Indicators of Risks to Media Pluralism

Explanation

Media Audience Concentration

This indicator assesses the concentration of audience and readership across media platforms based on audience share. Concentration is measured by using the Top 4 owners in the market. Presented are the sums of the audience / readership / subscription shares of the major 4 owners within each market. Share is based on the standard studies carried out in the country, for TV (TAMPANEL, Nielsen), Radio (TNS), Press (TNS) and Online (Factum Group) in 2016.

The TV market is highly concentrated, as the major 4 owners represent an audience share of 76.25%. Each of the 4 largest media groups, StarLight Media (21.68%), 1+1 media (20.49%), Inter Media (21.42%) and Media Group Ukraine (12.66%) have an audience of around 20%. These media groups belong to the richest individuals in Ukraine, known largely as oligarchs, Pinchuk, Kolomoyskyi, Firtash and Akhmetov respectively.

The Top 4 radio groups reach 92,23% of the audience in Ukraine. The audience data was obtained from a website of Retro.FM which published the audience research produced by TNS Ukraine. Tavr Radio Group alone has a reach of 39.53% - it unites 6 radio stations of which are in the top 18 radio stations in Ukraine. Ukrainian Media Holding has 7 radio stations, four of which are in the above mentioned top 18 radio stations. It’s audience amounts to 30.73%. Business Radio group represents 4 radio stations of which three are in the top 18 and reach an audience of 11.76%. TRK Lux has only two radio stations both of which are in the top 18 radio stations and have an audience of 10.21%. 3 out of four majour owners are big radio groups that belong to Ukraine’s richest, apart from TRK Lux which is owned by the wife of the mayor of Lviv.

The Top 4 print media reach a readership of 18.60%, which mean low concentration. The print market is less concentrated three out of major 4 owners are large media groups. These are MGU with the audience of 3.6%, UMH – 8.2%, MHV – 3.2% and the newspaper Fakty ta Kommentarii – 3.6%. Two of the owners, UMH and Media Holding Vesti have revealed that ownership information is not precisely transparent. Experts also argue that three of the owners, UMH, Media Holding Vesti and Media Group Ukraine have pro-Russian stance and issue mostly newspapers in a Russian language.

The ONLINE market is not regulated in Ukraine. Internet websites are not considered to be media and are not registered as such. The top 4 owners of internet media have an audience of 17.56%.  Three of the 4 owners are large media groups MGU (3.15%), 1+1 media (4.25%) and UMH (7.49%) and have numerous online media. The fourth Obozrevatel (2.67%) belongs to Brodskyi family, former Member of the Parliament of Ukraine.

 

LOW (1)

MEDIUM (2)

HIGH (3)

 

2.1

Audience concentration in television (horizontal)

 

 

Percentage: 76.25 %

 

 

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share below 25%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share between 25% and 49%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share above 50%.

 

2.2

Audience concentration in Radio (horizontal)

 

 

Percentage: 92.23 %

 

 

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share below 25%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share between 25% and 49%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share above 50%.

 

2.3

Readership concentration in newspapers (horizontal)

 

 

Percentage: 18.6 %

 

 

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a readership share below 25%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a readership share between 25% and 49%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a readership share above 50%.

 

 

Sources: 

 

Meta Data: Calculations are based on audience data obtained through various sources: TV (ITC), Radio (TNS), Press (TNS) and Internet (Factum Group). Audience data on Radio and Internet was based on more than 100%, namely 322% and 606% respectively. We have recalculated the audiences by assuming those to be 100%.

2.4

Audience concentration in Internet (horizontal)

 

Percentage: 17.56 %

 

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share below 25%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share between 25% and 49%.

If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have an audience share above 50%.

 

Audience data for the internet media in Ukraine. Factum Group PDF | 156 KB
Audience data for radio in Ukraine. TNS Ukraine PDF | 100 KB
Audience data for TV channels in Ukraine. Television Industry Committee PDF | 16.18 KB
Audience data for print media in Ukraine. TNS Ukraine PDF | 100 KB

Media Ownership Concentration

This indicator aims to assess the horizontal concentration of ownership within the media sector. Concentration is measured by using the Top4 owners. The Top4 are obtained by summing the market shares of the major 4 owners within the market.

