Over the past few years, the Ukrainian military has become not only a fighting force but also one of the country’s most powerful content producers. Brigades and military units run their own social media channels, produce documentaries, publish reports from combat positions, build their own brands, and communicate directly with audiences of millions.
In this new reality, journalists are no longer the only intermediaries between the war and society. At the same time, military communications and independent journalism serve different purposes. The former is designed to support the military, mobilize society, and contribute to victory. The latter is meant to document events, verify facts, ask uncomfortable questions, and build a comprehensive picture of the war.
Can these roles coexist? What does society lose when the story of the war is told by only one side? And does the journalist’s mission change when the military itself has become a powerful media actor?

Description to be confirmed.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Description to be confirmed.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Ukraine has become a unique environment for testing new forms of collaboration among journalists, OSINT investigators, civil society, and accountability mechanisms. Together, they have developed new approaches to documenting attacks, identifying alleged perpetrators, preserving evidence, and recording these events in the public sphere. At the same time, this new ecosystem presents a range of institutional and ethical challenges. How can such collaboration facilitate the discovery of the truth and the holding of perpetrators accountable, while maintaining the independence, professional safeguards, and accountability that distinguish journalism from criminal investigation?
Speakers:● Yevheniia Motorevska, Head of war crimes investigation unit at the Kyiv Independent;● Liudmyla Huseinova, Numo,sisters!

Twenty years ago, a youth organization emerged on Donetsk’s civic and political scene, bringing together patriotic communities and setting itself the goal of reviving the Ukrainian language, culture, and historical memory.
Twenty years later, we will discuss the pre-war experience of “Poshtovkh” (2006–2014) and, more broadly, explore the tools of information warfare in a context where the enemy holds a narrative advantage. How can the Ukrainian narrative be strengthened in the East? How can cognitive reintegration be carried out after future de-occupation?
Moderator: Serhii Stukanov, Head of Unity Institute
Speakers:● Olena Stiazhkina, leading researcher Institute of history of Ukraine, professor Kyiv School of Economy (KSE);● Stanislav Fedorchuk, NGO Ukrainian people council of Donetsk and Luhansk regions;● Kateryna Zhemchuzhnykova, Communications Manager at Civil Network OPORA, member of the Donbas Media Forum Organizing Committee

Since the start of the full-scale invasion Ukrainian media have gained new experience in covering captivity. Psychologists, rehabilitation specialists, journalists and people released from captivity are increasingly speaking publicly about the experience of detention, and there is now a better understanding of the risks and limits of public exposure. At the same time, people who have survived captivity and their families still describe being asked unethical questions, the oversimplification of their experiences and situations in which media attention can become an ordeal in its own right. So is Ukrainian journalism genuinely learning from its own mistakes — and are its practices evolving as experience grows?
Research by the Media Initiative for Human Rights shows that captivity affects not only those held, but also their families, and that its consequences do not end at the moment of release.
At the same time, public visibility is one of the few tools capable of drawing public attention to people whom Russia is trying to erase and of keeping the focus on efforts to secure their release. Some captives are known across the country; others remain almost invisible. The media profile of a military unit, a family's activism and whether there is a communications strategy can all determine how visible an individual story becomes. But are the media inadvertently creating a 'hierarchy of captivity'?
And how can journalists tell the stories of civilians unlawfully held by Russia for years so that they do not remain mere statistics? Are the media prepared to cover not only the moment of release, but also the difficult return to everyday life, bureaucratic procedures, rehabilitation and the experiences of families? And is there enough coordination between everyone working to bring people home — journalists, human rights defenders, families, civil society organisations and state institutions?
We will discuss how to make noise so that people are not forgotten, without harming the very people this attention is meant to help.
Speakers:● Maria Klymyk, Co-head of the Department for the Protection of the Rights of Military Personnel and Their Families, Media Initiative for Human Rights;● Olexsandr Hudilin, A defender of Mariupol who was released from captivity, author of “Donbas News”;● Kateryna Muzlova, Director, CO “CF ‘HEART IN ACTION’” | Member of the Public Council under the Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War;● Stanislav Kozliuk, journalist

