Monitoring of the media space for hate speech targeting LGBTIQ+ communities (Q3 2025)

From July to September 2025, the Paralegal Hub of PO “ALLIANCE.GLOBAL” continued a systematic monitoring of the Ukrainian media space to identify instances of hate speech targeting LGBTIQ+ communities and other vulnerable population groups.

Monitoring was conducted using the MediaMonitoringBot tool, which performs daily automated searches of national online media based on 22 thematic keywords and two stop-words. Following automated selection, all items underwent manual review to detect discriminatory statements, stereotyping, or incitement to hatred.

In the third quarter of 2025, 2,280 media items were processed: 675 in July, 625 in August, and 980 in September. The most frequently used keywords were “HIV,” “LGBT,” “gay,” and “gender,” indicating sustained public sensitivity around sexuality and identity.

During the reporting period, 15 publications by the NGO “Vsi Razom!” were identified as containing discriminatory narratives. Core themes included litigation against the National Council (media regulator), lawsuits concerning same-sex marriages, and manipulative coverage of international events. These materials are framed as a clash between “traditional values” and “LGBT propaganda,” thereby legitimizing social hostility.

The initiative “Prava Molod” published seven items featuring explicit hate speech—aggressive vocabulary, dehumanizing imagery, and propagandistic visuals (skulls, cages, red backgrounds). LGBTIQ+ people are portrayed as “enemies of the nation” or a “threat to the state,” which aligns with international definitions of hate speech. Such materials are dangerous as they incite rejection and social exclusion.

Statements by five public figures (Mykola Lukashuk, Yevhen Petruniak, Dmytro Korchynskyi, Ihor Plohoy, and Ruslan Martsinkiv) displayed both covert and overt forms of hostility. Politicians employed legitimized discrimination by appealing to the Constitution, “traditional values,” or “national identity,” whereas radical actors resorted to direct insults and dehumanization. A telling example is the mayor of Ivano-Frankivsk, Ruslan Martsinkiv, who publicly thanked radicals for attempting to disrupt the opening of an LGBT center and called the event “a blow to the family”—an instance of hate speech by a public official.

By the end of Q3 2025, of 22 closely analyzed materials, eight contained explicit hate speech, while 15 exhibited covert discrimination or manipulative framing. At the same time, no open hate speech was recorded in mainstream media outlets, suggesting a gradual shift in standards and growing editorial responsibility. Social networks and blogs remain problematic due to the spread of offensive formulations and visual stigmatization. This underscores the need for continued journalist education, as well as the development of ethical guidelines and legal response mechanisms for hate speech.

A detailed report is available at: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16VYVpW09Tw95q37cylJFqlDHxJR8vBk_?usp=sharing