Since financial information on market share was not available in Ukraine this indicator could not be assessed. In accordance with the MOM methodology if the country presents data on audience, but not on revenues/market share: the market share data is excluded from the analysis, i.e., the findings are based on the audience data alone and the revenue data are considered optional.

LowMediumHigh
1.2Ownership concentration in television (horizontal): This indicator aims to assess the concentration of ownership within the TV media sector. 
  If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a market share below 25%.  If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a market share between 25% and 49%.  If within one country the major 4 owners (Top4) have a market share above 50%. 

The same questions apply to the radio, print and online sector.

 

 

Regulatory Safeguards: Media Ownership Concentration

This indicator assesses the existence and effective implementation of regulatory safeguards (sector-specific and/or competition law) against a high horizontal concentration ownership and/or control in the different media.

Results:

The regulatory safeguards in the media ownership concentration either do not exist or are not effectively used, therefore this indicator assess the situation in the country to be of High Risk.

The Law on Television and Radio Broadcasting regulates TV and Radio. The law prescribes some limits, but it doesn’t define objective criteria to calculate concentration and therefore appropriate control is in fact missing -  which results in a High Risk.

The press is regulated by the Law On Press, which prescribes concentration limit (5 % of socio-political print media on the market). In practice, the calculation is not based on the regularly publishing (active) media outlets (4000 issues) but the total number of registered media (30.000 publications). This calculation, including the inactive media outlets, distorts the result, the limit is never reached.  As regulatory safeguards exist but the implementation is in practice ineffective, a medium risk was diagnosed.

For online media, no regulatory safeguards exist, as they are not regarded as media in Ukraine, which results in a high risk. In addition, there is no special regulation on ISPs or telecommunication companies (except regulations on service charges of the companies with dominant market position).

There is no merger control in Ukraine with the view of legislative concentration limits (though non-working) in TV and radio markets. Nominal control of such limits is prescribed by the law on the press (theoretically including mergers), but as it was mentioned, the limit is never formally reached.  

Regulatory Safeguard Score 2 out of 16 – High Risk (12,5%)

Horizontal Concentration (TV, radio, print, internet access providers)

IndicatorDescriptionYesNoMDNA
3.1 Does the media legislation contain specific thresholds or limits, based on objective criteria (e.g. number of licenses, audience share, circulation, distribution of share capital or voting rights, turnover/revenue) to prevent a high level of horizontal concentration of ownership and/or control in this sector? This question aims to assess the existence of regulatory safeguards (sector-specific) against a high horizontal concentration of ownership and/or control in the specific sector.     X   
3.2 Is there an administrative authority or judicial body actively monitoring compliance with the thresholds in the audiovisual sector and/or hearing complaints? (e.g. media and/or competition authority)? This variable aims to assess if the law/regulation provides a due monitoring and sanctioning system for the regulation on audiovisual media concentration.      X    
3.3 Does the law grant this body sanctioning/enforcement powers in order to impose proportionate remedies (behavioural and/or structural) in case of non-respect of the thresholds?

This variable aims at assessing if the law is providing a due system of sanctions to sector-specific regulation, such as: refusal of additional licences; blocking of merger or acquisition; obligation to allocate windows for third party programming; obligation to give up licences/ activities in other media sectors; divesture. 

      X  
3.4 Are these sanctioning/enforcement powers effectively used? This indicator aims to assess the effective implementation of sector-specific remedies against a high horizontal concentration of ownership and/or control in the television media.    X    

The same answers apply to the question of media mergers. 

Regulation Horizontal Concentration

Cross-media Ownership Concentration

This indicator aims to assess the concentration of ownership in the different sectors – television, newspapers, audio, and any other relevant media – of the media industry (cross-media). Concentration is measured by using the Top 8 companies. In order to measure this indicator top 8 companies are identified with the highest revenue across all media sectors (TV, Radio, Print, Internet). The ratio is calculated between the TOP 8 revenues and the entire revenue market across media sectors.

In case when market share is not available cross media ownership is calculated on the basis of audience shares. As such, the results presented are not an indicator for economic strength in different media sectors but rather for the potential influence on public opinion when considering all media types.

