What the United News Marathon and Suspilne’s Pershyi Channel broadcast looked like on March 24–25, 2026 — summary

Українською читайте тут.

Coverage of the week’s main topics; representation of parliamentary factions and groups in guest studios; instances of political PR, as well as Russian narratives and toxic media figures in the telethon; and violations of the core standards of information journalism—in brief.

The United News Marathon was launched on February 24, 2022. Detector Media began monitoring it on March 21 of the same year using this methodology. In January this year, Detector Media refined and expanded this methodology in response to comments and suggestions from the editorial teams participating in the telethon. The author of the monitoring is Ihor Kulyas, a media trainer and the creator of Detector Media’s core monitoring methodology. 

From March 2022 to September 2024, the monitoring focused on recording and analyzing broadcast schedules of different channels, the main content produced by editorial teams (reports, live feeds, studio discussions), violations of journalism standards, instances of political PR, representation of parliamentary factions and groups, Russian narratives and toxic media figures, and topics ignored by the telethon.

On May 21, 2024, Suspilne’s Pershyi Channel left the telethon and began independent 24/7 broadcasting. This change is not fundamental for monitoring purposes. The work of Suspilne’s news editorial team continues to be evaluated as before, using the same methodology as before the telethon. 

Since October 2024, the monitoring format has changed. It now focuses on analyzing coverage of major socially significant topics in the telethon and — for comparison — on Suspilne’s Pershyi Channel. It tracks how key daily and weekly topics are covered, representation of MPs from different factions, instances of political PR, and the presence of toxic media figures and Russian narratives.

Summaries of monitoring reports are available here, and the full versions of reports are available here.

On March 24–25, the heaviest fighting took place in the Pokrovsk, Kostiantynivka, and Huliaipole directions. In the United News telethon, editorial teams collectively paid the most attention to the Pokrovsk and Oleksandrivka directions, while other active frontline areas received little coverage. On the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne, very little attention was paid to the frontline overall during the reporting days. The Sloviansk direction received the most coverage, while the most active areas were covered only minimally.

On March 23–24, the enemy launched nearly a thousand drones per day. The worst consequences were recorded in Zaporizhzhia, Poltava, Dnipro, Lviv, and Ivano-Frankivsk. The Pershyi Channel covered these events much more promptly and comprehensively than the telethon. Expert discussions of the enemy attack and its consequences were also significantly more in-depth on the Pershyi Channel.

The main foreign policy topics of the reporting days (the impact of the war in Iran on Ukraine, the negotiation process between Ukraine, the United States, and Russia, and the anti-Ukrainian rhetoric and actions of the current Hungarian government) were covered differently by the telethon channels. The Iranian topic was analyzed in depth only on the We Are Ukraine channel, while the Hungarian topic was discussed with just one expert on 1+1. The Pershyi Channel of Suspilne devoted sufficient attention to all three thematic areas, engaging a broad and high-quality range of experts in the discussions.

The topic of the parliamentary crisis in the telethon was covered (albeit in an unbalanced way) only by ICTV and STB. The Pershyi Channel discussed the issue both with MPs from different factions in debate studios and with numerous political experts.

During the reporting days, the telethon featured the highest number of serious violations of the standards of accuracy and the separation of facts from opinions. There were also serious violations of the standards of balance of opinions and timeliness. On the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne, the most frequent violations concerned accuracy and completeness of information. The standard of balance of opinions was also violated.

During the week of March 23–29, guest studios featuring MPs in the telethon included almost exclusively representatives of the “Servant of the People” party, with only one appearance by a representative of “Batkivshchyna.” Representatives of “Holos” and “European Solidarity” were absent from the telethon. On the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne, representation of ruling and opposition factions in discussion studios during this week was balanced, although this balance was violated twice.

Over the two analyzed days, there were five instances of political PR in the telethon, all on ICTV and STB. On the Pershyi Channel, there were two unjustified mentions of the factional affiliation of guest MPs.

During the reporting days, the highest number of battles once again took place in the Pokrovsk direction (47 and 44 combat engagements per day, respectively). The next most intense were the Kostiantynivka direction (39 and 16 engagements) and the Huliaipole direction (22 and 17). In all other directions, the number of engagements was fewer than 10 per day.

