Monomarathon. Why did the authorities disable Channel 5, Priamyi and Espreso?

Since the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion, Detector Media has written many kind words about the joint TV marathon "Yedyni novyny #UAРазом" ("United News #UA Together"), an unprecedented model of uniting private, state and public Ukrainian media. We called this marathon the TV and radio miracle and air defence in the civil war. However, now we are forced to discuss another, less appealing side of the history of the unification of the Ukrainian media during the war. Before raising the issue, we waited for ten days for comments and at least brief responses from the authorities to the question of why and on what grounds three TV channels - "Channel 5", "Priamyi" and "Espreso" - were deprived of digital broadcasting. No comments or explanations have been received.
 

When Russia attacked Ukraine, some national TV channels immediately initiated an information marathon, while others broadcasted their usual content for a while. On February 24, the National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting decided to allow broadcasters to deviate from their programs during martial law. On February 25, the second day of the war, the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy announced the joint marathon with the participation of "1+1", "STB"/"ICTV", "Inter" and "Rada" TV channels. On February 26, "Ukraine"/"Ukraine 24" and "Suspilne" TV channels joined the marathon. Over time, the marathon has been partially or completely broadcasted by almost all Ukrainian TV channels. Subsequently, one channel from each media group was allocated for family and children content. At this stage, participation in the joint marathon and its broadcast were voluntary. The broadcasters had no obligations.
 

On March 18, a joint Russian-language marathon "FreeDom" was launched at the initiative of the "StarLightMedia", "Inter", "1+1" and "Ukraine" media groups based on the UATV foreign broadcasting multimedia platform. The project was represented as one that occurred with the support of President Zelenskyi; it is coordinated by the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy, as well as the joint "Yedyni novyny #UAРазом" TV marathon.

In the first days, "Channel 5", "Priamyi" and "Espreso" did not hold a joint broadcast but aired their programs as part of the information marathon mode, but soon began to make insrts from the joint marathon. These channels may be called oppositional. "Channel 5" and "Priamyi", formerly owned by Petro Poroshenko, have been owned by "Free Media Holding" since November 2021. Its shareholders are employees of channels and politicians from the "European Solidarity" environment. The main beneficiary of "Espreso" is the son of businessman Kostiantyn Zhevago; The company's share also belongs to the wife of Mykola Kniazhytskyi, a People's Deputy from "European Solidarity". However, both "Free Media" and "Espreso" claim that during the war they introduced taboos on political disputes and criticism of the government.
 

On March 18, the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine made two critical decisions.

First, the private company "Zeonbud", which is the provider of the T2 digital television network, was transferred to the control of the Concern for Radio Broadcasting, Television and Radio Communications.
 

Second, the national TV channels "whose programming consists mainly of information and/or information and analytical programs" were obliged to broadcast the "Yedyni novyny #UAРазом" TV marathon around the clock. The National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting had to ensure compliance with this requirement.
 

Both decisions were put into effect by the President on March 19. While the first decision was fairly easy to explain by military requirements (including the need to correct the consequences of Russia's attacks on the TV tower), the second one needed clarification. Neither the National Security and Defense Council, the President, nor the National Council provided explanations.
 

On March 19, "Free Media" requested clarification from the National Council, the National Security and Defense Council, and the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy and demanded that "Channel 5" and "Priamyi" be allocated slots (part of the airtime) in the national joint marathon and included in the editorial group. According to a DM source, during an online meeting on March 20, which was attended by representatives of the National Council, Ministry of Culture and TV channel managers, broadcasters were promised a meeting to include the "Channel 5" and "Priamyi" in the marathon. They were promised air slots on March 23. On March 20, "Free Media" announced its participation in the joint marathon and began broadcasting it in part.
 

None of the promises happened, instead, according to "Channel 5" CEO Volodymyr Mzhelskyi, broadcasters were offered to broadcast a joint marathon without partaking in its production. That is, actually pay for the broadcast of third-party content.
 