Results:

Cross-Media ownership concentration is assessed to be medium.

Information on market shares is not available in Ukraine, therefore the assessment was based on audience data. The Top 8 owners with the highest audiences shares across all media sectors were identified by adding up the audience shares of all the media outlets (TV, Radio, Newspapers and internet content providers) they own. The ratio between the TOP8 audiences and the whole audience across media sectors was calculated. The weighting of audience shares is based on the consumption habits for each media type, TV- 82%, Internet-67%, Radio-28% and Press-23% (based on a Consumption Survey for 2016 produced by USAID U-Media Annual Survey).

The major 8 owners have an audience share of 55.13% across all media sectors. The Top 8 are: Ukrainian Media Holding (UMH) with an audience of 15% across Press, Radio and Online media; Tavr Media and Starlight Media belong to the same owner, Viktor Pinchuk and his wife Olena Pinchuk. Tavr is a radio group with an audience of 8.95% whereas StarLight Media has an audience (TV) of 4.44%. Pinchuk family alone has an audience of 13.39% across TV and Radio. 1+1 Media, has an audience of 8.52% across TV and online media. Media Group Ukraine has an audience of 6% across Print, TV and Online media; TRK Lux with its TV and radio channels has an audience of 4.56%; and Business Radio Group has through its radio stations an audience of around 2.65%. Inter Media Group with its TV and online media reaches an audience of 5.01%. None of the major owners have significant presence in all sectors of media, but rather in combinations of two to three media sectors.

Score: 55.13% Cross-Media Concentration – Medium 

 

LOW (1)

MEDIUM (2)

HIGH (3)

3

Percentage: 55.13 %

Company/Group (Print: audience shares | TV: audience shares | Radio: audience shares | Online: audience shares)

(Print: sum of audience shares) * (Print coefficient) / 4 + (TV: sum of audience shares) * (TV coefficient) / 4 + (Radio: sum of audience shares) * (Radio coefficient) / 4 + (Online: sum of audience shares) * (Online coefficient) / 4 ~ Company/Group cross concentration, where "coefficient" is a number which was weighted for each type of media depending on percentage of media consumption for each type of media. This "coefficient" is divided by 4 because sum of potential media consumption for four types of media is 4 times 100% - 400%.

So, the final formula is ((Print: sum of audience shares) * (Print coefficient) + (TV: sum of audience shares) * (TV coefficient) + (Radio: sum of audience shares) * (Radio coefficient) + (Online: sum of audience shares) * (Online coefficient) / 4 ~ Company/Group cross media concentration

·       UMH (Print: Korrespondent - 1.1; KP v Ukraine - 1.7; Argumenty i fakty - 2.9; Dengi - 0.2; Telenedelya - 2.3 | Radio: Retro FM - 25.7; Nashe Radio - 22.65; NRJ (Europa plus) - 7.72; Avtoradio - 24.01; Radio Pyatnica - 18.87 | Online: Korrespondent - 10.2; football.ua - 3.6; bigmir - 10.3; vgorode - 7.6; tochka - 6.7; kp - 7) ~ 15 %

·       Tavr Media (Radio: Radio Roks - 17.34; Russkoe Radio Ukraina - 25.43; Hit FM - 37.79; Kiss FM - 22.68; Radio Melodia - 16.91; Radio Relax - 7.75) | ~ 8.95 %

·       1+1 Media (TV: 1+1 - 11; Plus Plus - 2.67; 2+2 - 2.44; TET - 3.52; Bigudi - 0.7; UNIAN - 0.16 | Online: tsn - 15.9; unian - 9.9) ~ 8.52 %

·       Media Group Ukraine (Print: Segodnya - 3.6 | TV: TRK Ukraina - 11.03; NLO TV - 1.3; Indigo TV - 0.33 | Online: segodnya - 16; gorod - 3.1) ~ 6 %

·       Inter Media Group (TV: Inter - 10.62; NTN - 4.53; Mega - 1.11; K1 - 1.6; K2 - 0.46; Zoom - 0.35; Enter-Film - 1.27; Pixel - 1.48 | Online: podrobnosti.ua - 3.7) ~ 5.01 %

