Overview of the Programs of Candidates for the Chairman of the Board of the Public Broadcasting Company

Українською читайте тут.

Candidates list music bands in their biographies, leave Russian words in their strategies, and primarily work for oligarchs. But all of them declare the values of Suspilne (The National Public Broadcasting Company of Ukraine).

Six candidates compete to lead Ukraine’s Public Broadcaster

Six men are competing for the opportunity to lead the National Public Broadcasting Company of Ukraine (Suspilne) for the next four years. They have been approved for the selection process by the Supervisory Board of the public broadcaster, which has now moved on to “reviewing and discussing the content of the submitted documents.” Meanwhile, these documents have already been published on the Suspilne website, prompting "Detector Media" to examine the candidates' proposals as well.

The candidates include six media managers: Mykola Chernotytskyi, the current head of Suspilne; Oleksandr Tkachenko, former head of the "1+1" media group, a former MP from the "Servant of the People" party, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Humanitarian and Information Policy, and Minister of Culture and Information Policy (2020–2023); Volodymyr Horkovenko, who spent twenty years in media before working five years in the information policy department of President Poroshenko’s administration (2014–2019); Oleksandr Kharebin, who served as First Deputy Director General of UA:PBC under Zurab Alasania from 2015 to 2017; Mykola Faiengolt, who led PayTV & Digital at StarLightMedia for nearly a decade; and Yurii Yurchenko, head of the municipal TV network in Zaporizhzhia.

Each candidate submitted a resume, a cover letter, and a strategic development plan for Suspilne. While the document types were uniform, their formats varied significantly between candidates.

For instance, Tkachenko’s resume is the only one without a photo and resembles a professional biography. Faiengolt’s resume, by contrast, is visually designed, broken into sections, and curiously includes a link to Google search results for his name. Chernotytskyi’s cover letter is about 150 words long, while Tkachenko’s stretches to 1,696 words. Yurchenko’s development plan is nine pages of fairly general information, whereas Faiengolt’s spans 74 pages of business analysis. Tkachenko is also the only candidate to submit his plan in slide format.

These stylistic differences mirror the diversity in content. Kharebin emphasizes newsroom convergence and virtual reality technology. Tkachenko focuses on boosting news popularity. Horkovenko discusses social media and accuses Suspilne of inflating engagement metrics. Chernotytskyi repeats the word “continue” in various forms ten times throughout his proposal.

None of the six candidates propose radical changes. Most of them stress the mission of public broadcasting, the importance of digital platforms and regional hubs, content for younger audiences, radio development, utilizing Suspilne’s rich archives, and maintaining independence. Interestingly, some propose creating things that already exist — such as a convergent newsroom (established in 2021) or restoring investigative journalism, which is already underway at Suspilne and its partners.

All candidates also share another trait: errors in their documents. Most are minor — for example, Chernotytskyi writes “будь коли” instead of “будь-коли.” But Kharebin’s plan includes the phrase “телевизийных станцій,” a linguistic mismatch. Yurchenko writes “promo kOmpaniya” and — hopefully by mistake — uses “toleration” in the phrase: “Toleration of compliance with gender equality and inclusion norms in media.” Faiengolt includes a Russism: “включая матеріальні стимули” (“including material incentives”).

One hopes that, if elected, each candidate will approach the job with greater attention to detail. And that those promising innovation and AI will actually use such tools — like running their documents through an online editor before applying for what could be the most important job of their lives.

So, let’s take a closer look at how the candidates’ submissions differ.

An incumbent deputy of the Kyiv Regional Council from European Solidarity and assistant to MP Iryna Herashchenko, Horkovenko previously headed a department in the Information Policy Directorate during President Poroshenko’s administration. Before that, he worked as a journalist for Ukrainian TV channels, including Inter, ICTV, and Ukraina.