On March 29, during a meeting of the National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting, its Chairman, Olha Herasymiuk, claimed that the regulator was touched by the obedience to the rule of law and decency of the broadcasters. At the same meeting, the National Council approved a new distribution of TV channels in the digital multiplexes MX-1, MX-2, MX-3 and MX-5. "Channel 5", "Priamyi" and "Espreso" were also included, so, at least as of March 29, the National Council had no intentions to deprive them of air.
 

Also during the meeting, there was a call to support the marathon-producing channels with budget funds.

"Free Media" has repeatedly appealed to the National Council, the National Security and Defense Council and the Ministry of Culture, reiterating its request to join the production, not just broadcast the marathon, but there was no response. At the same time, "Channel 5", "Priamyi" and "Espreso" include blocks of the joint marathon in their air, filling the rest of the air time with their product. Several regional, local and niche channels that do not have a national status and are not covered by the decision of the National Security and Defense Council do so voluntarily. For example, the "24" channel broadcasts news from the joint marathon during its broadcast, and from 22:00 to 7:00 - the entire joint broadcast.
 

But on the night of April 4, the broadcasting of three channels on digital air was suspended. A joint marathon began to be broadcast on the frequencies of these channels, but without their logos (although other broadcasters who broadcast the marathon keep their logos).
 

Whose decision was it? Detector Media has not yet been able to get an answer. "Zeonbud", which operates under the RRT Concern, claimed it had not received any decisions to stop the broadcast. People's Deputy Mykola Kniazhytskyi also says that there are no official documents or explanations. Both "Free Media" and Espreso have expressed readiness to apply to court if the situation is not resolved.
 

Thus, Channel 5, Priamyi and Espreso are not broadcast digitally, although, according to "Zeonbud", they will have to pay for their places in the multiplex. Channels are broadcast on the Internet, on satellite, on OTT platforms and on cable networks. But with about 40% of Ukrainians consuming digital terrestrial television, the three channels have lost most of their audience.
 

The teams of the channels appealed to Volodymyr Zelenskyi to influence the situation and get back their right to broadcast. Mediarukh movement and the Commission on Journalistic Ethics addressed Volodymyr Zelenskyi to intervene in the situation with the suspension of the broadcast of Channel 5, Priamyi and Espreso. On April 15, a joint appeal of the three channels to the European Union appeared.
 

On April 14, the Verkhovna Rada adopted a Resolution on the value of freedom of speech by 348 votes, which does not directly mention the situation with the three channels, but there are hints of it: "Cases of technical disconnection of pro-Ukrainian TV channels from the air should receive a decisive response from law enforcement agencies with bringing the perpetrators to justice." Representatives of "European Solidarity", in particular Iryna Herashchenko, interpreted this as support for the "inadmissibility of closing Channel 5, Priamyi and Espreso" by the majority of people's deputies

Oleksiy Danilov, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, in response to a question from the BBC about the reasons for the disconnection of channels (formulated exactly this way), responded that no one disconnected the channels - they are still available on YouTube, satellite and cable TV. "We have a decision of the National Security and Defense Council, which states that national channels should participate in the national marathon. If they want, they may join. They may broadcast all those things (TV marathon programs)", he said, categorically rejecting the possibility that the channels applied for it, but were not included in the marathon producers' pool.
 

There is no reaction to the appeals of representatives of channels, opposition political forces from the RRT Concern, the National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting, the National Security and Defense Council, or the President. The questions of the DM to the State Special Communications Service and the Concern about radio broadcasting, radio communication and television immediately after the channels were cut off, we're also left unanswered. On April 4, the State Special Communications Service, which manages the Concern, promised the DM to respond to the request but still fails to do so. The Head of Concern of radio broadcasting, radio communication and television Kyrylo Danylov also didn't answer the letter with questions.
 

In response to the DM's request for comment, the National Council noted that all decisions of the regulator are available on the website. However, among them, there are no decisions to disable Espreso, Priamyi and Channel 5. On April 16, Detector Media has already sent official inquiries to the National Council and the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy.
 