·       TRK Lux (TV: Channel 24 - 0.38; Radio: Lux FM - 27.57; Radio 24 - 5.32; Online: 24tv - 13) ~ 4.56 %

·       StarLight Media Ltd (TV: STB - 8.5; ICTV - 6.36; Novyi channel - 4.88; QTV - 0.76; M1 - 1.06; M2 - 0.12) ~ 4.44 %

·       Business Radio Group (Radio: Shanson - 23.74; Lyubimoe radio - 7.19; DJFM - 6.97) ~ 2.65 %

 

 If within one country the major 8 owners (Top8) have a market share below 50% across the different media sectors.

If within one country the major 8 owners (Top8) have a market share between 50% and 69% across the different media sectors.

 If within one country the major 8 owners (Top8) have a market share above 70% across the different media sectors.

Regulatory Safeguards: Cross-media Ownership Concentration

This indicator aims to assess the existence and effective implementation of regulatory safeguards (sector-specific and/or competition law) against a high degree of cross-ownership between media types (press, TV, radio, internet). Given the diversity of thresholds or limits that exist among different countries with regard to ownership and/or control, 'high' should be assessed according to the standards of your country and in the light of the thresholds or limits imposed by domestic laws.

Results

Cross-Media ownership legal regulation does not exist in Ukraine – which means High Risk. As a result, there is no authority monitoring cross-media ownership. In addition, effective merger control in Ukrainian media market is missing, as it is mentioned in the comments to Indicator 3: Regulatory Safeguards – Ownership Concentration horizontal: There is no merger control in Ukraine with the view of legislative concentration limits (though non-working) in TV and radio markets. Nominal control of such limits is prescribed by the law on the press (theoretically including mergers), but as it was mentioned, the limit is never formally reached.  

Regulatory Safeguard Score: 0 out of 8 – High Risk (0%)

IndicatorDescriptionYesNoMDNA
5.1Does the media legislation contain specific thresholds or limits, based on objective criteria (e.g. number of licenses, audience share, circulation, distribution of share capital or voting rights, turnover/revenue) to prevent a high degree of cross-ownership between the different media ?This question aims to assess the existence of regulatory safeguards (sector-specific) against a  high degree of cross-ownership in different media sectors.   X    
5.2Is there an administrative authority or judicial body actively monitoring compliance with the thresholds in the audiovisual sector and/or hearing complaints? (e.g. media and/or competition authority)?This variable aims to assess if the law/regulation provides a due monitoring and sanctioning system for the regulation on cross-media concentration.   X      
5.3Does the law grant this body sanctioning/enforcement powers in order to impose proportionate remedies (behavioural and/or structural) in case of non-respect of the thresholds?

This variable aims at assessing if the law is providing a due system of sanctions to cross-media concentration, such as: refusal of additional licences; blocking of merger or acquisition; obligation to allocate windows for third party programming; obligation to give up licences/ activities in other media sectors; divesture. 

   X    
5.4Are these sanctioning/enforcement powers effectively used?This indicator aims to assess the effective implementation of the regulation.  X   X  

The same answers apply to the questions on preventing cross-media ownership concentration through merger regulation. 

Ownership Transparency

This indicator assesses the transparency of data about the political affiliations of media owners. Ownership transparency as a crucial precondition to enforce media pluralism

Results:

Most information about the media owners of the media outlets studied are directly accessible to the public. After the adoption of the Transparency law in Ukraine in 2015, all TV and Radio outlets are obliged to disclose their ownership structures and make them available on their websites. Since 2016, broadcasting companies are obliged to provide the National Council of TV and Radio Broadcasting with information on their ultimate beneficiaries and substantial shareholders, affiliated parties and corporate ownership structures on an annual basis. Any change in management and ownership structure has to be reflected.

Most information on media owners is also available (for verification purposes) from the unified state register of the Ministry of Justice of legal entities, individual entrepreneurs and civic formations.

RSF identified a low transparency level (Active Disguise) only for TV Channel 112 Ukraine and TV Channel UBR. The channel 112 Ukraine still does not disclose its final beneficiaries, replied to written requests that the owner was absent.