In 2019, Kyiv Post reported receiving documents allegedly found in Horkovenko’s office during his time in the presidential administration. According to the documents, Poroshenko’s people allegedly paid media outlets and bloggers for support. It’s worth noting that one of the criteria for selecting the chairperson of the board is “moral integrity — high ethical standards, public authority, and accountability to society.”

In his resume, Horkovenko is the only candidate to mention charitable activity during the full-scale war: “Member of the Skif Volunteer Territorial Defense Group, which operated in the Makariv area during the occupation of the Kyiv region. After the de-occupation, we were the first to deliver humanitarian aid to Ivankiv.”

Horkovenko’s program spans 39 pages and begins with a jab at the current government, mentioning that the European Parliament adopted a resolution “urging the Ukrainian government to stop pressuring the media.” Clearly, as a member of European Solidarity, Horkovenko holds a personal grudge against Zelensky’s team. Even in his resume, he mentions winning a lawsuit over his unlawful dismissal from the National Council — a position to which he was appointed by Poroshenko and dismissed by Zelensky.

Despite this, Horkovenko promises that he “does not intend to criticize or look for scapegoats.” And he partially keeps that promise. His program is based on an analysis of current numerical indicators of Suspilne (Public Broadcaster) and a global goal — to make the media more popular. He even states that “the more viewers consume Suspilne content, the higher the level of public trust will be.”

In his program, Horkovenko addresses all aspects of Suspilne’s operations, and he is one of only two candidates (the other being Mykola Chernotytskyi) to mention “radio ensembles.” However, he devotes the most attention — 13 out of 39 pages — to Suspilne’s social media. He accuses the broadcaster of buying followers: “It is likely that a significant portion of the budget was spent just to produce a pretty graph in the annual report and claim: ‘We at Suspilne have 13 million followers on social media, and we strongly influence the information space.’ In fact, they do influence it, but not significantly.”

This serious accusation is not backed by evidence. Horkovenko illustrates it only with the discrepancy between the number of followers and the number of reactions on Suspilne’s pages. He also criticizes the broadcaster for not posting very exclusive or timely content (again, without evidence — "DM"), and thus losing to competitors on social media: “Suspilne, with over 3,600 employees, has no content.” He claims that regional pages lack regional content.

Among the changes he proposes is better interaction between page admins and audiences: “Even if the main news is serious, it’s acceptable and even desirable to joke in the comments, react to things, communicate. Not just ‘be at work’.” Horkovenko is one of only two candidates (along with Tkachenko) who use passive-aggressive language in their programs — and the only one to open with a promise not to criticize anyone.

Horkovenko devotes just two pages to radio, and four to television. Regarding TV, he highlights problems such as: “There’s a lack of daily discussion-based talk shows and hard-talk style debates,” and “investigative programs should return to Suspilne’s airwaves.” Suspilne already has investigative programming. Also, Horkovenko misnames the channel as “UA:Pershyi” instead of simply “Pershyi,” which has been the official name since the rebranding in May 2022. He also mistakenly refers to NSTU as a hybrid acronym, “NSTKU.”

In addition, he raises the question: “Why not try producing films and series?!” — suggesting international co-productions.

Horkovenko calls regional broadcasting “the most painful issue” and proposes the creation of a “full-fledged regional channel,” so that Suspilne can “maintain dialogue on relevant issues specific to each region.” Here, Horkovenko seems to forget how many channels actually make up Suspilne, how many regional branches are operating, and how NSTU is structured overall.

Obviously, such changes would require funding. Horkovenko is the only candidate to directly propose funding from local budgets. He is also the only one to directly use the word “paywall” in the context of Suspilne’s website, though he immediately adds: “Even within our team, there is no unified view on whether such an initiative contradicts the principles of openness and information accessibility.” It remains to be seen how this candidate would justify monetizing content to taxpayers who already fund Suspilne.

For some reason, to illustrate Suspilne News’ suitability for a paywall, Horkovenko uses a list of websites ranked by the number of materials. A more representative sample would be based on popularity and would mention media outlets that have already implemented paywalls.