Partnerships between businesses and media in Ukraine still often begin with a specific request: a publication, placement, or a standalone event. But can such cooperation develop into a long-term partnership that creates value for businesses, media outlets, and audiences alike?
Businesses need to understand what results they gain from working with media, while media outlets need to be able to communicate their value in terms that go beyond reach and audience size. At the same time, sustainable cooperation requires clear rules, transparency, and trust between the parties.
During the discussion, we will talk about how businesses and media can agree on formats of cooperation, define mutual value, and build partnerships rather than simply exchange services. We will discuss what helps move from a one-off commission to systematic cooperation, how the expectations of businesses and media are changing, and the role that trust, reputation, and new technologies play in this process.
We will also focus on how content consumption and information search are changing in today’s environment, and what this means for the future of cooperation between businesses and media.
Moderator: Mariia Vereitina, Head of Strategic Partnerships at DII Ukraine
Speakers:● Alona Kholodova, Community Manager at Nakypilo, journalist;● Alina Smyshliak-Boroda, Reputation Management and CSR Director at Kormotech;● Vitalii Ulybin, CEO of Poltavska Khvylia media outlet, PhD in Journalism and lecturer at Borys Grinchenko Kyiv Metropolitan University;● Uliana Kolodii, Founder and CEO of u.comms;● Serhii Kolesnikov, Editor and Co-Founder of #SHОTAM;● Oleh Shaparenko, Strategic Communications Manager at EPAM Ukraine;● Mariia Vereitina, Head of Strategic Relations of DII Ukraine;● Vira Kostenko-Kuznietsova, Founder at Between Media Agency

As algorithms become increasingly capable of handling rewrites, translations, and routine news updates, newsrooms are being forced to revisit a fundamental question: what are they actually paying journalists for? For writing? Or for original reporting, fact-checking, trust, context, empathy, and uncomfortable questions?

Artificial intelligence is already transforming newsrooms. Entire workflows are being automated, new roles are emerging, and editors are increasingly working not only with people but also with algorithms. But this transformation brings new challenges. If AI takes over the first rung of the professional ladder, where will future journalists learn their craft? How do we avoid becoming prompt operators rather than authors? How can we use AI without losing our responsibility to the people whose stories we tell? And are algorithms beginning to determine what society will be talking about tomorrow?

This discussion is not about whether AI will replace journalists. It is about what will remain uniquely human work. If artificial intelligence takes over the mechanical parts of the profession, does that mean journalism can finally return to its core purpose — finding what an algorithm cannot? Because that is where original reporting, trust, context, responsibility, and decisions no machine can make are born.
Moderator: Yulia McGuffie, NV.ua Editor-in-Chies.
Speakers:● Roman Andreiko, СЕО 24 Channel;● Andriy Kulykov, Presenter, Hromadske Radio;● Oleh Dereniuha, NikVesti, media manager;● Dmytro Samoliuk, Head of Digital, "WE-UKRAINE"

Description to be confirmed.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Ukrainian identity is multifaceted and unique, having been shaped over the years by the influence of diverse civilizations, worldviews, and historical contexts. A wide array of traditions exists across the country, from East to West. Our diversity is not merely about differences, but about cultural depth. Today, this identity—forged at the crossroads of worlds—faces a grave threat: imperial Russia is destroying historical memory, burning books and educational institutions, and eradicating anything Ukrainian in the territories it has temporarily occupied. Another challenge arises from rapid globalization, which blurs national borders: how can we maintain our sense of belonging to Ukraine? What can displaced persons do to preserve their connection to their homeland? Where does the line lie between the desire to be understood by the world and the need to preserve our unique Ukrainian context? Participants in this panel discussion will explore how to remain Ukrainian in a turbulent world, no matter the circumstances.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Last year at Donbas Media Forum, journalists and military communications representatives came together for a candid discussion about their shared responsibility to balance the public’s right to know the truth about the war with genuine security and operational constraints. This year, we are returning to that conversation to examine which problems have been resolved and which remain unaddressed.
The war is now in its fifth year, international attention is increasingly divided among a growing number of crises, and technological developments on the battlefield are creating new threats for both journalists and military personnel. At the same time, the public’s demand for reliable information about the war — and the media’s responsibility to provide it — remains unchanged. Do the rules governing media operations reflect this new reality? Can access to information become more flexible without compromising security? And who should initiate changes to the rules when the realities of war evolve faster than established procedures?
We will invite military press officers and representatives of the military command to discuss some of the most challenging aspects of media–military relations: delays in providing comments and approval procedures, the authority of press officers, unequal access to information among news organizations, and responsibility for information vacuums.
Yet this responsibility cannot be one-sided. During wartime, a journalist’s mistake can cost more than audience trust — it can jeopardize people’s safety and lives. Premature publication of information, disclosure of military positions or operational details, and failure to honor agreements or comply with security restrictions can have real consequences. Where should the line be drawn between the public’s right to know and the media’s professional responsibility? And what changes must journalists themselves make to ensure that trust between newsrooms and the military works both ways?
This discussion continues an open and candid conversation about mutual expectations, professional disagreements, real-world constraints, and the need for change. Rather than settling for formal responses or assigning blame, we aim to openly address what is not working on either side and work towards concrete solutions.