It is possible to link some outlets to politicians based on the study of ownership structures, especially for TV and Radio companies. The above-mentioned transparency law obliges companies to describe interests of their related parties, i.e. family members. It is usual practise for Ukrainian politicians to have their businesses registered with their spouses, children, siblings or a number of MPs have their businesses registered in their assistants’ names.

LowMediumHigh
6.1Data on media owners as well as their political affiliations is publicly available (Active Transparency) (>75% of sample) Data of media owners and their political affiliations are disclosed based on investigations of journalists and media activists or upon request (Passive Transparency /Data Publicly Available) (>50% of sample) Data on political affiliation of media owners are not easily accessible by the public and investigative journalists or activists are not successful in disclosing these data (Data Unavailable / Active Disguise) (<50%  of sample)

Regulatory Safeguards: Ownership Transparency

This indicator aims to assess the existence and effective implementation of transparency and disclosure provisions with regard to media ownership and/or control. 

The laws are specific to media markets: Radio and Television are regulated by the law on Television and Radio Broadcasting, which obliges the companies to disclose their ownership structures on their web sites and to submit such data to the National Council on TV & Radio Broadcasting (regulatory authority). The law prescribes a fine for TV or radio company in case of non-compliance with the disclosure requirements. High regulatory safeguards overshadowed by timid implementation mean medium risk for concentration.

For the print market, specific laws that would oblige companies to disclose information about their ownership structures don’t exist. The print media has to indicate the founder and publisher of the outlet in each of its publications. Taking founder / publisher as a starting point for further research, more about the ownership structure can be found on the website of the State register of the Ministry of Justice. The law prescribes a fine in case of non-compliance with the disclosure requirements.

The press ownership transparency has two practical problems: 1) data on ultimate beneficiaries of many legal entities (not only media) in fact is not published in the State register; 2) when  the editorial office of an outlet is a separate legal entity or a branch of a legal entity not connected with its founder/publisher –another actor would be involved in the editorial process that is able to influence the editorial policy, but the actor would not be disclosed due to the absence of such obligation (loophole).

Internet is not regulated and there is no legal registration of Internet media – which can lead to a high risk to media pluralism.

Regulatory Safeguard Score: 13.5 out of 20 – Medium Risk (67,5%)

IndicatorDescriptionYesNoMDNA
7.1 Does national (media, company, tax...) law contain transparency and disclosure provisions obliging media companies to publish their ownership structures on their website or in records/documents that are accessible to the public? The aim of the question is to check regulatory safeguard for transparency towards the citizens, the users and the public in general.  X   
7.2 Does national (media, company, tax...) law contain transparency and disclosure provisions obliging media companies to report (changes in) ownership structures to public authorities (such as the media authority)? The aim of the question is to check regulatory safeguard for accountability and transparency towards public authorities.  X   
7.3 Is there an obligation by national law to disclose relevant information after every change in ownership structure? This question aims at assessing if the law provides rules on the public availability of accurate and up-to-date data on media ownership. This is a condition for an effective transparency.   X  
7.4 Are there any sanctions in case of non-respect of disclosure obligations? This question aims at assessing if the law on media ownership transparency can be enforced through the application of sanctions.        X    
7.5 Do the obligations ensure that the public knows which legal or natural person effectively owns or controls the media company? This question aim at assessing the effectiveness of the laws that deal with media ownership transparency and if they succeed in disclosing the real owners of the media outlets.    

Medium:


effective owners are still unknown

  X  

(Political) Control Over Media Outlets and Distribution Networks

This indicator assesses the risk of political affiliations and control over media and distribution networks. It also assesses the level of discrimination by politically affiliated media distribution networks. Discriminatory actions would for example include unfavourable pricing and posing barriers to media accessing the distribution channel. The overall level of (political) Control over media outlets and distribution networks was assessed as a medium risk to media pluralism. How was this conclusion drawn?

Political Affiliations means that the media outlet or company belongs to a party, a partisan group, a party leader or a clearly partisan person. The majority of media outlets selected for our study have direct or indirect links to a political party or even more so to politicians. They reach an audience of on average 49,7% - which means a medium risk.