Horkovenko’s program is the only one that includes a wordplay based on radio frequencies: “The specifics of radio and television work differ, so everyone should be on their own wavelength.” It is also the only one where we found a small, unattributed definition from the internet: “Operations management in media is the activity of managing the process of acquiring services, transforming them into a finished product, and delivering that product to the consumer.”

Among his four-year promises: "securing UA:Pershyi a spot in the top 10 channels by TV audience share," and "UA:Kultura in the top 20" — as well as "bringing Suspilne’s website into the top 15 most popular online resources."

Former CEO of “1+1”, accused of censorship. Architect of the "United News" telethon, where censorship is present. One of the media figures who offered to vouch for Ihor Kolomoiskyi. Former Minister of Culture and Information Policy, who defended the blocking of Poroshenko's TV channels and protected Medvedchuk's propagandists during the telethon. Dismissed after a scandal involving the allocation of half a billion hryvnias for films and TV series during wartime.

In 2021, he claimed that Oleksandr Dubinsky (a notorious "1+1" hitman during Tkachenko’s time) was not part of Russia’s disinformation network. In 2023, Dubinsky was charged with treason for allegedly being part of a criminal organization tied to the Russian General Staff.

Tkachenko has been the subject of journalistic investigations regarding an illegal mansion on Trukhaniv Island and an attempted takeover of the Odesa Film Studio.

A former MP from the “Servant of the People” party — the same team that already took over the “Rada” channel, discredited “Ukrinform”, and created several new state-run channels.

Let’s recall once more that one of the criteria for choosing the head of public broadcasting is “moral integrity — high ethical standards, public credibility, and accountability to society.”

Tkachenko’s program consists of 77 slides and is highly critical of Suspilne. His attack is evident even in the presentation’s subheadings: “Flashy reports cannot replace the real state of affairs,” “Figures that explain nothing,” “TV professionals understand well the real situation and the persistently weak position of Suspilne.”

There are at least some manipulations in Tkachenko’s statements. For instance, he at one point claims that “Pershyi” (the main Suspilne channel) “has a smaller audience than the average Ukrainian news channel in the pre-war period.” Of course, comparing today’s TV channels to pre-war media is misleading.

Tkachenko accuses the “Kultura” channel of lacking culture: supposedly it only airs “Ukrainian-dubbed, Russian-language melodramas” and concerts by “Lisapetny Batalion,” whose cultural value is debatable.

Firstly, he judges the channel by its most popular shows of the year, though simply looking at the programming schedule reveals plenty of cultural projects. Secondly, even that list includes other concerts — ironic, considering that a media group that aired “Svaty” and “Kvartal” now questions whether “Lisapetny Batalion” is cultural. Thirdly, most series on the list are not Russian-language. “Ruby Ring” (the top show) is in Ukrainian. “Lady in the Veil” is indeed dubbed — from Italian. “Central Hospital” is dubbed from Russian, but, notably, was produced by “1+1 Production” during Tkachenko’s time.

In the second half of his presentation, the candidate shifts to proposals. His main focus is news popularity: “The key is the news and information segment, which should become the focal point for rapid and impressive results. My experience in building information broadcasting and digital news platforms allows me to scale proven approaches to Suspilne, adapting them to its unique mission.”

Such claims from Tkachenko are questionable, as his “proven approaches” are not scalable to Suspilne — they contradict journalistic standards: fake stories about Poroshenko allegedly killing his brother, paranormal show segments, chupacabra news, reports on the secret lives of tragedy victims, lobbying Kolomoiskyi’s interests, and sexism.

Or, to quote his presentation: “Suspilne doesn’t mean boring. We must increase audience engagement through empathy and an emotionally engaging delivery style — without violating journalistic standards, but increasing overall content interest.” In his social media review, Tkachenko compares Suspilne’s Telegram page to what he calls the segment leader — “Trukha”.

