Is there still a chance to preserve freedom of speech today, and how can it be properly balanced with other modern challenges? This was the topic of discussion among speakers on the panel “When Freedom Kills Freedom: How to Combat Lies Without Destroying Pluralism” during the Donbas Media Forum. Olha Herasymiuk, Chair of the National Council, shared her vision of the key steps needed to protect freedom of speech in times of war.
Today, as information is increasingly used as a weapon, freedom of speech – one of the fundamental values of democracy – requires rethinking and protection. This was the central topic of the panel discussion moderated by Andriy Shevchenko, co-founder of Media Center Ukraine.
At one point, Ukraine deemed it appropriate to ban Russian TV channels and certain social media platforms – as a tool to counter disinformation and propaganda from Russia. This measure is not a panacea, noted Olha Herasymiuk, but it significantly helped to cleanse the country’s information space. At the same time, the state was – and continues to be – guided by the conviction that Russian media and quality journalism are not comparable concepts.
“We are not fighting journalism or free thought. It must remain critical – the sharper, the better. What we oppose is equating Russian propaganda and disinformation with journalism.”
According to Georgii Tykhyi, spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, there is a need to establish clear rules of engagement in the information space.
Freedom, he emphasized, is not chaos – it is a space where every voice should be heard, except for those who enter with the intent to destroy that space.
“Freedom of speech also needs protection. If everyone in the room is talking at once – and some of the loudest voices were sent by ‘Comrade Major’ (it means that some participants in the information space are not acting on their own initiative but are carrying out tasks related to disinformation or propaganda) – that’s not freedom of speech. Rules are necessary. Those who come only to shout others down must be shown the door. This is not a restriction of freedom – it is its defense.”
At the same time, relying solely on bans is not a rational approach. Russian disinformation is constantly evolving, and therefore democracy must also seek new ways to preserve its freedoms. Olha Herasymiuk reminded the audience of the situation in which Hungary banned independent Ukrainian media, noting that this case poses a threat even to European countries. If they tolerate such actions, the danger of completely blurring the line between propaganda and journalism becomes increasingly real.
The discussion then continued in a European context. Rebecca Harms, Vice-Chair of the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, noted that Western societies also understand that freedom cannot exist without boundaries. That is why the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) has been developed – not to restrict, but to guarantee the rights of both journalists and audiences.
“We cannot leave the media space without rules. Freedom needs boundaries in order to survive. The European Media Freedom Act is not about control — it’s about guarantees.”
Nina Jankowicz, from the American Sunlight Project initiative, added to the discussion by noting that restrictions during wartime are inevitable. However, she emphasized that such measures must be transparent, understandable, and temporary – and should be accompanied by investments in the long-term resilience of society, particularly in media literacy and public trust in journalism.
Bohumil Kartous, from the Czech Elves initiative, spoke about the challenges that traditional regulatory approaches can no longer fully address. He highlighted the influence of social media algorithms, which create information bubbles, fuel emotions, and contribute to the rise of populism. If societies fail to learn how to manage these processes, democracy may disappear unnoticed.
Chair of the National Council also stressed the need to strengthen regulation of digital platforms. Currently, the most toxic disinformation is spread via Telegram, and this messenger must be brought under European regulation in accordance with the Digital Services Act (DSA) – although it continues to evade this responsibility through various false claims.
Media literacy is another tool aimed at strengthening the informational health of society. According to Olha Herasymiuk, it does not begin on specific platforms or in public debates, but when a child starts asking the question “Why?” – a sign of proper prevention. European countries are currently considering the introduction of a dedicated professional role – media educator.
Another key point was voiced by Vlasta Lazur, a journalist from Radio Liberty. In her view, honest journalism – which not only informs but also verifies – is no longer just a profession, but a guarantee of stability. The ability to verify information is not a limitation, she said, but a privilege that must not be lost.
“We cannot afford the luxury of staying silent, but we must allow ourselves the luxury of verification. The balance between truth and responsibility – that is journalism during wartime.”
Quality journalism today remains the only way out of a situation where freedom of speech is being exploited for manipulative purposes, emphasized Olha Herasymiuk. Around the world, there is understanding that it is precisely quality journalism that can counter information threats and remain a reliable source of information for people.
“The only way forward in this situation is to support quality media – those that verify information and do their work honestly and responsibly.”
Let us recall that on October 9, the anniversary Donbas Media Forum began in Kyiv – an annual professional event that has brought together Ukrainian journalists and media experts for ten consecutive years. The forum was officially opened by Olha Herasymiuk, Chair of the National Council.