Especially in the radio market, media owned by politically affiliated individuals gets to people: they have an audience of more than 83.76%. Major radio groups here are Tavr Media, UMH, TRK Lux and Business Radio Group. Tavr Media with its 6 radio stations has an audience of 39.72%. It is owned by Viktor Pinchuk and his wife Olena Pinchuk, the daughter of the Leonid Kuchma, former President of Ukraine. Furthermore, he was elected into the Ukrainian Parliament twice in 1998 and in 2002 with the political faction “Trudova Ukraina”. In 2006 parliamentary elections he supported the party “Viche”.  UMH has an audience of 30.73% through its six radio stations, and is owned by Sergiy Kurchenko, closely affiliated with Viktor Yanukovich, ousted President of Ukraine. TRK Lux with its two radio stations has an audience of 10.21% and is owned by the wife of Andriy Sadovyi, the mayor of Lviv. Radio Era has an audience of 3.1% and is owned (only technically) by Anton Symonenko, assistant to Andrey Derkach, close friend of Leonid Kuchma, former President of Ukraine and was elected member of the Parliament of convocations 7 and 8.

·      Also, TV audience (77,9%) is highly exposed to channels controlled by politically affiliated individuals. The biggest owner is Viktor Pinchuk, through his StarLight Media he has an audience of 21.68%. Ihor Kolomoyskyi comes in second with his 1+1 media he has an audience of 20.49%. Ihor Kolomoyskyi came into public politics after the Maidan of 2014, when he became the Head of the Administration of Dniepropetrovsk region. Political parties Ukrop and Vidrodzhennya are associated with him. Media Group Ukraine has an audience of 12.66% and belongs to Rinat Akhmetov, who was a member of the parliament in 5th and 6th convocations from the Party of Regions. Inter Media Group has an audience of 21.42% and belongs to Dmytro Firtash, Head of the Federation of Employers. Espreso TV has an audience of 0.3% and belongs to Mykola Knyazhytsky, Member of the Parliament since 2014 from the party “Narodny Front”. And last but not least, Channel 5 has an audience of 0.6% and belongs to the current President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko. TV channel News One, which belongs to Eugen Muraev (Member of Parliament of Opposition Bloc, also known for his Kremlin-backed position), has an audience of 0.58%. TV Channel UBR, part of Media Holding Vesti has an audience of 0.17% and is associated with the former Minister of Revenues and Duties, Oleksandr Klymenko. 10 out of 12 TV channels in our study are controlled by individuals with close ties to politics.

For the print market, the risk that politically affiliated publications reach the audience is low - about 15.9% of the audience reads press controlled by the individuals with political affiliations. This is not a surprise considering that press readership is generally low in Ukraine. However, similar to Radio and Television outlets, the majority press outlets are also owned by politicians or individuals with close ties to politics. The daily “Segodnya” (part of Media Group Ukraine) has the largest audience among print media, 3.6% and is owned by Rinat Akhmetov. The newspaper "Vesti" has an audience of 3.2%, which is associated with the former Minister of Revenues and Duties (disbanded since 2014) Oleksandr Klymenko. The Ukrainian Media Holding (UMH) with 6 newspapers has an audience of 8.2 % and is owned by Sergyi has Kurchenko. The newspaper “Gazeta po-Ukrayinsky” has an audience of 0.9% and is associated with Ihor Vasyunyk, former Member of the Parliament.

·      Similar to the print sector, politically affiliated online media reaches a smaller part of the audience (21.24%), the risk of political control is likewise low. Ihor Kolomoyskyi’s 1+1 Media through its various websites has an audience of 4.25%. Sergyi Kurchenko’s UMH through its online-sources reaches the audience of 7.49%. Obozrevatel website with an audience of 2.7% belongs to the family of businessman and former member of the Parliament, Michaylo Brodskyi. Rinat Akhmetov’s Media Group Ukraine has an audience of 3.15%. The website 24tv.ua attracts an audience of 2.15% and is controlled by the mayor of Lviv Andriy Sadovyi. Ihor Vasyunyk is affiliated with the website Gazeta.ua with an audience share of 1.5%.

Leading Distribution networks

A leading distribution network is defined as a network covering more than 15% of the national market. In general, the level of politication over media distribution networks is medium (print, TV) to low (radio).