Description to be confirmed.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Who do we fail to see in the media, and why? How can newsrooms give a voice to groups and individuals who often remain outside the public spotlight? We will talk about the representation of different social groups, stereotypes and biases in the media, editorial practices, and how to make the media space more diverse and more sensitive to the experiences of those who are often unheard and overlooked.
After all, inclusion is the process of enabling all people to take an active part in society regardless of their individual characteristics. It is about equal rights, accessibility, and embracing diversity.
Moderator: Iryna Virtosu, journalist
Speakers: ● Daria Kukurika, Executive Director of "The League of the Strong"● Olha Vesnianka, Servicewoman of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, journalist, media trainer● Liudmyla Yuzva, Consultant, National Democratic Institute, PhD.

Ukraine is not giving up on its occupied territories, but it cannot predict exactly when or under what circumstances they will be liberated. The prospect of prolonged occupation raises difficult and painful questions for the state, communities, and the media. How can we plan for the future without a clear timeline? How can we maintain ties with people living under occupation and support communities divided by war? How can we prepare for liberation without postponing urgent issues until an indefinite “after”?During the discussion, representatives of government, communities, and the media will explore possible scenarios and identify the steps that need to be taken today. The conversation will address state policy on the occupied territories, support for people both under occupation and after they leave, and ways to preserve community bonds.
A particular focus will be the future of relocated media outlets from the occupied territories. How long will their communities need them, and what role should they play during prolonged occupation and after liberation? What knowledge, archives, contacts, and trust must be preserved so that, when these territories are liberated, society does not have to rebuild communication with them from scratch?This is a conversation without easy answers—about uncertainty, responsibility, and readiness to act under different scenarios.
Moderator: Viktoriia Yermolaieva, Editor-in-Chief of Hromadske Radio
Speakers:● Violeta Artemchuk, Director of the Non-Governmental Organization "Donbas SOS";● Serhii Rodin, deputy Mayor of Bakhmut;● Yuliia Tyshchenko, Chair of the Board and Founder of the Ukrainian Center for Independent Political Research (UCIPR), Co-founder of the National Platform for Resilience and Social Cohesion;● Valentyna Troian, Representative of the Institute of Mass Information in the Luhansk region, host of Ukrainian Radio and Hromadske Radio.

Since the onset of the full-scale invasion, access to public information has been in a precarious state. While the imposition of martial law did not alter the fundamental laws governing access, it has led to arbitrary actions by various government and local self-government bodies, which justify restricting access to information of public interest by citing martial law—often without providing specific grounds. Data is neither published nor released upon request, bypassing the mandatory "three-part test." Furthermore, Parliament has passed several bills, and the government is drafting new ones and adopting secondary legislation that directly restricts access to important information. Consequently, journalists—and by extension, citizens—find their information rights curtailed, while courts largely side with the authorities. How, then, should journalists navigate existing and planned restrictions? How can they secure a response to an information request or the release of data? Why do authorities restrict access to all information rather than just that which requires restriction due to the war? What role do journalists play in upholding information rights? We will discuss these issues and more during the panel.
Moderator: Nadiia Babynska, Open data expert.
Speakers:● Yuliia Derkachenko, Representative of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights on Information Rights;● Tetyana Oleksiyuk, Vice-President of Access Info Group under the Council of Europe Convention on Access to Official Documents (Tromsø Convention);● Olena Rusinova, journalist at Vilne Radio;● Olesia Koval, Head of the Transparent Cities program Transparency International Ukraine;● Olga Vdovenko, Director of Legal Affairs, NGO "Human Rights Platform".