The media manager claims that “Telegram is the main channel for satisfying Ukrainians’ information needs. Suspilne must account for this and increase its influence on the platform.” He also proposes focusing on YouTube. All other networks are “non-priority but important for promotion.”

The candidate never clearly explains what compromises Suspilne should make in exchange for popularity, except for emotional delivery and bringing in celebrity hosts. On the other hand, he does call for coverage of important social issues, stresses trust in Suspilne, raises the topic of innovation, and repeats the importance of veteran inclusion.

He also proposes some new ideas: an award from Radio Promin or creating a proprietary streaming platform with international partners’ support.

Regarding funding, Tkachenko is the only one proposing a temporary amendment to the law on public broadcasting: “Given the state’s limited ability to fund Suspilne at the legally defined level, we suggest expanding ad quotas and introducing excise-related revenues for sports and children’s projects. Temporarily, until state funding is restored to the legal level.” This approach hardly seems honest or safe — relying on “temporary law changes” that Suspilne itself cannot guarantee.

On finances, Tkachenko takes a subtle jab in his motivation letter: “…Especially to the public, which funds the broadcaster — sometimes more than top commercial media.” It might be fairer to measure this by dividing it across staff numbers, TV and radio channels, regional branches, and content areas.

He is also the only candidate to mention “bomb shelters with improved conditions” and directly proposes relocating the company: “The future of Suspilne is a compact, modern, and efficient production complex based on Ukrtelefilm.” Considering the legal battles over Ukrtelefilm, a move to the Odesa Film Studio seems more realistic — although Suspilne already has an excellent newsroom in central Kyiv.

There are more curious moments in this lengthy presentation. For example, the mention of “redistributing resources from inefficient areas to more productive ones,” which is worrisome given the “1+1” manager’s background. Or the phrase “from viewers who grew up with Grandpa Panas to baby boomers and pensioners,” which is amusing — aren’t boomers and pensioners essentially the same demographic?

And, of course, promises. Tkachenko plans to push Suspilne’s website to the top of the “white list” — beating, for instance, “Ukrainska Pravda.” To bring one Suspilne TV channel into the top five. Two radio stations into the top five. The YouTube channel — into the top ten.

In his biography, Tkachenko mentions being listed in the “Top 100 most influential Ukrainians” and that in 2005 he was one of the authors of the public broadcasting concept. That’s true. His team’s work wasn’t the only one — public broadcasting bills existed since 1997 — but he was involved in 2005 through the production studio “Nova Mova.” In 2005, the studio joined the “Public Broadcasting Coalition” and developed its own concept. One of Tkachenko’s teammates was media expert Ihor Kulyas, a former head of news at Novyi Kanal (resigned in 2002 over Medvedchuk’s censorship memos). So we’ll quote Kulyas from that period: “For some reason, officials are convinced that public broadcasting must be led by a politician. [...] Should we not expect that public broadcasting will offer viewers politically biased content instead of producing high-quality programming that meets global standards? [...] The potential appointment of Mr. Kmetyk — which almost happened — was beyond reason, considering his work history and reputation in television.”

Former head of distribution at StarLightMedia, anti-piracy advocate, and currently the founder of companies specializing in monetization and promotion of TV channels.

Faienhold's program spans 74 pages and contains the most analysis, tables, and managerial approaches. It also includes at least one error: “27,120 thousand UAH in 2024 (an average of 2.26 thousand UAH per month).” It should be 2,260 thousand, not 2.26 thousand.

The candidate employs a form of social engineering aimed at the Supervisory Board: he praises Suspilne more than anyone else and promises the Board the best European-level funding at the end of his document: “The Supervisory Board, as the guarantor of the broadcaster’s independence, will receive proper working conditions and clearly defined resource support. All issues regarding the Board’s funding will be regulated under the best European practices.” As a reminder, under current law, the members of the Supervisory Board work without compensation.

