Mar 2025

EngRus

What do Russians read, and how can independent media reach them?

Despite censorship, independent media still operate in Russia. The main platform for them is Telegram, where channels of all political orientations coexist. However, "pro-government" channels are far more popular: our survey found that 44% of Russian audience of Telegram channels follow "pro-government" channels, while only 14% follow "oppositional" ones. To understand the reasons behind this, Cedar conducted a large-scale analysis of channels read by both supporters and opponents of the regime in Russia, and formulated recommendations for independent media.

Key Findings
Introduction
The Media Space in Russia and Telegram as a Source of Political Information
Content and Orientation of Media
Channel Characteristics and Popularity
- Sentiment
- Topic Composition
Recommendations
- Write About People's Everyday Problems
- Create Positive Content
***

Research by: Alesya Sokolova

This research was supported by Dialogue Office for Civil Society Cooperation

Key Findings

44% of people reading Telegram channels in Russia read "pro-government" media, and 14% read "oppositional" ones, as determined by a telephone survey.
In addition to "pro-government" and "oppositional" news media, there is a group of "neutral" channels, among whose audience there are people with less radical positions, and sometimes both supporters and opponents of the war.
"Neutral" channels focus more on everyday news, such as the economy (with attention to domestic, not international, events), emergencies (fires, utility failures, abnormal weather changes), health news, food, and science.
"Oppositional" media tend to cover a narrower range of topics compared to "pro-government" and "neutral" channels. Specifically, the variety of subjects covered by "oppositional" channels is about 60-70% smaller than that of "pro-government" channels and 30-50% smaller than that of "neutral" channels. "Oppositional" channels focus on issues that are not covered by other media (e.g., repression and the consequences of war), and the range of these issues is quite limited.
Posts in "oppositional" channels are, on average, 30% less positive than in "pro-government" channels and 15% more negative. "Neutral" channels fall between "pro-government" and "oppositional" ones on this parameter.
Channels with more positive content tend to be more popular (p = 0.02). For "pro-government" media, this is achieved by presenting Russia in a positive light, but the correlation between popularity and positive tone also exists among "oppositional" media (p = 0.05).
The level of emotionality in the content is not correlated with popularity: both neutral channels in their coverage of events and channels with more emotional presentation can be popular. The share of content about the war is also not correlated with popularity.
To expand their audience, independent media can:
- Cover a broader range of topics
- Focus more on everyday issues: economy (price spikes and interest rates), emergencies in Russia, health-related news
- Create more positive content: news about culture, animals, life stories, as well as selections of films, photos, music, and memes.

Introduction

The audience of Russian independent media is growing slowly or even shrinking, and it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to compete with propaganda. According to estimates by JX Fund, by 2023 the audience of "oppositional" media was approximately 7-10 million people. Most of them are likely to hold an anti-war stance. At the same time, about 60% of Russia’s population, according to sociologists from "Chronicles", are neither strongly pro- nor anti-war — the media simply do not reach this audience. The idea of breaking out of the oppositional bubble is being discussed more frequently in newsrooms.

However, most studies of independent media audiences focus on the readers they already have. There are virtually no projects that systematically study how these media can break out of the existing bubble to reach the apolitical majority. Therefore, editorial decisions in this direction are often guided by intuition rather than data.

Our study aims to partially fill this gap. The data we have collected can help the media make more informed decisions about strategies for expanding their audience, so they can more effectively compete with state propaganda.

The Media Space in Russia and Telegram as a Source of Political Information

Of course, no research or data can fully compensate for the loss of audience due to the immense pressure faced by independent media. The state blocks access to them, labels them as "foreign agents" and "undesirable organizations", cuts off their access to advertising and donations. As of February 2025, Russia ranks 162nd in the Press Freedom Index out of 180 countries on the list. Meanwhile, propaganda has virtually unlimited resources for distribution and promotion and can apply many tactics to influence different audience segments.