Distribution networks for print publications were inherited from the network of Ukrposhta (Ukrainian Post) with 15,000 branch offices, and kiosks of Soyuzpechat (Print Union) that in different cities were later privatised by individuals and companies that compete with each other. For example, there are three big chains, a successor of Soyuzpechat (Print Union) - Torhpresa (Trade Press), Presa (Press) related to the owners of the newspaper Vysokyi Zamok (High Castle) and Interpress owned by the newspaper Expres. All these companies had severe competition with one another, often resorting to boycotting the sale of a competitor’s media outlets. This kind of conflicts can still be observed today: in Krivoy Rog the newspaper Domashyaya (Homey) is cannot be purchased in 80% of kiosks[1]. The reason is the newspaper’s pro-opposition spirit to the Mayor Yuri Vilkul, who is affiliated with Rinat Akhmetov. The distribution in different regions[2] of Ukraine of nationwide publications is often related to corruption and political challenges, some outlets have NEVER been available for purchase in a range of regions[3].

Radio Networks are directly related to the frequencies that are distributed by the National Council on Television and Radio Broadcasting. During Yanukovych’s presidency the Council artificially reduced the influence of opposition-oriented radio stations by expanding the coverage area of those loyal to the regime.

During the regime of Yanukovych television providers used to cut off certain opposition channels (such as TVi) blaming it on bogus "technical" reasons. Such channels were not available via analogue frequencies but only through the cable or via satellite. As a result, these cut-offs affected entire regions depriving them of alternative opinions broadcasted by media. Such scandals involved "Triolan" provider[4], which is associated with the Mayor of Kharkiv Hennadiy Kernes.

 


[1] Roman Kabachiy (2016) Медійний Кривий Ріг: чи проб’ється світло крізь морок фейків і маніпуляцій. IMI. Retrieved in October from: http://imi.org.ua/analytics/54469-mediyniy-kriviy-rig-chi-probetsya-svitlo-kriz-morok-feykiv-i-manipulyatsiy.html

[2] 2011. 2015 рік буде переломним – найцікавіше у журналі “Країна”20.01.2011. Pro Vse. Retreived in October 2016 from: provse.te.ua/2011/01/2015-rik-bude-perelomnym-najtsikavishe-u-zhurnali-krajina-20-01-2011/

[3] 2014. У Херсоні не продаються журнали «Новое время» і «Країна» - журналіст ІМІ. Telekritika. Retreived in October 2016 from: ru.telekritika.ua/rinok/2014-08-18/97116

[4] 2012. ПРОВАЙДЕР "ТРІОЛАН" ВИМКНУВ КАНАЛ ТВІ ЗІ СВОЄЇ МЕРЕЖІ. 5ua. Retreived in October 2016 from: http://www.5.ua/suspilstvo/provaider-triolan-vymknuv-kanal-tvi-zi-svoiei-merezhi-39945.html

LowMediumHigh
POLITICATION OF MEDIA OUTLETS    
8.1What is the share of TV media owned by politically affiliated entities? 
  The media having <30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation. The media having <50% - >30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.  The media having >50% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.
8.2What is the share of Radio channels owned by politically affiliated entities?
  The media having <30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation. The media having <50%>30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.  The media having >50% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.
8.3 What is the share of Newspapers owned by politically affiliated entities?
  The media having <30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation. The media having <50%>30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.  The media having >50% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.
What is the share of Online media owned by politically affiliated entities?
The media having <30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.The media having <50%>30% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation. The media having >50% audience share is owned (controlled) by a specific political party, politician or political grouping, or by an owner with specific political affiliation.
POLITICATION OF MEDIA DISTRIBUTION NETWORKS
8.4 How would you assess the conduct of the leading distribution networks for print media? 
  Leading distribution networks are not politically affiliated or do not take discriminatory actions. At least one of the leading distribution networks is politically affiliated or takes occasional discriminatory actions All of the leading distribution networks are politically affiliated and has a record of repeated discriminatory actions
8.5 How would you assess the conduct of the leading radio distribution networks? 
  Leading distribution networks are not politically affiliated or do not take discriminatory actions. At least one of the leading distribution networks is politically affiliated or takes occasional discriminatory actions All of the leading distribution networks are politically affiliated and has a record of repeated discriminatory actions
8.6 How would you assess the conduct of the leading television distribution networks? 
 Leading distribution networks are not politically affiliated or do not take discriminatory actions.At least one of the leading distribution networks is politically affiliated or takes occasional discriminatory actionsAll of the leading distribution networks are politically affiliated and has a record of repeated discriminatory actions
How would you assess the conduct of the leading internet distribution networks?
Leading distribution networks are not politically affiliated or do not take discriminatory actions.At least one of the leading distribution networks is politically affiliated or takes occasional discriminatory actionsAll of the leading distribution networks are politically affiliated and has a record of repeated discriminatory actions