Faienhold's strategy is also focused on popularizing Suspilne — but not through news content, but rather through entertainment: “Emphasis on entertainment content: talk shows, series, entertainment programs, with news organically integrated among them.”

This idea recurs multiple times in the program. For instance, the candidate calls for an “entertainment breakthrough,” a large-scale joint entertainment project with foreign public broadcasters. Obviously, beyond Eurovision? Or he concludes: “There is an evident fatigue with news and political content. This means entertainment content becomes an even more important factor in retaining audiences.” Given Mr. Faienhold’s prior experience at StarLightMedia, one hopes Suspilne won’t turn to local-style “entertainment” such as psychics, pregnant children, and wife swaps.

Another potential red flag: Faienhold is the only candidate who mentions using artificial intelligence specifically for “automated content creation”: “Using AI tools for quickly generating texts...” However, he later clarifies that the use of AI should be responsible, ethical, and not replace human expertise.

In fact, there are several hints in Faienhold’s program about possible threats to the quality of Suspilne. For example, vaguely worded ideas like “improving clickability” on YouTube. Such changes can be implemented in many ways — but Ukraine definitely doesn’t need another Channel 24-style YouTube. Overall, Faienhold proposes increasing the share of long-form videos on YouTube, and continuing active use of Telegram for “prompt information sharing and audience engagement (especially in the regions).”

In addition, the candidate advocates for the development of investigative journalism that “will have a tangible impact on social change, strengthening Suspilne’s position.” He even suggests taking advantage of the fact that many specialists have recently found themselves on the job market after USAID funding dried up (though he cites no research to support this). He also proposes the creation of Suspilne’s own fact-checking center.

Another of his innovations is the integration of regional and sports broadcasting: “It’s necessary to combine Suspilne Sport broadcasts with local content, including sports news, analysis, and reports on regional events.”

Sometimes, the candidate’s competitive advantages, despite their positive intent, sound rather unfortunate due to their phrasing: “Suspilne is already the only national broadcaster that systematically creates content in minority languages. This leadership must be preserved and strengthened.” One would hope this “uniqueness” wouldn’t need to be preserved — Suspilne should rather inspire others by its example.

Out of all the candidates, only Faienhold and Tkachenko mention the word “audit.” However, Faienhold specifically emphasizes: “Optimization of the staffing structure should not happen through layoffs but through retraining and adaptation of employees to new digital realities.”

Regarding funding, the candidate prioritizes advocacy for full promised government financing. After the war and with economic recovery, he proposes, for example, a special budget fund financed by spectrum usage royalties. Additionally, Faienhold proposes introducing paid services for Suspilne: “There are plans to launch subscription-based or pay-per-view projects, as well as effective use of online platforms (OTT services, YouTube, podcasts, etc.) to generate revenue from ads and subscriptions without compromising the accessibility of socially important content.” However, the strategy lacks details on this point.

Faienhold is the only candidate to end his program with the exclamation: “Glory to Ukraine!”

Imagine a program where the phrase “Imagine!” is repeated eight times. That’s the concept from Oleksandr Kharebin, former president of Media Invest Group, owned by oligarch Serhiy Taruta. He was also the former COO of a media holding owned by pro-Russian, sanctioned oligarch Serhiy Kurchenko, during a time when journalists were resigning en masse due to censorship.

He also served as First Deputy Director General of NTKU (2015–2017), and was allegedly an expert for Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s team ahead of the 2019 elections. At least, Kharebin was included in the published list of Zelenskyy’s experts and called himself the "third person" in the ZeTeam, after Zelenskyy and his wife. Later, Zelenskyy stated that he had never worked with him, not even for a minute.

Let’s also recall that one of the selection criteria for the Chair of the Management Board is “moral integrity — high ethical standards, public trust, and responsibility to society.”

In his résumé, Kharebin is the only one who considers it important to mention that he graduated with honors. In his motivation letter, he describes what he did in 2022: “At the start of the war in 2022, through YouTube and other media, I analyzed strategies and talked about what concerned every Ukrainian: how to endure, how to win, how not to lose oneself.”

