The media system in Ukraine. Political science approach

: The media system in Ukraine is one of the most significant elements of the whole structure of the public relations, especially in the political sphere. In spite of the two great social uprisings in Ukraine, the influence of oligarchs on the policy was not successfully optimized. They exploit the media as the tool of their political game. Main hypothesis of the article: the media system is dominated by the interests of oligarchs who practically control the whole of it.


Political conditionings
The presentation of the general condition of the media system shall begin with the showing of political procedures that are responsible for that state. The so-far existing patterns of functioning of an individual in the public life and planned economy with its all infrastructure heritage entered the declared democratic system in Ukraine creating the political system dedicated to the interests of industrial and capital/oligarch groups 1 . The said system, due to the two great social protests referred to as the Orange Revolution and the Dignity Revolution, underwent transformations but in its principle, did not eliminate the influence of oligarchs. It is particularly visible in the case of the already formed political system in which political parties created by the oligarchic groups are more political projects than the organizations with clearly specified ideology that is perceived as the tool to achieve some goals, rather than its substantial element 2 . As a result they become, as Yuri Szwed, Ukrainian specialist of the political system in Ukraine, notices The machines to cast a vote and virtual project 3 .
In December 2015 there were 200 political parties registered in Ukraine 4 , and in 2017 the state registers contained as many as 352 political parties 5 . However, the sociological study points out to the fact that for the last 15 years only from 2% to 5% of the citizens belonged to political parties with the permanent activation of membership in the period of elections, which is explained by the willingness to achieve some material benefits rather than the ideological support of their activity 6 .
Szwed explains this dynamics by the phenomenon of the so-called rebranding -in order to take part in the next elections, new parties are not formed but the old ones undergo reconstruction based on the already existing structure, frequently by the mere change of name, leadership and in the most cases, of their owner. After lost elections, in the clash with other formations, also representing their sponsors' (oligarchs') interests, these parties simply disappear from the political life leaving space for others 7 . 1 See.: А. Окара, Власть и бизнес в Украине как сиамские близнецы, Журнал "Бизнес", 2003, no. 31; А. Колодій, "Олігархи" й "олігархія  Another important feature of the Ukrainian political system is the fact that the Ukrainian political parties do not pay much attention to their ideological sense of belonging. It is frequently easy to observe an obvious inconsistency between their activities and the values they proclaim. The significant trait, that in fact distinguishes them one from another, is their preferable course of the foreign policy-deeper integration with Russia or Europe. It is often caused by economic interests of the party sponsors and may constitute one of the key reasons for which ideological coalitions between various political parties are concluded. The example of the above is the coalition of the Communist Party of Ukraine and the Party of Regions.
Low ideologization manifests itself also in the phenomenon of the mass transfer of representatives from one party to another with the totally different postulates than the ones under which a representative had been chosen to the parliament. The example is the transfer of a great part of the representatives from the Batkiwszczyzna Party to the Party of Regions accompanied by the accusations of the change of the party caused by the obtaining of the financial profits from the Party of Regions.
The attempt of de-oligarchisation of politics after 2013 calling for the exclusion of oligarchs from the political decision-making process turned out to be inefficient. The existing policy-makers (oligarchs) supporting the Party of Regions, losing their political backup after its collapse, withdrew from more or less visible interference with the decision-making process. Nevertheless, some oligarchs, such as for example, Ihor Kolomojsky, who set up a political project called the Ukrainian association of Patriots ("Ukrop"); oligarchic groups of Firtasz and Liowoczkin -oligarchs originating in the Party of Regions who established the Opposition Block, still show the tendency to take the monopolistic control over the parliamentarian groups.
The media equipped with a greater freedom of speech and addressing the society's expectations connected with the elimination of oligarchs from the political scene, started to look for the sources of financing of the political parties. However, these attempts seem to be very fragmented and do not lead to the transparency in the functioning of the parties themselves. The reasons for this are as follows: social and political discourse, because of the control by financial and capital groups over the majority of the media, is implemented to the benefit of their interest 8 ; there is a lack of explicit legal regulations that would introduce a transparent mechanism of financing of the political parties. On the other hand, the advantage is that the parliamentary parties, at this stage, do not have the so-called ""sponsor-monopolist" 9 .