Despite all of this, Russian independent media still have access to an audience in Russia: more than a third of Russians use VPNs to bypass blocks, and Telegram (effectively the only uncensored and unblocked large platform for information exchange in Russia) remains the most popular social network in terms of daily reach — 51% of Russians visit it every day.

According to Mediascope calculations, 55% of the 100 most popular Telegram channels are related to news or politics in some way. In comparison, on "VKontakte" (a completely state-controlled social network and Telegram's closest competitor), according to Brand Analytics, there are only a few political or news-related public pages in the top. According to survey data from the Levada Center, the proportion of Russians who get their news from Telegram is growing — in the five years from 2019 to 2024, it has increased from zero to 28% of the population. At the same time, the role of traditional media, such as television and online publications, is decreasing. Telegram is becoming the main source of political information for Russians, and over time this trend is only strengthening.

Independent outlets are aware of Telegram's role in the Russian media landscape: by August 2024, 89% had a Telegram channel, making it the most widespread social network among them. Even fewer media outlets have their own websites (74%).

For these reasons, we chose Telegram as the focus of our study of the Russian media space. Through a telephone survey in Russia, we managed to identify 79 of the most popular Telegram channels among respondents, 36 of which were news-related. For comparative analysis, we added 7 independent media that did not make it into the list of popular channels, in order to trace the reasons for their lesser success. Thus, we analyzed a total of 43 news channels.

The survey was conducted in the second half of 2024 in two waves, each with 1,600 respondents. The sample is representative by gender, age, and by types of settlements based on population size across Russia. The researchers asked which Telegram channels the respondents read. In the second wave, also the questions related to support for Russia's "special military operation" in Ukraine were asked, including whether the respondent would cancel the "special military operation" if they had the opportunity. In the first wave, 192 people (12% of all respondents) agreed to answer the question about Telegram channels, and in the second wave, 245 people (15%), for a total of 437 respondents.

The respondents named 361 unique channels, of which we only considered those mentioned by at least three respondents — 79 channels in total. From these 79 channels, we identified the public channels that primarily produce news content — 36 in total.

7 out of the 10 most popular channels from our survey match the top-10 channels according to Mediascope data. The differences may be explained by variations in data collection methodology, as well as possible censorship of the company's data (2 out of 3 channels not included in the Mediascope top — Meduza and Redaktsiya [Editorial]/Context).

Using the survey data, we built a graph showing the intersection of audiences across different channels. We then categorized the channels into three groups: "pro-government," "neutral," and "oppositional". We classified as "neutral" those channels whose audience intersects both "pro-government" and "oppositional" ones — meaning they are read by supporters, opponents of the war, and undecided individuals. Examples of such channels are provided in the hidden block below.

‎

When classifying the channels, we relied on the following factors:

The percentage of the channel’s readers who responded in the survey that they would cancel the "special military operation" (SMO). In most cases, we considered a channel "oppositional" if more than 75% of its readers shared this view.
The channel's position in the audience intersection graph.
Expert opinions on the political orientation of the channels.

According to the survey, 44% of respondents in Russia read "pro-government" media, while 14% read "oppositional" media. In this count, we included all channels mentioned by respondents, including non-news and less popular ones.

In the following text, we define the popularity of a channel as the number of respondents in the survey who mentioned it. This definition has its shortcomings: for example, respondents may have difficulty remembering the names of some channels they read, while others are more recognizable and may be mentioned even if they are not read frequently. Furthermore, "oppositional" media might be mentioned less often due to the risk of repression. However, we believe this metric better reflects the level of popularity than the number of subscribers, as it excludes artificially inflated numbers and because being subscribed to a channel does not necessarily mean it is read regularly.‎