To be fair, the review of Kharebin’s program could end with this quote: “Wikipedia has proven that people value truth and transparency — its style prohibits propaganda and requires sources. NSTU could adopt this by publishing sources for all news on Suspilne.online.” Citing sources — the standard of accuracy — is one of the foundational principles of journalism, and sources are already included in every Suspilne news article. A future head of NSTU cannot be unaware of this.

On the other hand, Kharebin’s strategy still contains many points of interest. Essentially, his document is 27 pages of iterations on media convergence: “Imagine a report from de-occupied Kherson: a live broadcast on ‘Pershyi’ shows three bridges and schools being rebuilt, a 60-second TikTok clip with the hashtag #KhersonLives goes viral among young people, and a podcast on ‘Promin’ immerses listeners in stories of local residents returning to life. This is not fantasy, but a reality NSTU can implement.” NSTU really can do this — because, like most media outlets, it already does.

For example, Kharebin repeatedly suggests that Suspilne develop its TikTok presence. He twice writes that Suspilne’s TikTok page has 10,000 followers. In fact, Suspilne has several TikTok accounts, and just “Suspilne Ivano-Frankivsk” has over 24,000 followers. The two most popular accounts — “Eurovision” and “Dorechi” — have over 320,000 and over 200,000 followers, respectively.

Still, it’s fair to admit that Kharebin’s proposals haven’t been implemented at quite the same scale. The candidate mentions virtual reality 34 times throughout his text. For instance, “VR fairy tales called ‘Growing Up Tales,’ where heroes like Cossacks or forest spirits teach resilience and hope.” He even proposes creating a metaverse: “NSTU will create the ‘Public Metaverse’ — a virtual space for concerts and tours.” However, the strategy does not explain where Suspilne would find the funding for this (Meta loses billions on similar technology), or where Ukrainians — especially in frontline areas — would get VR headsets.

Then again, exaggeration is present from the start of the strategy: “This document is not a dry plan with numbers and deadlines, but a living story [...] This strategy immerses you in every aspect [...] It’s a journey through possibilities.”

Overall, Kharebin is selling the Supervisory Board a dream: audio meditations on Suspilne.online as “support for millions,” “augmented reality apps,” and replacing 50% of outdated equipment by 2027. Yet he doesn’t clearly explain how all of this would be physically or financially achievable. Instead, he presents already-implemented Suspilne ideas as fresh concepts: “Imagine broadcasts with sign language interpretation for veterans with hearing loss.” We’ve imagined it — and even seen it.

Some of Kharebin’s ideas could potentially pose risks to quality journalism: “AI will analyze social media and search queries to know what Ukrainians want — for example, more news about reconstruction (70% interest) or culture (50%).” Such proposals might result in Suspilne producing popular news rather than important news.

Other proposals are either insufficient or already implemented, like the strategies for resisting political pressure: “Transparency (online reports), international oversight by the EBU, the campaign ‘Suspilne — Independent’.” He also proposes creating an online forum and expects it to have one million users by 2027.

Five pages of the presentation are dedicated to the section “Modern Trends and Forecasts,” which contains specific pledges and predictions from the potential head of the board, such as: “Reach: 15 million (50% of Ukrainians), of which 5 million are youth.” But there are also vague sections like “Roles and Responsibility”: “Clear roles accelerate progress.” That’s the entire content of the section. Or a promise to win Eurovision: “Eurovision: Participation and victory.” That’s even bolder than Tkachenko’s alleged influence over legislation.

Kharebin’s section on financing is the most optimistic of all candidates. He envisions state funding of: “2.5 billion UAH annually (with a 10% increase from 2026 with the Council’s support).” Grants from partners more than doubling: “500 million UAH from international partners (for documentaries, technology).” Business sponsorships: “50 million UAH annually from businesses (‘Nova Poshta,’ ‘PrivatBank,’ ‘Epicentr’).” And monetization of the website with a million (!) users: “50 million UAH annually from Suspilne.online subscriptions (1 million subscribers at 50 UAH/year).” For context, NV had just 15,000 subscribers last year.