Description to be confirmed.
Speakers to be confirmed.

Today's journalism education shapes what journalism will be tomorrow - and whether it will remain people-centered at a time when technology, war, and new patterns of news consumption are changing the rules faster than curricula can be updated. How do we train journalists who can work for people and about people, even in the most difficult social conditions? What does "quality journalism education" actually mean in today's world? Who should teach practical courses - academic faculty or newsroom practitioners - and how can the two be combined? How can young people be kept in the profession when financial incentives are weak?
Moderator: Andrii Bystrov, PhD Candidate, Educational and Scientific Institute of Journalism, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv.
Speakers:● Nataliya Lyashchenko, acting CEO "Kyiv 24";● Nadiia Balovsiak, Associate Professor at the UCU School of Journalism and Communication, independent journalist;● Artem Khalimovskyi, Education Expert, Mnozhyna Foundation;● Pavlo Miroshnychenko, Associate Professor, Department of Journalism, Zaporizhzhia National University;● Viktoriia Sydorenko, HR Director, Suspilne Ukraine.

What happens to court reporting when behind every case lie not just documents and legal statutes, but human lives, the public interest, and high stakes? How can journalists navigate complex legal proceedings, uncover their own sources and evidence, and avoid becoming pawns in information warfare? Covering war crimes cases and trials of Russian military personnel presents a particular challenge, as the cost of error can be exceptionally high. How should one report on victims and witnesses, handle sensitive evidence and traumatic accounts, and avoid turning the courtroom into a media spectacle? Does the public interest always justify publishing specific information? Where is the line drawn between investigative journalism, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a fair trial? And ultimately, how can court reporting move beyond merely announcing verdicts to helping society understand how and why justice is administered?
Moderator:
Speakers:● Tetiana Kozak, Editor-in-Chief, Graty.me;● Oleh Baturin, Journalist with the Center for Investigative Journalism, and war crimes documenter for The Reckoning Project and the Public Interest Journalism Lab.

This session focuses on how media outlets can preserve their team, processes, and trust when the editorial staff operates without a shared office—whether due to relocation or long-term remote work. In crisis situations, newsrooms often prioritize finances, housing, equipment, safety, and operational tasks; yet, it is the people who form the foundation holding all these processes together. If a team loses connection, role clarity, and a sense of mutual support and trust, it is not just the "atmosphere" that suffers—deadlines, financial stability, product quality, and the media outlet's long-term viability are all compromised.
The activity consists of two parts. In the first, the facilitator will briefly explain how interactive team formats work: their purpose, how they facilitate discussions on complex issues without direct pressure, and how metaphors, roles, and scenarios can reveal weaknesses in communication, accountability, support systems, and workflows. Examples will also be provided to show how these formats help teams better understand one another and discuss "invisible" work, crisis-specific roles, burnout, and the need for support.
In the second part, participants will engage in a condensed team simulation centered on the challenges of remote work, relocation, and the loss of a shared physical newsroom. Through the use of metaphors, roles, and collaborative decision-making, they will be able to examine typical team risks—such as blurred roles, individual overload, communication gaps, and loss—without feeling pressured. ...lack of informal connection, ambiguity in decision-making, and insufficient support.
The simulation will demonstrate that a safe team environment is created not only through good relationships but also through specific management practices: clear division of responsibilities, regular communication, making "invisible work" visible, and the ability to discuss fatigue or challenges before they escalate into a crisis. The concluding reflection will focus on what participants can take from this experience back to their own newsrooms to ensure the team does not rely solely on the personal endurance of a few individuals.
Moderator: Mariia Kucherenko, Comfort Manager at the NGO “Maie Sens”

Speakers:● Taisiia Harmash, Acting Head of the NGO “MAIE SENS”, Head of Partnerships for 6262.com.ua and 0372.ua;● Anastasiia Dziubak, Editor and Media Manager at Hrechka;● Bohdan Porokhniak, Head of Nauka.ua;● Yuliia Kanzeba, journalist at TRYBUN;● Olha Zyma, Editor-in-Chief of Dostup.Media;● Natalia Kulidi, CEO of the Dnipro-based media outlet Misto i Richka