{"id":125022,"date":"2025-02-05T13:58:49","date_gmt":"2025-02-05T10:58:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/125022\/"},"modified":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","modified_gmt":"2026-04-15T13:35:32","slug":"financial-cuts-weaken-exiled-belarusian-medias-fight-against-propaganda","status":"publish","type":"longreads","link":"https:\/\/pozirk.online\/en\/longreads\/125022\/","title":{"rendered":"Financial cuts weaken exiled Belarusian media’s fight against propaganda"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

US President Donald Trump\u2019s recent decision to freeze international aid for 90 days has significantly impacted Belarusian media and NGOs in exile.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n \"\"\n
\n \n
\n (Eugene Shelestov \/ Pexels.com)<\/span>\n <\/div>\n <\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\u0141uka\u0161enka\u2019s regime doubles down on propaganda<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Just a few weeks after Alaksandar \u0141uka\u0161enka extended his rule through a stage-managed ritual, Information Minister Marat Marka\u016d is already preparing propagandists for the next election cycle. State media are confident about the future, with generous government funding guaranteed, regardless of the low quality of content produced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government has silenced all independent media in the country, giving state-controlled news organizations a competitive edge. \u0141uka\u0161enka has called for more aggressive propaganda, comparing it to Western public relations practices. These calls are backed by funding: in 2025, state media organizations will receive 180.6 million rubels ($53 million) from the national budget, in addition to funds from local budgets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, since 2022, the government has collected a fee from advertisers, allegedly for improving national content, but in practice, the money has been diverted into propaganda efforts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Minister Marka\u016d is happy to see foreign-based independent media facing financial difficulties, accusing these outlets of “planting completely different thoughts in people’s heads, aimed exclusively at the destruction of the country.” This statement effectively acknowledges that authorities persecute critics. In Marka\u016d’s view, any change of government or democratization amounts to “the destruction of the country.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Brainwashing pays off<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

State propaganda is proving effective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Chatham House survey conducted in December 2024 and January 2025 revealed that 68 percent of respondents agreed with the statement that \u0141uka\u0161enka is doing his best to prevent Belarus from being dragged into war. Opposition groups, however, view the Belarusian leader as an aggressor due to his support for Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A January 2025 survey by the Belarusian Change Tracker showed an increase in trust for the government and support for its involvement in Russia\u2019s war of aggression.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Researchers noted that some respondents might not have answered honestly due to fear of punishment for their pro-Ukrainian stance. Chatham House highlighted that fear may have reduced the proportion of pro-Ukrainian responses by 9 percent. Nevertheless, this shift in public opinion is an alarming trend for those advocating for democratic change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

State media continue to face weak competition from independent outlets in exile. By 2030, state-controlled media may dominate completely, especially if independent media lose Western funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Independent media in disarray<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Trump’s executive order has already affected several media outlets, while Europe is losing interest in Belarus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Warsaw-based Belarusian-language TV channel Belsat<\/em>, which operates as part of Poland\u2019s broadcaster TVP<\/em>, continues to function despite cuts to its budget, staff and autonomy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the end of 2024, the chairman of the Belarusian Association of Journalists, Andrej Bastuniec, predicted a 10 percent reduction in support for independent media in 2025, with uncertain prospects for 2026. After the suspension of US aid, observers fear that Belarusian independent journalism is in crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Obychnoe Utro<\/em> show on YouTube quickly responded to the bad news from Washington, raising \u20ac14,000 in donations from viewers to continue production in February.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some bloggers argued that the channel\u2019s \u20ac25,000 two-month budget was too high, suggesting they could replace independent media at a lower cost. However, this suggestion is unrealistic. The internet has fostered the illusion that anyone with a laptop and good communication skills can rival professional journalists.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While some bloggers may have large audiences, they cannot replace traditional media with high standards of fact-checking, independence, ethics and balanced reporting. Moreover, bloggers often rely on information from traditional media and take sides in information wars.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Exiled media resist control and censorship<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Being in exile and labeled “extremist” in their home country, Belarusian media cannot fully utilize Western business models. Their ability to attract advertisers and monetize content is severely limited, although they should not disregard these tools.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most exiled media rely almost entirely on donor support. While propagandists criticize independent media for accepting foreign grants, they have no other means of survival, especially since the Belarusian government has criminalized independent journalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Propagandists claim that independent media do not exist and that they merely serve the interests of those who fund them. This narrative is promoted to justify their own dependence on the government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no absolute freedom of the press, just as there is no absolute freedom in general. However, it is possible to assess the level of independence and freedom based on the coverage provided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

State-run media never criticize \u0141uka\u0161enka, and no state media editor would permit journalists to criticize the government. In contrast, independent Belarusian media are free to publish conflicting opinions, including criticism of \u015aviat\u0142ana Cichano\u016dskaja, Zianon Pa\u017aniak and other opposition figures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Claims that Cichano\u016dskaja\u2019s office controls exiled media are unfounded. It is also incorrect to believe that Western donors dictate editorial policies. Donors evaluate key performance indicators, such as audience engagement and media citations, without interfering in content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Media should serve truth, not politics<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Despite criticism from some independent media outlets, the pro-democracy camp has appealed to Western partners for continued support for media in exile. On January 31, Cichano\u016dskaja met with diplomats from nine European Union countries to discuss financial assistance for media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maintaining integrity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

It is clear that some independent media are biased. Journalists living in exile and labeled “extremists” by the Belarusian government have little reason to support the regime. However, it is important not to take sides in the information war or allow political struggles to dominate one’s work. When this happens, professional standards can suffer, impacting the quality of coverage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is essential to distinguish between news and analysis, as these genres have different rules. A news report must be objective and should present various, even conflicting, perspectives. Analysis, op-eds and essays provide authors with the opportunity to express personal viewpoints, but facts must be clearly separated from opinions. Additionally, facts should be verified, and different perspectives should be represented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Resilient media crucial for Belarus\u2019 future<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Some commentators question the need for many independent media outlets in exile, suggesting that one or two major outlets would suffice. This view is misguided. \u0141uka\u0161enka has already deprived Belarusians of a political choice, and limiting the diversity of information sources would only exacerbate the situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Diversity benefits consumers. Each media outlet targets a different audience, and niche outlets with unique content can still play a vital role, even with a limited reach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Foreign embassies, for example, subscribe to professional media outlets, not bloggers, who often cannot guarantee accuracy or offer a plurality of opinions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is easy to destroy a media project, but reviving it is incredibly difficult. Despite \u0141uka\u0161enka\u2019s attempts, independent Belarusian journalism has proven its resilience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n
\n \"\"