In the United News telethon, the greatest overall attention was given to the Pokrovsk direction (one report, one analytical segment, and six discussions with guests). Considerable attention was also paid to the Oleksandrivka direction (two report segments, one live broadcast, and two discussions). The more active Huliaipole direction was covered only in one discussion, while the Kostiantynivka direction was mentioned only in general summaries. The most active in covering the frontline situation during these days were the editorial teams of the 1+1 and We Are Ukraine channels. Most often, the situation at the front was discussed with frontline soldiers (12 times); four times with spokespersons of various Defense Forces units; and three times with military experts. War correspondents from 1+1 produced two reports and one live broadcast during these days, and one more frontline report aired on ICTV and STB.

On the Pershyi Channel, slightly more attention during the reporting days was given to the Sloviansk direction (a frontline report was produced from there, and the situation was discussed with two guests). The most active directions—Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka—were each covered in only two guest studio discussions, while the Huliaipole direction was discussed with just one guest. Overall, the channel devoted unusually little attention to the frontline during these days: there were studio discussions with four frontline soldiers, four unit spokespersons, and two experts. One report was produced.

On March 23–24, Ukraine experienced one of the most massive enemy air attacks—nearly a thousand drones per day, launched in waves, in addition to cruise and ballistic missiles. The worst consequences of this attack were recorded in Zaporizhzhia (one killed and nine injured), Poltava (two killed and twelve injured), Dnipro (13 injured), Lviv (22 injured and a fire in a UNESCO heritage building in the city center), and Ivano-Frankivsk (two killed and four injured, with a maternity hospital struck). In terms of reporting, most of these events were covered much more promptly and comprehensively by the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne than by the telethon, through live broadcasts and reports from its own correspondents. Within the telethon, channels provided full-fledged on-the-ground coverage only partially: Inter covered Zaporizhzhia, 1+1 covered Dnipro, and We Are Ukraine covered Zaporizhzhia and Lviv. Expert discussion of the attack and its consequences was also significantly stronger on the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne; within the telethon, high-quality expert analysis was provided only by the We Are Ukraine channel. On March 25, a drone attack on Kharkiv injured seven people. This event was likewise covered more promptly and comprehensively by the Pershyi Channel than by the telethon.

The main foreign policy topics during the reporting days remained unchanged: the war in Iran in its Ukrainian dimension, updates on the negotiation process between Ukraine, the United States, and Russia, and the anti-Ukrainian rhetoric and actions of the current Hungarian government ahead of the elections. Coverage of developments in the war in Iran and the consequences of the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz varied across the telethon channels. Inter provided high-quality coverage of official U.S. statements and actions through reports by its correspondent in the United States. At the same time, the We Are Ukraine channel organized in-depth expert discussions. Other channels covered the Iranian topic only superficially. The Pershyi Channel of Suspilne devoted sufficient attention to the issue through expert discussions. It also paid more attention to ongoing developments in the negotiation process, engaging a wide range of experts.

Regarding the Hungarian topic, on March 24, the telethon devoted minimal attention to a press conference by Oschadbank about the details of the illegal abduction of Ukrainian cash collectors by Hungarian special services: the 1+1 channel limited itself to a brief news segment, while We Are Ukraine ignored the press conference altogether. The Pershyi Channel provided a live broadcast and a live report from its correspondent. On March 25, Donald Trump called on Hungarians to vote for Orbán’s political force, while Orbán decided to stop gas supplies to Ukraine. On that day, the telethon—apart from brief reports—discussed the issue with only one expert. In contrast, the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne organized broad and multifaceted expert discussions on the topic throughout the day.

During the two reporting days, the most important domestic political issue remained the functionality of parliament. On March 25, the Verkhovna Rada had a quorum and adopted decisions. In the telethon, the 1+1 channel did not mention this at all, while ICTV and STB covered it in an unbalanced manner. The Pershyi Channel devoted a significant portion of its airtime to the topic, discussing the parliamentary crisis both with MPs from different factions in debate studios and with numerous political experts.