The most positive forecast in Kharebin’s strategy is Ukraine’s total victory by 2029, with the liberation of all occupied territories: “For NSTU, this means that by 2029, when 5G is expected to be widely implemented in Ukraine (with 60% coverage, according to the Ministry of Digital Transformation), live broadcasts from Luhansk, Crimea, or Donetsk will become possible.”

He is the current Chair of the Board of Suspilne (Public Broadcaster of Ukraine). Previously, he served as the director of the National Television Company of Ukraine's Sumy Regional Directorate. He submitted the shortest motivation letter and the most concise resume among all candidates. He is also the only one who mentioned proficiency in the Russian language.

Chernotytskyi’s program is the most values- and ideology-driven among the candidates. While Tkachenko focuses on news, Faienhold on entertainment formats, and Horkovenko on social media, the current head of Suspilne chooses to speak about the mission and objectives of the broadcaster: "Suspilne’s content policy must not only respond to public demand but also proactively work to expand access to quality content so that everyone has the opportunity to gain knowledge, think critically, and participate in shaping the future."

Since Chernotytskyi is running for a second term, he frequently uses the word “continue” in his strategy: "Continue implementing the concept of children's and youth programming," "Continue investing in the rights to major sports events," "Continue investing in quality news," "Radio Kultura will continue covering cultural topics..."

Some of these assessments differ from those of his competitors. For example, Tkachenko believes that Radio Kultura should rather “start” covering cultural topics.

Other candidates’ programs openly question Chernotytskyi’s assertion that Suspilne’s three television channels are “evenly distributed among target audiences.” They instead point out the dominance of an older demographic. The numbers in the current head's document are the most optimistic:

It should be noted that Chernotytskyi cites data specifically about trust in Suspilne's news, while the others refer to general trust in Suspilne, with no source provided.

Chernotytskyi’s program is the only one whose SWOT analysis doesn’t include any weaknesses for which the Chair of the Board is responsible. Kharebin, for example, mentions the lack of a content monetization model. Fayengold points to marketing issues, while Tkachenko highlights the neglect of the regional network. Most of the challenges listed by Chernotytskyi (salaries, planning horizon, overregulation, infrastructure) are attributed to state policy.

On the other hand, Chernotytskyi is the only candidate who emphasizes content for Ukrainians abroad. He mentions developing international journalism within Suspilne’s broadcasting. Like others, he also highlights regional broadcasting and “support for hyperlocal correspondents” among the priorities.

He also addresses entertainment formats, such as cinema: "A significant challenge for Suspilne will be gaining experience in fiction films. The Department of Strategic Analysis and Development of Socially Impactful Content will shape production topics in line with public demand trends and societal challenges."

In the section on expectations, Chernotytskyi returns to praise: "Suspilne must remain a benchmark of quality informational content," "Public broadcasting has become a major player in Ukraine’s media space," "The public broadcaster has gained recognition from peers and partners in Ukraine and abroad."

No radical changes, innovations, or transformations are envisioned in his strategy.

He is the head of the Zaporizhzhia municipal enterprise "Municipal Television Network," which promotes the local authorities.

Let us remind you once again that one of the criteria for selecting the Chair of the Board is “moral integrity — high ethical standards, public credibility, and responsibility to society.”

Yurchenko’s resume contains the least relevant information among all candidates. He talks about his channel’s achievements: “During my tenure, the TV channel became the best regional channel in Ukraine on OTT platforms...” He also notes that he holds a national record in the Ukrainian Book of Records for the longest live broadcast, that he received a medal for personal contribution to the development of Zaporizhzhia, and that he organizes city festivals. He even calls his music band legendary: “For many years, I’ve been the frontman and author in the legendary-for-Zaporizhzhia band ‘#KHORTA’.”