12 "pro-government" channels: Ostashko! Vazhnoye (Ostashko! Important), Solovyov, Pool N3, SMI Rossiya ne Moskva (Media Russia Not Moscow), Readovka, RIA Novosti, Dyadya Slava (Uncle Slava), TASS, Komsomolskaya Pravda: KP.RU, Mir Segodnya s "Yuriy Podolyaka" (World Today with "Yuriy Podolyaka"), Tsargrad, RT na Russkom (RT in Russian).
16 "neutral" channels: Ateo Breaking, Baza, Ranshe Vseh. Nu Pochti. (Ahead of Everyone. Well, Almost), Bloknot Rossiya 18+ (Notebook Russia 18+), BRIEF*, Kommersant, Lenta Dnya (Daily Feed), Mash, Pryamoy Efir • Novosti (Live Broadcast • News), RBC, Rossiya Seychas (Russia Now), SHOT, Vecherniy Telegram (Evening Telegram), Topor (Axe) VChK OGPU, Lentach.
15 "oppositional" channels:
- Named by respondents (8): BBC News | Russian Service, Ekho Moskvy (Echo of Moscow), Redaktsiya (Editorial)*, Meduza, TV Rain, Varlamov News, Ostorozhno, Novosti (Careful, News), Novaya Gazeta.
- Added manually (7): Novaya Gazeta Europe, The Insider, Mediazona, Agentstvo. Novosti (Agency. News), ASTRA, Holod, Important Stories.

BRIEF channel was merged with the Ezh channel (the latter being the new name of the former). The same was done with the Redaktsiya and Context channels.

Content and Orientation of Media

We analyzed how the three groups of channels we identified differ in terms of content, language, and tone. In addition to the 36 popular news channels selected through the survey, we also considered seven independent media channels that did not appear in respondents' answers. We downloaded the posts from these channels for a period of three months, from September to November 2024, and categorized them into common news events (news covered by more than one channel in a day) and unique content. We focused more on the former during the analysis.

The goal of this analysis was to understand what readers feel is missing in "oppositional" media and why they choose "neutral" and "pro-government" sources instead. As a result, we made some generalizations in the analysis. However, these generalizations should not be interpreted as saying "all media in this category write a lot on this subject." Generally, we mean that a particular feature is characteristic of most media in the category and not of most media in other categories.

For instance, when we say that "neutral" channels write more about the economy than "pro-government" or "oppositional" ones, this means that the differences in the thematic composition are statistically significant with p<0.05. That is, the likelihood that the average share of content on this topic in "neutral" channels differs significantly from the average share in "oppositional" channels, and that this difference is accidental, is less than 5%. This does not mean that all "neutral" channels write more about the economy than all channels in the other categories, but on average, this difference is noticeable.

Using Telegram's official API, we downloaded posts from each channel for the three-month period from September to November 2024, totaling 230,000 posts. OpenAI embeddings were used to analyze topics — this is a standard method of representing text as a vector (a sequence of numbers), commonly used for content analysis through machine learning. The posts were converted into embeddings using OpenAI's pre-trained model, and for the subsequent analysis, we used these vectors.

The posts were grouped into events, 22,400 in total. An event consists of posts published within a 24-hour period whose embeddings differ by no more than a certain threshold value meaning that the content is similar. In other words, we define an event as a situation when more than one channel writes about the same news.

Topic modeling of events was done using their average embeddings, which means the average vector of different posts on the same topic. Grouping posts by events helps avoid the impact of word choice on thematic division — these differences are smoothed out in the averaging process. For example, this approach makes it irrelevant whether a channel uses the word "war" or "special military operation" (SMO). At the same time, unique posts (i.e., those not mentioned by any other channel) were excluded from the event analysis and analyzed separately.

We divided the texts into themes using topic modeling. For this, we employed the k-means clustering algorithm.

When analyzing the focus within a particular theme (for example, that "oppositional" media pay more attention to the consequences of shelling), we compared posts from different channels on the same topics. To study the language, we looked for words frequently used in one group of channels but rarely in another. In some cases, we compared posts about the same events in different categories of channels (for example, when examining differences in the language used to describe the war in Ukraine).

For sentiment analysis, we used the original posts in the channels, not events. Sentiment was assessed using a pre-trained model. It rated three parameters of the text on a scale from 0 to 1: positivity, neutrality, and negativity. To get a single value representing the overall positivity of a text, we followed these steps: 1) calculated the positivity level for each post as "positive sentiment" minus "negative sentiment," 2) calculated the average of this value across all posts, and 3) subtracted the average positivity level from each post's positivity score. This way, the value of zero represents the average level of positivity across all posts.