Historic outline of the development of mass media
In order to present the shape of the modern media, it would be reasonable to look at the history of their development. It can be said that only after Ukraine won its independence, the years 1991-1992 were the period when the awareness of the need to create the independent media was born. Until1995 the phenomenon of liberalization of the information space and emergence of the independent centers of the means of mass media could be observed. More or less in the half of Leonid Kuchma's office as the president, freedom of speech was considerably limited, and this process lasted till January, 2005. During that period, there were thousands of nationwide and local media functioning that remained the property of the State Treasury. It mainly concerned the national TV and radio which had their centers in every single oblast. This was also the time when the private media were established and whose owners were the financial and industrial groups, the oligarchs. Their goal was to become the active players on the Ukrainian political scene and they needed the media to achieve this. The country witnessed the fierce competition between the oligarch groups that had already been established and those which were being formed (e.g. Donetsk and Dnipropetrovsk clans). The mass media became the natural element of that game.
Additionally, it should be remembered that there was a problem of the lack of qualified staff able to function in the conditions of the market, on which there was a constant fight for the receivers' attention that involved the free use of freedom of speech. The post-Soviet universities did not manage to educate the journalists who would be able to do their job in a skillfulway and switch to a completely different way of the media operation,which was not based on the service of the single political party whose activities were assumed as the only appropriate and legitimate. That is why the government under Kuchma was so successful in controlling the Ukrainian media. The so-called internal censorship assisted by numerous pressures of the government and individual owners affiliated to the ruling elites, efficiently interfered with the honest work of journalists and proper fulfillment of their professional duties. Lots of young editors, reporters and columnists eager to benefit from the promised freedom of speech, were fired from work, and those who were particularly unsubmissive, were simply removed by means of the state security services or criminal groups.
After the Orange Revolution, which, as it is assumed today, led to the liquidation of censorship, the media in Ukraine started to function in the conditions close to democratic ones. Freedom of speech was the main priority, the political institutions stopped to influence the implemented editorial policy -the process of selection of information to be passed to a receiver. As a consequence, the level of citizens' trust in the media considerably increased 10 . Unfortunately, that situation did not last long. After successful етапі: виклики, проблеми, суспільні очікування" 16 вересня 2015 р. Київ 2015, s. 28-29, inf election, the Party of Regions representing the interests of the great capital and the old political elite still present on the political scene from the times of Kuchma's presidency, revived the control over the content of information communicated by the media. For example, The Security Service of Ukraine under the leadership of one of the shareholders of a commercial program and a recognizable businessman, told the journalists to present the information about the Party of Regions and their activities in positive light. It may be even said that the media, in spite of the postulates and ideas spread in the period of the Orange Revolution, did not become the dedicated advocates and guards of democracy, but instead, started to act as "factories" manufacturing «performances» [...]" 11 frequently directed by their owners.