On the 1+1 channel, the most frequent serious violations of the accuracy (credibility) standard were generalized, vague pseudo-attributions of subjective opinions. Many facts were presented without any references to sources. Most serious violations of the precision standard involved mismatches between visuals and text in news briefs and live broadcasts. The most common violations of the separation of facts from opinions standard were emotional judgments by journalists in news reports. There were also numerous unauthorised commentaries by hosts in guest studios. All serious violations of the completeness standard involved insufficient presentation of experts’ credentials. The most frequent violations of the clarity standard were the use of words incomprehensible to part of the audience. There were also several serious violations of the timeliness standard when events that had occurred a day earlier were presented as news.

On ICTV and STB, the most frequent serious violations of the accuracy (credibility) standard were generalized, vague pseudo-attributions of subjective opinions. Many facts were also presented without source references. The most common serious violations of the precision standard were mismatches between visuals and text in news briefs. Almost all serious violations of the separation of facts from opinions standard were purely emotional judgments by journalists in news reports. There was also a serious violation of the balance of opinions standard when a controversial topic was discussed only with a representative of the ruling parliamentary faction.

On the Inter channel, the most frequent serious violations of the accuracy (credibility) standard were generalized, vague pseudo-references to sources of facts. The most common violations of the precision standard were mismatches between visuals and text. The most frequent violations of the separation of facts from opinions standard were emotional judgments by journalists in news and in news segments of guest studios. All serious violations of the clarity standard involved the use of words incomprehensible to part of the audience.

On the We Are Ukraine channel, the most frequent serious violations of the accuracy (credibility) standard were purely abstract pseudo-references. Many facts were also presented without any references at all. The most common serious violations of the precision standard were mismatches between visuals and text in news briefs and analytical segments. The most frequent violations of the separation of facts from opinions standard were purely emotional judgments by journalists in news reports. There were also many subjective commentaries by journalists in news reports. The most common serious violations of the completeness standard were the absence of natural sound in videos within news briefs and analytical segments. There were also many insufficient presentations of experts.

The most frequent serious violations of the accuracy (credibility) standard were purely abstract pseudo-references. The most common violations of the separation of facts from opinions standard were excessive use of attribution markers and attention-enhancing phrasing in news reports. The most frequent violations of the completeness standard involved insufficient presentation of experts’ credentials. The balance of opinions standard was seriously violated twice when the topic of the parliamentary crisis was discussed only with representatives of the ruling faction. All serious violations of the clarity standard involved the use of words incomprehensible to part of the audience.

Members of Parliament were invited to the telethon 14 times during the reporting week (compared to 13 the previous week). Over the course of the week, 13 representatives of the “Servant of the People” party appeared on air (nearly 93% of all MP appearances). In addition, one representative of “Batkivshchyna” appeared on the 1+1 channel. On all other telethon channels, only representatives of the ruling faction were featured. Representatives of the opposition factions “Holos” and “European Solidarity” were not invited to the telethon.

The Office of the President was represented three times during the week by advisor Mykhailo Podolyak (with a total of 41 minutes of airtime on 1+1, Inter, and We Are Ukraine). Another advisor, Serhii Leshchenko, appeared twice (18 minutes on Inter and We Are Ukraine). In addition, Presidential Commissioner Vladyslav Vlasiuk appeared on We Are Ukraine (with a total of 15 minutes). Altogether, the Office of the President had 1 hour and 14 minutes of airtime in the telethon.

On the public broadcaster’s channel, MPs appeared 41 times during the week (compared to 30 the previous week). Representatives of the ruling “Servant of the People” faction were invited 23 times, while opposition MPs appeared a total of 17 times (8 from “European Solidarity,” 6 from “Holos,” and 3 from “Batkivshchyna”). In addition to faction representatives, a non-affiliated MP (Yuliia Yatsyk) also appeared on the talk show New Countdown. In most discussion studios, representation of ruling and opposition factions was balanced. However, on March 24, this balance was broken twice during daytime broadcasts: the parliamentary crisis was discussed one-on-one, without opposition representatives, with “Servant of the People” MPs Yevheniia Kravchuk and Oleksandr Kopylenko.

During the two analyzed days, there were five instances of political PR in the telethon, all on ICTV and STB. The main figure of positive PR was President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. There were no instances of negative PR.

On the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne, formal instances of political PR included unjustified mentions of MPs’ factional affiliation.

No Russian propaganda narratives were identified in the telethon or on the Pershyi Channel of Suspilne during the reporting period. However, news on the Inter channel was hosted by a presenter considered to be toxic.