For example, the model assessed the positivity of the news "The Ministry of Education suggested excluding cheerleading and massage from physical education classes" as 0.03, negativity as 0.10, and neutrality as 0.87. We first calculated the positivity level as 0.03 - 0.10 = -0.07. Then we accounted for the fact that the average positivity across all posts, calculated this way, was -0.19. Thus, in the overall news context, this piece of news is not very negative, it has a positivity score that is 0.12 higher than usual. This value is used as the positivity level.

To determine whether differences between channels in terms of coverage of various themes or sentiment are statistically significant, we performed pairwise comparisons for channel categories ("pro-government" vs "oppositional," "neutral" vs "pro-government," "neutral" vs "oppositional") using the Student's t-test. We considered a result statistically significant with p<0.05. To calculate correlations between various channel properties (e.g., sentiment and popularity, measured by the number of respondents who read a given channel), we used linear regression, a standard statistical method for analyzing the relationship between one variable (e.g., popularity) and others (e.g., sentiment level or the share of posts on a particular topic).

"Pro-Government" Media

The main topic for most 'pro-government' media still revolves around the war in Ukraine, but these channels approach it through the lens of international politics, particularly the conflict between Russia and the West, including the USA and NATO. According to thematic modeling, 12.5% (the median value across all channels) of all news posts in "pro-government" channels are dedicated to this topic. For comparison, "oppositional" media cover it only 6.9% of the time. Other popular topics in "pro-government" media include shelling (9.7%) and the situation on the front lines (6.6%). It is important to note that this focus does not prevent these channels from remaining popular.

A special emphasis is placed on the actions of Vladimir Putin on the international stage, particularly highlighting his positive interactions with the leaders of BRICS countries. News about the Russian economy is also presented in a positive light, often focusing on the trade of natural gas. Posts on legislative issues and social topics are dominated by migration issues, with a distinctly negative stance towards migrants. Shelling are usually reported in dry summaries, with more frequent coverage of shelling by Ukraine against Russia.

Interestingly, the abbreviation "SMO" (Special Military Operation) has almost disappeared from use in coverage of the war. Now, "pro-government" media predominantly refer to these events as "the conflict" (this term appears in 2.9% of posts related to the war) or even as "the war" (1.8%). Linguist Boris Iomdin points out that the mere use of the word "war" is not necessarily an indicator of a specific stance: "pro-government" media, for example, often talk about the war that the West supposedly started against Russia. The term could also be used metaphorically (e.g., the sanctions war). Additionally, "pro-government" media frequently use emotionally charged terms to describe Ukrainian soldiers, such as "militant" and "enemy" (appearing in 3% and 6.8% of posts about the situation on the front lines, respectively).

In addition to media focusing on international politics and the war in Ukraine, there are two outlets in the top category that focus on local and everyday news: they write about crime, emergencies, and health and science news.

When covering international politics related to Ukraine, the media emphasize the confrontation between Russia and the west (mentioned in 9.4% of posts on the topic). In this context, the USA (11.9%) and NATO (5.7%) are frequently mentioned, while Ukraine appears in 28.3% of posts. Here are some examples of such news: "Slutsky told RIA Novosti that the west is leading the world toward a new 'missile crisis,' and the responsibility for the consequences will fall on Washington and Brussels", and "The US approach to limiting Kyiv’s use of long-range weapons for attacks deep into Russia has not changed and will not change, the White House said."

Shelling are often covered in "pro-government" media in the form of dry reports. Most often, they report on shelling by Ukraine against Russian and Russian-controlled territories: "Debris from drones shot down in the Tula region fell on an energy facility, with no disruption to the technological process, authorities reported", and "Two people were killed in Privolie, LPR, in a drone attack by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on a civilian car, authorities said." News about shelling by Russia is also reported but often without specifying who carried out the attack: "Explosions were heard in Cherkasy and Odessa regions — Ukrainian media," and "Critical infrastructure was damaged in Vinnytsia region in western Ukraine."