When people who make ambiguous decisions do not give explanations and do not answer questions, society is left to make its assumptions.

In an interview with Detector Media, Volodymyr Mzhelskyi voiced his version of the reasons why "Free Media" channels were not allowed to the joint marathon: "With the inclusion of Channel 5 in the production of a joint marathon, one would have to disclose internal processes, because, according to its participants, they have a clear order, who can be invited to air and who is prohibited. What topics can be discussed and at what angle. How many times and who to show during the day." Sources of the Media Detector in the editorial offices of the channels working on the marathon also mention certain recommendations from the state coordinators, lists of desirable and undesirable speakers and topics. This is not a matter of public discussion for obvious reasons: quarrels between our people are now taboo, and everyone is jointly working to win the war against Russia."
 

In March, Detector Media asked the organizers of the marathon for comments, but received a response from the press service of the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy, which was limited to the words "this is not a time for image materials." Representatives of StarLight Media Viktor Soroka and 1+1 media Yaroslav Pakholchuk publicly agreed to talk about the organization of the marathon, but they did not talk about state control over editorial policy.
 

Did the state need the frequency resource of three channels to broadcast the joint marathon? Hardly. At the same time, the ratings of Channel 5 and Espreso have increased somewhat since the beginning of the war. Data after March 24 are not available since measurements are not carried out, but the March figures show a positive trend.
 

Do Channel 5, Priamyi and Espreso promote "European Solidarity"? Rather no than yes. Unfortunately, the editorial office of Detector Media does not have specific figures, as the air of the channels has been out of monitoring in recent weeks, and the situation until February 24 is not indicative. However, according to our colleagues who watched these channels during the war, "European Solidarity" speakers did not dominate at all. Although they probably appeared there more often than in the joint broadcast of "Yedyni novyny #UAРазом" TV marathon. However, "European Solidarity" itself does not criticize or at least tries not to criticize, the government during the war. And Petro Poroshenko claimed that he and Volodymyr Zelenskyi "shook hands".
 

There are three possible motives left.

First, a financial one. Channels participating in the marathon are likely to have to recoup costs - about USD 1 million a month for each of the media groups - from the state budget. Instead, broadcasters that simply rebroadcast a marathon produced by other channels will pay for the broadcast at the expense of their private investors.
 

Second, the electoral one. Before the war, Volodymyr Zelenskyi's team had problems with its own media resources, which we have discussed many times. Now, these problems have been solved - the authorities are dictating to almost all Ukrainian television what to show. Moreover, there is a ban on agitation during martial law. Therefore, only those who have access to the air will be able to convert media support into electoral support. This monopoly, if it lasts long enough, could be a crucial advantage in the upcoming election campaign. By the way, let us remind you that digests from the President's Office are constantly broadcast within the joint marathon, "Bayraktar News", produced by the 95th Quarter Studio, is also regularly shown. DM sources say not only that the 1+1 channel is now the unspoken headliner of the marathon, but also the UNIAN information channel (close to Ihor Kolomoiskyi is developing and strengthening, as it now broadcasts joint marathon.
 

Third, security matters (in the sense of security of the government itself). Society reacts violently to any hint of a compromise with Russia. "European Solidarity" does not hide its critical attitude to possible concessions in the negotiation process. There can be no doubt that the reaction to the compromise in future peace agreements, if any, will be strong - and no taboos on criticism of the government will work. And in that case, the channels affiliated with "European Solidarity" could become mouthpieces of disagreement with the actions of the authorities.

On March 18, Mykhailo Podoliak, an Adviser to the Head of the President's Office, issued an interesting statement about the need to stop "experts who, hiding somewhere, unfold their sad songs about how to fight properly, and how to negotiate." And how else to do it, if not taking all information flows under monopoly control?
 

We do not know which of these versions is correct, and we hope to get answers to our questions from politicians and the authorities. It would be naive to rely on the court in this matter since even in peacetime, Ukrainian courts made the decisions the authorities needed; in addition, the trial may be delayed until the end of the war (which must come sooner or later).