Background
On January 18, 2024, the Commission on Journalistic Ethics received a complaint from Maryna Smirnova about an article by Polina Kotova on Dzvin online media titled “Cherkasy Public Activists Opposed the Procurement of Equipment Intended for the Armed Forces of Ukraine” dated January 18, 2024, available at https://dzvin.media/news/cherkaski-gromadski-aktyvisty-vystupyly-proty-zakupivli-tehniky-yaku-potim-mayut-peredaty-zsu/?amp;mibextid=xfxF2i.
In the article, styled as an op-ed column, the journalist criticizes Cherkasy public activists for what she perceives as inconsistency in their stance on allocating a significant portion of the city budget to finance the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Polina Kotova shares screenshots of social media posts from various civil society representatives and criticizes their inconsistent stance on prioritizing personal well-being, especially considering their ongoing criticism of non-targeted expenditures from the city budget. However, the article does not mention the name of the movement these individuals represent, nor does it identify the community to which the activists, whose posts are shown in the screenshots, belong. The journalist also expressed her concern, stating, “calls to destroy the city council, along with all the deputies, using a Russian missile, are quite natural.”
According to the complainant, every word in the article is a lie, a distortion of facts, and a manipulation aimed at discrediting the actions of activists from the Cherkasy community while whitewashing the actions of the authorities. In particular, the quotes from activists included in the article are taken out of context, and the statements published are based on assumptions without any supporting evidence.
On February 21, 2024, the Commission reached out to the online media, requesting comments regarding potential violations of clauses 6 and 10 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist, as well as addressing the arguments specified in the complaint.
The response from the online media was received on February 23, 2024. In her response, the editor-in-chief, Tetiana Vorontsova, stated that all events mentioned in the article, along with statements from activists during protests and Cherkasy City Council meetings, are supported by relevant media materials, posts on the “Sprotyv Cherkashchyny” movement’s social media pages, and the pages of its organizing activists. All evaluative judgments made in the article, to which the journalist is entitled, are based on the screenshots of social media posts included in the publication, as well as on other posts previously mentioned by “Dzvin” in its articles. The journalist also highlighted contradictions in the statements and activities of the movement. In her opinion, society should pay attention to these inconsistencies when evaluating the actions of “Sprotyv Cherkashchyny.”
During a more detailed examination of the case and based on the response of the media, the Commission also decided to additionally analyze the material for compliance with clause 9 of the Code.
Relevant ethical standards
Clause 6 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Respecting the right of the public to full and objective information about facts and events is the primary duty of a journalist. Journalists and editors must take steps to verify the authenticity of all messages, video and audio materials received from members of the public, freelancers, press services and other sources.”
Clause 9 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Facts, judgments and assumptions must be clearly separated from one another. The dissemination of information containing bias or unfounded accusations is unacceptable.”
Clause 10 of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist: “Views of the opponents, including ones who are objects of journalistic criticism, must be presented in a balanced manner. Assessments of independent experts must be provided the same way.”
Regarding violations of the requirements of the Code, cl. 6, 9, 10
Given that the material in question is an op-ed column, the Commission refers to its guidelines on opinion journalism. There, the Commission emphasized that an author’s perspective on events doesn’t exempt journalists or media from adhering to the Ethics Code. The Code applies equally to opinion and factual journalism, meaning journalists must base evaluative judgments on verified facts. Publications should include references to the materials used, such as media articles (including previous pieces from the same outlet), social media posts, expert reports, and so on. Otherwise, a reader cannot access the complete context of the column or locate previous articles on the topic, which could be crucial for a better understanding of the situation.
The Commission concurs with the editor-in-chief of “Dzvin” that the author of the material was entitled to make evaluative judgments and believes that these judgments could indeed be based on previous articles from the media. However, Polina Kotova did not post a link to any of them in the column in question. The article fails to clarify for first-time readers which social movement is involved, the context of the conflict between activists and Cherkasy city authorities, and the criteria used for selecting screenshots from individual members of the “Sprotyv Cherkashchyny” movement. This is particularly concerning given the inclusion of comments under posts, where the original text is not provided in the article. Conversely, consumers of information who are aware of this conflict may lack the other side’s position, and as a result, the material may appear biased against civil society in their dispute with the city government.
The Commission notes an attempt to manipulate the audience’s emotions by suggesting that an activist’s concern for herself, as shown in a screenshot of her post, contradicts the goals of her public activism. While this approach may suit the tone of the column, it blurs the line between criticizing public activity and creating a biased view of the activist. The article includes statements that display contempt for individuals with psychological issues and undermine the value of professional psychological assistance. Such portrayals can perpetuate negative stereotypes about seeking professional help in a country at war, where a significant portion of the population may require such support. Such presentation of the material is unacceptable and indicates non-compliance with the requirements of journalistic ethics. Summarizing this argumentation, the Commission concludes that the material violates the requirements of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist, cl. 6 and cl. 9.
Findings and recommendations
Considering the above, the Commission believes that the material of Dzvin online media by journalist Polina Kotova titled “Cherkasy Public Activists Opposed the Procurement of Equipment Intended for the Armed Forces of Ukraine” dated January 18, 2024, violates the requirements of the Ethics Code of the Ukrainian Journalist, cl. 6 and cl. 9. In view of the quick response of the media and its willingness to cooperate, the Commission issues a warning to “Dzvin” and Polina Kotova.
The Commission emphasizes the need to comply with the following requirements when preparing materials related to conflicts related to the exercise of public authority at the local level:
- clearly separate facts from judgments and assumptions, avoid involvement in the presentation of information and selective choosing of various sources for creating materials;
- provide a comprehensive context of the analyzed topic so that first-time readers can understand the essence of the problem;
- substantiate each factual statement made in the material and reference such substantiation wherever possible;
- maintain balance in the material by providing the criticized the opportunity to explain or refute claims regarding their performance.