(Political) Control Over Media Funding

This indicator assesses the influence of the state on the functioning of the media market, focusing particularly on the risk of discrimination in the distribution of state advertisements. The discrimination can be reflected in favouritism towards political parties or affiliates of political parties in the government, or in penalisation of media criticising the government. State advertising is understood as any advertising paid by governments (national, regional, local) and state-owned institutions and companies.

Results:

There is no transparency in the advertising market. None of the media outlets provided financial information or information related to advertisements. Information about state advertising is not public either. Financial information was available only for the state funded TV channel UA: Pershiy which is in process of transition into a Public Broadcasting Service. Therefore, the risk of political control over media funding is considered high.

 LowMediumHigh
9.1 Is the state advertising distributed to media proportionately to their audience share? 
  State advertising is distributed to the media relatively proportionately to the audience shares of media     State advertising is distributed disproportionately (in terms of audience share) to the media State advertising is  distributed exclusively to few media outlets, which do not cover all major media outlets in the country
9.2 How would you assess the rules of distribution of state advertising?    
  State advertising is distributed to media outlets based on transparent rules. State advertising is distributed to media outlets based on a set of rules but it is unclear whether they are transparent. There are no rules regarding distribution of state advertising to media outlets or these
IMPORTANCE OF STATE ADVERTISING    
9.3What is the share of state advertising as part of the overall TV advertising market?    MD
  Share of state advertising is <5% of the overall market Share of state advertising is 5%-10% of the overall market Share of state advertising is > 10% of the overall market
9.4What is the share of state advertising as part of the overall Radio advertising market?    MD
 Share of state advertising is <5% of the overall marketShare of state advertising is 5%-10% of the overall marketShare of state advertising is > 10% of the overall market
9.5What is the share of state advertising as part of the overall Print advertising market?    MD
 Share of state advertising is <5% of the overall marketShare of state advertising is 5%-10% of the overall marketShare of state advertising is > 10% of the overall market

(Political) Control Over News Agencies

This indicator assesses the range and independence of competing news agencies, including the assessment of the level of state ownership and level of independence of state owned news agencies.

Results:

Since financial information on market share was not available in Ukraine this indicator could not be assessed. Ukrinform is the only state owned News Agency in the country. Other influential news agencies include UNIAN (1+1 media), Ukrainsky Novyvny (Inter Media Group), Liga BusinessInform. Branches of Russian news agencies Interfax, RBC-Ukraine are also active.

LowMediumHigh
10.1What is the market share of the leading news agency?    MD
  No news agency dominates the market (occupy >30% of the market of news agencies).  One news agency has <50% ?30% share of the market of news agencies.  The leading news agency has ?50% market share.
10.2How would you evaluate the political affiliation and/or dependence of the largest news agency?    At least two News Agencies are owned by individuals with political affiliations (1+1 Media and Inter Media Group).
  None of the largest news agencies is dependent on political groupings in terms of ownership, affiliation of key personnel or editorial policy. At least one of the largest news agencies is dependent on political groupings in terms of ownership, affiliation of key personnel or editorial policy. Most or all of the largest news agencies is dependent on political groupings in terms of ownership, affiliation of key personnel or editorial policy.

Oleh Rozvadovsky. Media Landscape in Ukraine. European Journalism Centre. Retrieved in September 2016.

  • Project by
    Institute of Mass Information
  •  
    Reporters without borders
  • Funded by
    BMZ