In 2015, UATV was formed as a predominately English-speaking broadcaster with the mandate of acting as a government-sponsored broadcaster to develop programming that would convey Ukraine’s point of view to the world.
Its mandate was clear, Ukraine had to develop and control an information conduit that would create and broadcast an accurate and facts based portrait of Ukraine that would be free from the oligarchic monopoly of TV-based information dissemination while establishing an information space that would compete with Russian propaganda efforts to discredit the democratic impetus taking shape in Ukraine.
To this end, the broadcaster became a respected and independent news source covering Ukrainian politics, culture, policy discussions and social events to the English-speaking world free from oligarchic dictates and seemingly overt political pressure.
UATV had grown to become a government-sponsored public broadcaster along the line of its counterparts in the democratic world. UATV’s programs aired to millions in 30 countries via satellite with a budget of 200 hundred million hryvnias.
On Jan. 12, it ceased creating new content.
In a democracy, the winning party has both the right and responsibility to establish agency mandates and to appoint their “own “people to head key institutions. This said, numerous sources testify that the reason UATV came under attack was because it was led by people who had once worked for previous President Poroshenko’s Channel 5. And though that may be true, it is the height of folly, and an example of arrogant governing stupidity to undermine and dismantle a successful institutional building effort by directly, and with deliberate intent, change the institutional mandate of an organization.
The question is why?
How have the priorities and strategic objectives changed since the formation of UATV mandate in 2015?
Does not Ukraine need an independent informational hub that would promote its culture, values and the goings on of its society that is free from direct political pressure or oligarchic self-interest?
Does not Ukraine need a vibrant and effective voice and a well-developed portrait that would have, as its primary objective, the establishment of a new and modern narrative that would reflect the political, societal and cultural changes in its post-Maidan history?
Does not Ukraine continue to need a government controlled information conduit that would be able to counter Russian propaganda efforts against it in the English-speaking world?
There is no doubt that UATV answered these questions both positively and successfully.
It is worth repeating, that UATV, starting from scratch, was broadcast to over 30 countries worldwide by satellite transmission, satellite space which was immediately taken over by Russians once UATV abandoned airing new content on January 12. In this one decision, Ukraine gave up hard earned ground in its continuing information war with Russia.
This said, why would the government make this decision abdicating precious informational ground that was successful in developing a new and informational image of Ukraine?
At the same time, why would the government retreat from its informational battle with Russia, whose propagandist intentions to frame and discredit the worlds understanding of Ukraine and the democratic forces struggling to find resonance in a transformational milieu and which stand in great contrast to Putin authoritarianism?
The decision to suspend the English services provided by UATV and to change its mandate and broadcasting practice was ill advised in the present information battle at best.
It showed a lack of awareness of the need and essential nature of promoting a new narrative for a Ukraine that many in the world do not know and which continues to be tethered to outmoded and irrelevent picture of Ukraine.
It needlessly surrendered an information space which was immediately taken over by Russia.
It was a cynical and morally debilitating move of patronage that undermined the establishment of an institution that was established on democratic principles such as free speech, the presentation of fact based reality and the presentation of a wide assortment of views that generated vigorous debate in a country in need of successful examples of institution building.
It lacked an understating of the use of information and the foresight essential in propagating the national interest on the world’s stage.
And perhaps most cynically, It was an example of the continuation of the old and corrupt politics, enveloped by favoratism and conflict of interest, a political pay-off which the President promised to eliminate in the election.
It must be asked: was the decision to change the leadership and mandate of UATV a patronage pay off to a friend of the president? If so, this is clearly the most sinister of President Zelenskyy’s decisions.
Because it was in December that a friend, confidant and producing friend of the president’s, a Russian citizen, Oleksiy Kiryshenko, who made a visit to the UATV studio’s and who will take over and implement a new plan, a revised mandate of UATV, which according to sources, will largely broadcast Russian speaking entertainment programming targeted at Crimea and the occupied territories with a doubling of the budget.
At the moment, the UATV staff have not been disbanded. For the next two months, staff are to be paid and are required to come the office. They are being made to submit to “exit” interviews. Though it has ceased to broadcast new material, both local and foreign-born staff are still in place meaning that the creative architecture is still in place.
The government must find a way to reverse its decision. It still has the time to salvage the damage that it has irresponsibly committed in abandoning the original and still relevant mandate of UATV.
In this interim time, it should both take the time to reevaluate its decision by compiling the information of staff and explore the potential to re-clarify and strengthen UATV’s original mandate to be the definitive voice of Ukraine to the English-speaking world.
It should follow Ukraine law, and immediately institute a call for a competitive tender process for the station’s leadership position and search to find competent news and broadcast professional that is a Ukrainian citizen, non-political, and one that is free from the overt appearance of a conflict of interest.
