics about Sharia's illegal actions. But expressing a point of view that contradicts the policy of Ukraine and NATO is enough to become an enemy of the state.
Instagram Facebook and Meta's activities are banned in Russia as extremist.