When covering diplomatic news not related to Ukraine (5.4% of all posts), Putin (mentioned in 26.3% of posts) and the BRICS countries (17%) are most frequently cited. These news items usually highlight Russia's success on the international stage: "The Kremlin press service reported that Vladimir Putin will meet with the heads of leading media from BRICS countries. The event will take place ahead of the summit in Kazan", and "Vladimir Putin will chair a meeting of the CIS heads of state today."

Posts on this topic tend to be the most positive among all posts from "pro-government" media. They often contain obviously supportive statements regarding the Russian government and negative comments about the west: "The BRICS summit in Kazan demonstrated the serious potential of the union to solve global problems and was an undeniable success for Russia", and "The West continues its attempts to organize a coup in Serbia — Deputy Prime Minister Vulin."

Economic topics (3% of all news) are typically related to foreign trade, with natural gas mentioned in 8.9% of such posts. The word "development" (2.6%) often appears, indicating the positive nature of these reports: "With the support of 'United Russia,' the three-year budget allocates 180 billion rubles for the development of comfortable urban environments", "Milk producers returned to previous prices following a prosecutor's inspection, the Russian General Prosecutor’s Office reported", and "Russia is still supplying gas to Europe through Ukraine, but the contract expires this year, and a new one will need to be signed, although the necessary infrastructure was not reserved, Putin said."

Posts about legislation (2.5%) and social issues (3.5%) predominantly focus on migration issues (9% of all posts in this category), with a clearly negative attitude toward migrants and a focus on their persecution: "Migrants will be banned from working in several sectors in the Omsk region", and "The police, during a raid on a construction site in Mytishchi, checked nearly 100 migrants."

It’s worth noting that the sample also includes two media outlets focusing not only on the above-mentioned topics but also on local news, incidents, and health and science news: SMI Russia, not Moscow and Komsomolskaya Pravda.

Compared to "neutral" and "oppositional" media, "pro-government" media write the least about arrests, trials, and technology or the IT sector.

"Oppositional" Media

The main focus of "oppositional" media is the coverage of repression (the median value for "oppositional" channels is 16.5% of news in the "arrests and trials" category). These are usually stories about politically motivated persecutions, such as: "The Moscow City Court placed Marina Egorova, the wife of politician Leonid Gozman, under house arrest", and "Security forces arrived at the home of a Moscow woman who tried to hold a rally in support of Durov." Posts about legislative bills (3.4%) also often cover repressive laws (such as the ban on childfree propaganda).

The proportion of news on topics related to the war does not differ significantly from "pro-government" and "neutral" media: 8.7% of posts concern shelling, 4.1% are about the situation on the front lines, and 6.9% focus on international politics related to Ukraine. However, the angle of coverage differs: much more attention is paid to human casualties, destruction, and shelling by Russia. When covering international politics, the focus is on Russia's actions and western support for Ukraine, rather than confrontation with the west.

In economics topics, "oppositional" channels write more about the state budget, central bank rate hikes, large enterprises, war spending, the ruble exchange rate, and sanctions.

When covering shelling and the situation on the front lines, "oppositional" media pay significantly more attention to human casualties and destruction. The media frequently use words such as "dying", "suffering", and "fire": "A building of a children's clinic in Kyiv was damaged in a Russian drone attack", "In Tver region, 13 people were hospitalized after a drone strike on civilians." The emphasis is on the shelling of Ukraine by Russia, unlike in "pro-government" media. Additionally, "oppositional" media almost always refer to the events in Ukraine as a war (the word appears in 5.8% of posts on military topics).