Legal regulations and ownership issues
The proposed history and modern condition of the media system finds its reflection in the actual legal state of the media functioning. At the introductory stage it should be noted that already in the first half of 1990s, the legal norms were established that regulated the activities of the mass media. They assumed the democratic values based on the respect of the fundamental human and citizen rights, one of which is the right to freedom of speech and expression. Article 34 of the Ukrainian Constitution, concerning freedom of thought and expression 12 , being one of the most basic values of the Ukrainian state is developed in over 200 legal acts sanctioning legal norms necessary for the implementation of that law by the freedom of disposal and dissemination of information by the institutions designated for this purpose, that is, the mass media. It is worth emphasizing that one of the first acts adopted by the Ukrainian parliament was the Act on Information after which the subsequent laws were formulated including: the Act on printed mass media; the Act on the state support of the mass media and ensuring of the social security of journalists, etc. 13 . The binding law, which is stresses out by the specialists dealing with the legal regulations of the media in Ukraine is imperfect and thus, it is very prone to all sorts of abuse. The journalistic environment and specialists signalized and still do the need of developing of the mechanisms that would enhance their functioning 14 . For example, there was a long debate among the journalists about the need of regulation of the access to the public information. Finally, in 2011 the Act on the access to the public information was adopted 15 .
Another very current issue, which is a sort of the litmus test for the Ukrainian media is the problem of the open information about the owners of individual mass media. This knowledge has the potential of reduction of influence on politics, that is exerted by frequently disguised interest groups controlling the emission of information materials. It could force the owners of specific mass media, under the threat of suing them for bias and the application of censorship, not to perform the actions aimed at influencing the program (information) offer of the mass media related to them. That would lead to the actual use of the right of freedom of speech by the journalists who would no longer represent the interest of not really recognizable owners in the public discussion. At this point, it should be added that the issue of the need of safety of information space is of crucial importance. The limitation of the possibility to affect this space by other countries is indispensable, particularly from the perspective of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea.
As a result of an extensive discussion, especially in the mass media, which was initiated by the experts, journalists and also public officers, in 2015, The Supreme Council adopted the Act on ensuring of information transparency concerning the ownership of the mass media and the implementation of the rules of the state policy in the area of TV and radio 16 . However, the experts point out to a loophole in the adopted Act -the procedures and requirements concerning providing of information about the structure of ownership, ultimate beneficiaries and shareholders were not developed. In spite of the later adopted relevant orders regulating the procedure of entering of the information on the websites of the National Council of Television and Radio of Ukraine, one cannot find the transparent information which, according to the Act, has to be put there 17 . In consequence, the possibility of evasion from the obligation under the Act, makes it almost ineffective 18 . The example of the above is TV 112 which, at the request of the National Council of TV and Radio to submit the information on its owners, sent the answer saying that the TV is owned by the team of its employees, which in view of the Ukrainian market specificity, is highly improbable.
The effort of showing the real ownership status of the media is made by the non-governmental organizations. With the support of international foundations, the Internet portals are created dedicated to this area exclusively, which contain the information on the owners of individual media groups and media themselves 19 . Basing on this information, we will present the general outlook of the Ukrainian media system, which, as it should be emphasized, is controlled by the oligarchic groups and oligarchs themselves. In order do this, we will use the research placed on the website of Media Ownership Monitor Ukraine entitled "Risk indexes for media pluralism".
The TV and radio market is characterized by a high concentration of shares of the oligarchic and business groups. Let us start with the TV market. The authors of the research point out to the fact that almost 76,25% of the TV viewers receive the information broadcast by the media belonging to the four groups of media tycoons: StarLight Media, 1+1 media, Inter Media and Media Group Ukraine.  The press market indicates considerably lower level of the concentration of shares of the oligarchic and business groups equal 18,6% according to the cited research. Table 3. Shares of the oligarchic groups in the press market (in %) Source: Media Ownership Monitor Україна, http://ukraine.mom-rsf.org/ua/ukrajina/znakhidki/ indikatori/#!0b8b5e0d6c5da7f670e908ac65258a18, "Концентрація айдиторії ЗМІ", inf. of 10 III 2017.
The information is worth emphasizing that the ownership status of UMH and Media Holding Vesti is not clear. It should be also stressed out that the owners of these capital groups are pro-Russia oriented and all titles controlled by them are in the Russian language.
The Internet media in the Ukrainian law, as emphasized by the report authors, are not treated as the mass media and are not submitted to the obligation of registration. The analysis of the information content will allow to distinguish the four owners (media groups) who control about 17,56% of the Internet media 20 . 20 Media Ownership Monitor Україна, http://ukraine.mom-rsf.org/ua/ukrajina/znakhidki/indikatori/#!0b 8b5e0d6c5da7f670e908ac65258a18, "Індикатори ризиків плюралізму медіа", inf. of 10 III 2017.

Potential of the influence of media groups and their owners on receivers
In order to show the condition of the Ukrainian media system (market), the account of the potential of the influence of the Ukrainian media groups together with the names of concrete owners of TV and radio stations and press titles will be presented underneath. Also in this case we will use the research of the risk indexes for media pluralism in order to present the actual number of receivers of the media broadcasts emitted by the individual media. The already invoked source 21 will be supplemented by the information obtained in the research called ""Information-weapon: who do the Ukrainian media belong to. The owners of the biggest TV and radio stations, press titles and the Internet media 22 . Like in the case of the previous analysis, we would like to start with the discussion of the TV market and then move on the radio market, and finally, focus on the press and Internet media.

Television market
It is considered that 77,9% of the receivers of the TV stations operating in Ukraine are the ones who view the stations belonging to politicians or people politically engaged 23 .

StarLight Media The Pinczuk Family
The greatest number of programs with the biggest number of viewers (21,68%) belong to the Pinczuk Family. They include the stations such as: STB -8,5%, ICTV -6,36%, Nowyj Nakal -4,88%, М1 -1,06, М2 -0,12%, QTV -0,76%. All these stations are the part of the capital group whose name appears on the below diagrams -StarLight Media. Victor Punczuk managing the Group privately is the son-in-law of the expresident Leonid Kuchma. He also controls the financial and industrial group called Intertajp (metallurgy, steel industry, manufacture of railway wagons).