Yurchenko’s entire program for the development of Suspilne is the same length as Tkachenko’s motivation letter — it fits within nine pages. In fact, the first six pages are filled with generic rhetoric that could be summed up in one sentence: “Developing socially important content, supporting regional broadcasting, promoting media literacy programs, and protecting the national media space are key steps to strengthening the role of media in building a democratic society.”

He then moves on to KPIs, explains what they are, and provides examples — but not his own KPIs for Suspilne, just general examples. He notes, for instance, that audience growth can be measured by “the number of unique viewers of programs.”

After listing KPIs, Yurchenko adds another list of “additional qualitative KPIs,” which... partially repeat the previous ones.

Yurchenko's KPIs vs. Additional Qualitative KPIs

Essentially, the candidate dedicates only three pages to weaknesses of Suspilne (which he calls “weak spots”) and proposed changes. But not all of them are specific — some are general statements like: “Joint work on social and cultural projects.”

His more concrete proposals focus on regional broadcasting. Yurchenko suggests giving regional branches new functions (without specifying what they are), focusing on local content, creating joint regional materials, and organizing intercity telebridges: "Two cities take turns hosting a festival of artists, musicians, historians, and cultural experts, competing and creating a joint product at different venues. This helps to reveal the history and unique features of different regions."

Additionally, Yurchenko proposes featuring well-known personalities in Suspilne’s documentaries, claiming it would help promote them. He cites, as an example, Ramina Eskhakzai, a finalist from “The Bachelor.”

He believes international awards could help popularize Suspilne: "There is weak promotion of international awards received. Additional promotion is needed as recognition by international experts. Few people are aware of this, understand it, or are proud of it."

There is no section in the program dedicated to audience research, but it’s very curious to imagine Yurchenko’s ideal viewer — someone who still watches telebridges, becomes interested in products thanks to international awards, and turns on a documentary because it’s hosted by a Bachelor finalist.

The candidate also believes Suspilne under-promotes the national radio dictation while over-promoting the Junior Eurovision. He calls on the channel to film “iconic contemporary events that could eventually become ‘living classics,’” and to create a new show similar to “Chance”: "The creation of a new music/cultural project as a platform for a new wave of Ukrainian musicians."

His final vision: "Building a network of hyperlocal media — YOU, the VIEWER, in any corner of the country, YOU are Suspilne." A reminder: Suspilne is already working on building a network of hyperlocal journalists.

In reality, who better than Ukrainians to know that candidates' programs often don’t mean much. Beautiful words can be written in documents (which, by the way, not everyone managed to do). And all promises to create a Suspilne metaverse or make its news “emotional” still need to pass the Supervisory Board, the staff, reality — and in some cases, even the Verkhovna Rada.

However, the programs do reveal a few trends. For example, all candidates support the development of regional networks. Most suggest simply not interfering with successful radio. For many, the development of Suspilne mainly means promoting it. Which is fine — but the question lies in how. Most candidates emphasize that Suspilne produces great content but packages it poorly for the audience.

Assessments of Suspilne’s current state differ radically — which is also understandable. Tkachenko paints a bleak picture in order to “save” the channel. Chernotytskyi highlights successes to extend his term.

Each candidate proclaims commitment to the principles of Suspilne’s independence. But this is one area where we (for now) can judge not just their words — but their actions. Among the six candidates, one likely paid journalists for advertorials. Another worked for a pro-Russian oligarch. A third heads a media outlet that produces advertorial content. And Tkachenko has done everything from running Novyi Kanal during the Medvedchuk censorship era, overseeing censorship at 1+1 in 2010, to essentially enforcing censorship during the United News marathon.

Finally, one last reminder: one of the criteria for selecting the Chair of the Board is “moral integrity — high ethical standards, public credibility, and responsibility to society.”