When covering international events related to Ukraine, "pro-government" media focus on the actions of the West and the confrontation with it. In contrast, "oppositional" media talk more about Putin's actions (mentioned in 16.4% of posts on this topic) and Russia's actions (in 40.4% of posts): "Russia may use weapons against countries allowing Ukraine to strike Russian territory with its weapons", "Putin wants to 'clarify' the doctrine of nuclear deterrence. If his words are to be believed, there are already at least two formal reasons for the use of nuclear weapons." News about the actions of western countries also appears but mostly in the context of assistance to Ukraine: "U.S. President Joe Biden indicated that Washington may allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory with American long-range missiles."

On economics topics (4.1% of news), "oppositional" channels cover the state budget, large enterprises, war spending, the ruble exchange rate, and sanctions more than other types of media: "The ruble continues to devalue. Is the dollar reaching 100 soon?", "Russia's 2025 budget includes record spending on the war — 13.5 trillion rubles", "Russian authorities want to merge Rosneft, Gazprom Neft, and Lukoil into one structure, which would become the second-largest in the world", "Sanctioned goods worth billions of dollars are 'disappearing' in Russia — when transiting from the EU to Asian countries." A significant portion of posts (12% of all economic topics) concerns the central bank's interest rate hikes.

News on diplomacy unrelated to Ukraine is covered less often by "oppositional" media than by "pro-government" media (the median value is 2.4% of news on this topic compared to 5.4% in "pro-government" media). Usually, these are unexpected actions by Russia or other countries associated with it: "Putin’s representative for Afghanistan announced the imminent removal of the Taliban from the terrorist list", "Turkey submitted its application for BRICS membership."

"Oppositional" media cover emergencies, the economy, and science and health news less frequently than "neutral" media, and also less often than "pro-government" media, which tends to cover these topics more.

The above characteristics are common across most "oppositional" media. However, there are notable exceptions. ASTRA stands out with a much higher volume of posts about shelling, and Holod focuses more on lifestyle and everyday news. BBC and Redaktsiya are closer to "pro-government" media in terms of thematic content (especially with more focus on international politics). Agenstvo (Agency) and Important Stories pay more attention to international politics and also cover the front line situation more than other outlets.

"Neutral" Media

This category includes channels that are more likely to be read by both supporters and opponents of the war. It is the most diverse in terms of channel types: seven out of 16 focus on lifestyle and everyday news (e.g., Bloknot Rossiya 18+ [Notebook Russia 18+], Topor [Axe]), three cover crime and incidents (Mash, Baza, and Shot), three focus on the economy (RBC, Kommersant, Brief), two cover international politics and the war (Ateo Breaking, Ranshe Vseh. Nu Pochti. [Ahead of Everyone. Well, Almost]), and one focuses specifically on covering shelling (VChK OGPU).

Despite the diversity, these channels share some characteristics that differentiate them from "pro-government" and "oppositional" media. These characteristics are the reason why they attract an audience with a range of political views. This section outlines these characteristics.

"Neutral" channels have a stronger focus on everyday news, particularly the economy (8.8% of news in "neutral" channels versus 4.1% in "oppositional" and 3% in "pro-government"). They focus more on domestic, rather than international, events such as price changes and the central bank's key interest rates. Additionally, they cover emergencies more frequently (5.8% of news, compared to 2.3% in "oppositional" channels), including fires, utility accidents, and unusual weather changes. They also cover health, food, and science news more than "oppositional" media (4.1% versus 0.8%).

"Neutral" media also cover the war, including shelling (7.3% of news), and international politics (7%), but they do not present these topics as dramatically as "oppositional" media. For example, Russia’s shelling of Ukraine are covered more than the reverse. The deaths and injuries of civilians in "neutral" channels are mentioned more often than in "pro-government" media, but less frequently than in "oppositional" media. Moreover, these channels use emotionally charged language ("enemy", "militant") much less frequently.

In the realm of international politics related to Ukraine, "neutral" channels place emphasis similar to "pro-government" media, but the overall share of content on this topic is lower (7% compared to 12.5%), and the tone is less positive. In general, the coverage of the war in these channels falls somewhere between "pro-government" and "oppositional" media but is closer to "pro-government."