Media Group Ukraine Renat Agcmetov
Another significant group with 12,66% receivers is Media Group Ukraine, the owner of which is one of perhaps best-known Ukrainian oligarchs, the main sponsor of the Party of Regions -Renat Agcmetov. The group has the following TV stations: Ukraine (11,03%), NLO TV (1,3%) and Іndigo (0,33%).

Eugene Marajev
In the research, its authors also mention the TV station News One with 0,58% receivers, which belongs to the MP from the Opposition Block, Eugene Marajev, famous for his pro-Russian sympathy.

Nikola Kniażytskyj
Espresso TV with 0,3% receivers belonging to the MP of the National Front Party Nikola Kniażytyskyj.

Petro Poroshenko
Program 5 with 0,6% receivers, the owner of which is the incumbent president Petro Poroshenko. Alexander Klymenko UBR with 0,6% receivers, associated with the ex-minister of Taxation and Congregations, Alexander Klymenko.

Radio market
The number of radio stations owned by the oligarchic capital groups is even more impressive -83,76% 24 . For example:

Kateryna Kit-Sadowa Mayor's of Lviv and leader of the Samopomicz Party wife Kateryna
Kit-Sadowa is the owner of the following radio stations: Luks FM (8,56%) та Radio 24 (1,65%), which in total gives 10,21% receivers. Andrij Derkacz Radio Era with 3,1% listeners belongs to Anton Simonenko but the actual owner is Andrij Derkacz-a close friend of Kuchma, an MP of the seventh and eighth term. 24 Ibid.

Press market
It is also emphasized in the research that due to a small number of press readers, the influence of politicians on this market is relatively small -15,9%. Nevertheless, both TV, radio and press markets are in their majority controlled by the politicians or people connected with them 25 .

Alexander Klymenko
The second position is held by Gazeta Wiesti -3,2% readers, associated with the ex-Minister of Taxation and Congregations, Alexander Klymenko.

The Internet media market
Practically one-fourth (21,24%) of the information emitted by the Internet media is controlled by the companies belonging to the oligarchic and industrial groups. As can be seen, also this market is to a large extent monopolized by the circles which treat the media as the tool to implement their own business and political interests 26 .
Pobrane z czasopisma Wschód Europy http://journals.umcs.pl/we Data: 30/08/2020 02:40:09 U M C S The above presented analysis of the TV, radio, press and Internet media confirms the thesis on the high degree of monopolization of the Ukrainian media market by the oligarchic groups and individual politicians. It may be further supported by another study, which focuses on the example of censorship on one of the most strongly monopolized media market -television. The study points out to the practice of infringing of professional standards by the most powerful TV stations which frequently use the subliminal advertising (dżynsę). This group comprises the two nationwide TV stations -Inter and Ukraine, the operation of which is mainly aimed at the promoting of the political activity of the political party Opposition Block (the successor of the Party of Regions), the founders of which were previously mentioned Serhij Liovoczkin i Rinat Achmietov. Also program 5 belonging to president Petra Poroshenko and The First National controlled by the government resort to the subliminal advertising (the so-called dżynse). Another example of the influence of the owners on the TV and radio stations as well as on press titles controlled by them may be the conflict between Ihor Kolomojsky and the coalition of Serhia Liovoczkin, Rinat Achmietov and Victor Pinczuk after the so-called Revolution of Dignity (in the period from 2014 to 2015) 27 . Television 1+1, Inter, ICTV, STB and Ukraine conducted the campaign discrediting their opponents, which subsequently led to the phenomenon of the so-called oligarchic censorship plu-I n t e r U k r a i n e I C T V 1 + 1 S T B T h e N e w C h a n n e l P r o g r a m