A significant portion of the content in "neutral" channels (median value of 12.8%) is focused on crime news, which is predominantly covered by tabloids like Mash, Baza, and Shot. However, there is a wide variation among channels in this category — for instance, channels focused on international politics and the economy hardly cover crime news. As a result, the overall share of content dedicated to crime is similar to that in "pro-government" and "oppositional" media.

"Neutral" media cover the economy more than other categories of channels (8.8% of news in "neutral" channels compared to 4.1% in "oppositional" and 3% in "pro-government"). They write slightly less about the central bank's key rate increase than "oppositional" media (10.3% versus 12%), and slightly more about prices (8.7% versus 7%).

However, they cover sanctions less frequently (3.2% versus 8.6% in "oppositional" media), government budgets (2.2% of posts with the word "budget" versus 5.3%), and exchange rates (4.8% versus 9%). Overall, "neutral" media focus more on domestic economic topics that affect everyday life, such as "Freight and passenger rail tariffs will increase by more than 10%", and "The average interest rate for market mortgages has exceeded 25% annually."

When it comes to legislation, "neutral" channels also cover issues that concern less politicized everyday matters: "Russians will be fined for walking dogs without a muzzle and a leash", "IT specialists will have to confirm their qualifications through Gosuslugi." They do write about repressive laws, but it is not their main focus: "The State Duma of the Russian Federation passed a law banning 'childfree' propaganda."

A significant portion (5.8% of news content) of "neutral" media covers emergencies in Russia, such as fires, utility accidents, and extreme weather events: "The trading rows in Podolsk, Moscow region, caught fire", "'Roscosmos' released a photo of cyclone 'Martin,' which hit Moscow", "At least 10 apartments were seriously damaged or completely destroyed in a gas explosion in Cherkessk."

Another topic that "neutral" media cover significantly more than other channels (4.1%) is health, science, and food news, which often (but not always) have an entertaining nature: "Doctors explained at what age one should completely quit alcohol", "There is a shortage of medicines in the Altai region", "Russian scientists from Novosibirsk have created charcoal pasta", "Energy drinks sold in Russia cause tumors and cirrhosis of the liver."

As with their coverage of the war and international politics, "neutral" media write about diplomacy unrelated to Ukraine in a similar manner to "pro-government" media. However, their tone is notably less positive toward Russia, and posts rarely express admiration for Putin's actions or condemnation of the West. These channels do, however, write more about the actions of other countries (Armenia, China, Kazakhstan, etc.) than "pro-government" media.

In practice, "neutral" media occasionally support pro-government narratives in international politics, such as "More than 30 countries are willing to cooperate with BRICS — Putin", and "Russian-Indian relations are characterized by privileged strategic partnership and are constantly developing." However, it should be noted that the neutrality of these channels is primarily defined by their audience (they are read by both supporters and opponents of the war), not by the position they promote.

The political stance of the content creators in these channels is not necessarily neutral, but most of them are not as focused on international relations as "pro-government" media, which allows them to attract an anti-war audience.

Main Differences Between Types of Media

“Pro-government media" write more than oppositional media about international diplomacy (the median share of news posts on this topic is 1.8 times higher than in oppositional media) and emergencies (2.5 times more), while "neutral" media focus more on everyday topics such as the economy (2.1 times more), health (5 times more), and incidents (2.5 times more). At the same time, "oppositional" media cover political repression significantly more than both other categories — the share of news on these topics is 2.3 times higher than in "neutral" media and 4 times higher than in "pro-government" media.

‎

Differences in coverage between media categories
	"Pro-government"	"Neutral"
Write more than "oppositional" media	- Emergencies - International diplomacy (not related to Ukraine)	- Emergencies - Products and health - Economy
Write less than "oppositional" media	- Arrests and trials (political and economic) - Technology and IT	- Arrests and trials (political and economic) - Situation on the frontlines

All three categories of channels write about the war and domestic politics with roughly the same frequency, but with noticeable differences in perspective and tone. "Pro-government" channels cover nearly everything related to the war and the internal situation in Russia in a much more positive light than "oppositional" ones. "Neutral" channels show a similar pattern — likely because they write about the negative consequences of the authorities' actions less frequently, although topics with statistically significant differences in tone are fewer. There are no topics that "oppositional" media cover more positively than "pro-government" or "neutral" channels.