Russian information product on the Ukrainian media market
The characteristic feature of the Ukrainian media system is the presence of the information content of the Russian origin and the Russian media themselves. That phenomenon had been fully accepted until the annexation of Crimea and the war in Eastern Ukraine by both the state and its most important players. All industrial and capital groups controlling the Ukrainian media market by means of economic bonds and political interests resulting from them, aiming at the reduction of production costs of the so-called information products (feature films, docummentaries, entertainment programs, etc.), extensively borrowed the information content from the Russian information space. This phenomenon, as emphasized by Joanna Szostek, the author of the article in which she researches the influence of the Russian media on the information transmitted by the Ukrainian media in 2010, is strictly connected with the interests of their owners. In order to show this phenomenon, she uses the already mentioned example of Inter TV, which frequently broadcasts materials referring to the Soviet past and presents the information on the political and social life in Russia in the way which is very loyal to the government at the Kremlin. Additionally, she points out to the tendency of showing Russia and its leaders in the positive light in the press. Here, she gives the example of Komsomolska Prawda and Izwiestia as well as Arguments and Facts in Ukraine 29 . The carried out analyses indicate that the level of transmitted content, for example in 2014, was very high -40,6% 30 .
The greatest issuers of the Russian information production are the most powerful Ukrainian TV stations: Inter, ICTV, NTN or Ukraine, the owners of which, as is concluded from the above presented analysis are the influential Ukrainian oligarchs whose interests are frequently located on the Russian market.
Another reason for those substantially long-term practices was the lack of awareness of domestic information production which, as was confirmed by practitioners in their numerous interviews, was consolidated by the so-called fifth column 31 .
As we mentioned in the introduction, the Russian media play a very important role on the Ukrainian media market. The research indicates that practically 38% of respondents watch the Russian TV, of whom 9% do it on regular basis.
Diagram 6. Preferences in viewing of Russian or Ukrainian TV (October 2014). * the survey does not include the opinion of the residents of the so-called occupied territories Source: Ракурс, http://ua.racurs.ua/news/37911-blyzko-20-ukrayinciv-dyvlyatsya-novyny-na-r osiyskomu-telebachenni, "Близько 20% українців дивляться новини на російському телебаченні", inf. of 10 III 2017. 31 The thesis is put forward by Olha Herasymczuk, vice-President of the National Board of Radio and Television of Ukraine in her interview given to the Radio Swoboda (Радіо Свобода, http://www. radiosvoboda.org/a/26757002.html, "Телеканали України й далі масово закуповують російські серіали -Ольга Герасим'юк", inf. of 10 III 2017.   The most impressive number of the receivers of the Russian programs constitutes the population living in Eastern and Southern Ukraine. In 2015,the situation changed due to the actions of the Ukrainian government, which fighting with the Russian propaganda machinery being the key part of the hybrid war of Russia with Ukraine, required the exclusion of the Russian TV programs undermining the social and political order and integrity of the Ukrainian state from the offer of the cable TV operators 32 .
In eastern and southern oblasts, the possibility of receiving of the Russian TV stations was reduced to 30%,as confirmed by the sociological studies 33 . However, the number of the receivers of information programs was not decreased as both in 2014 and 2015 about 10% of receivers still rely on the information transmitted by the Russian television. The audience of 10% viewing ORT 1 is an example of this 34 .
It should be noted that in the majority of cases, the Russian TV is viewed by the Ukrainians on the satellite TV platform and a considerable number of viewers can also access it via the platform of cable TV.
Diagram 7. Technical means with the help of which the Russian TV is viewed in Ukraine (eastern and southern) (2015). * The following oblasts were included in the survey: Kharkiv, Odessa, Chernihiv, Donetsk and Luhansk.

Summary
The media system in Ukraine is one of the significant elements of the whole structure of public relations, particularly in the political sphere. The political system is riddled with the interests of the oligarchic clans, which in order to implement their interests, support and create political parties that do not possess any distinctive ideological identity. Realizing the importance of the media in politics, they take the control over the media system which is considerably subordinated to their owners' interest. Editorial policy of many of them, especially the one concerning the fundamental issues, is strictly supervised. Broadcast materials are frequently biased and serve the interests of their principals. The characteristic feature of the media system, which also in this case seems to be a natural consequence of the social and political relationships, is the presence of the Russian media and Russian information products. The attempt to limit their influence, due to their biased information attitude aimed at promoting of the Putin vision of the social and political relationships, does not always bring the expected results. Initiatives of rearrangement of the functioning of the domestic media also frequently fail. The act on transparency and openness of information on the owners is not fully executed and does not eliminate the oligarchs' influence on the media system. It seems that the only reasonable solution would be to establish public media permanently financed from the state budget, totally independent from politicians, that would dictate new rules of the game based on the honest and independent journalism. However, the initiatives of creating of such a media group do not find the actual support of any of the teams exercising the authority.
• Abstract: The media system in Ukraine is one of the most significant elements of the whole structure of the public relations, especially in the political sphere. In spite of the two great social uprisings in Ukraine, the influence of oligarchs on the policy was not successfully optimized. They exploit the media as the tool of their political game. Main hypothesis of the article: the media system is dominated by the interests of oligarchs who practically control the whole of it. Key words: political system, party system, media system, media, political parties, oligarchy.