‎

Differences in sentiment of news content
	"Pro-government"	"Neutral"
Write more positively than "oppositional" media	- International diplomacy (not about Ukraine) - Legislation and new restrictions - Armaments and military cooperation - Sports and political confrontations (grouped by algorithm due to similar vocabulary) - Emergencies	- Legislation and new restrictions - Shelling - Emergencies - Sports and political confrontations - Foreign policy
Write more negatively than "oppositional" media	—	—

The most significant difference in tone of voice between "oppositional" and "pro-government" channels is found in content that can be described as "personal stories related to the war." "Pro-government" media often heroize Russian soldiers, while "oppositional" media focus on war crimes committed by them and the ruined lives of victims. In other aspects, the pattern remains the same as in news content — "oppositional" media report on the war and domestic politics more negatively, and they generally have no topics with positive coverage.

‎

Differences in sentiment of unique posts
	"Pro-government"	"Neutral"
Write more positively than "oppositional" media	- Personal stories related to the war - Domestic politics - Economy - Shelling	- Shelling - Personal stories related to the war
Write more negatively than "oppositional" media	—	—

Channel Characteristics and Popularity

Sentiment

Based on our data, more positive content correlates with higher popularity (p = 0.02), which we measured as the number of respondents who named a given channel in the survey. It's possible that the ideological position itself influences popularity directly, aligning more closely with many Russians' views, or that channels whose positions align with the official stance receive more state support in terms of promotion.

Examples of positive content from "pro-government" channels include statements like: "The tests of 'Oreshnik' were successful, I congratulate you on this, we will continue the tests — Vladimir Putin", "The relations between the UAE and Russia are qualitatively developing in the fields of economy, trade, and energy, said UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan", and "Russia has already won the special military operation, stated Alaudinov."

We also observe a negative correlation between the level of positivity in a channel and the share of its anti-war audience (higher pro-war content increases positivity with p < 0.001). When we add the share of the anti-war audience as a dependent variable in the regression model, the statistical significance of the relationship between popularity and both parameters disappears. In other words, due to the strong correlation between positivity and pro-war stance, it becomes difficult to determine whether positivity itself or the political orientation of the channel contributes more to its popularity.

However, popularity is unlikely to depend solely on political orientation. In this regard, we conducted a separate analysis of "oppositional" media and found that "oppositional" channels with a more positive tone are more popular (p = 0.05). Examples are shown in the graph below.

But it is important to note that the sample size in this analysis is quite small (15 channels), and the statistical significance is right on the 0.05 threshold. Therefore, we cannot confidently state that this correlation is not just a statistical error. Among other media categories ("neutral" and "pro-government"), such a correlation does not exist when considering media within a single category.

Nevertheless, we analyzed what specifically contributes to the positivity of "oppositional" media. It includes unique positive content, coverage of positive or neutral events, and a generally more positive tone.

One of the news topics with a relatively high level of positivity is diplomacy and political news unrelated to Ukraine. In "oppositional" channels, this positivity is often conveyed through an ironic tone: "Photo and video of the day: In Tatarstan, they prepared 130 kg of chak-chak for BRICS summit participants; Alexander Lukashenko was welcomed with bread and salt at Kazan airport; the summit menu has been revealed", or "In the Tyumen region, a banner with Putin’s image was ceremoniously unveiled on a school facade."

Sports news can also be positive: "Russian athletes won 64 medals at the Paralympics in Paris." Even relatively neutral topics like the economy may seem less negative against the broader news backdrop: "Russians spent a record amount on sneakers."

Examples of unique positive content include cultural news ("Last week, the 81st Venice Film Festival opened in Italy. Here are the best celebrity looks from the red carpet ahead of the main premieres") and science news ("Wrapping up Nobel Week: What achievements in medicine, chemistry, and physics did the Swedish Academy recognize this year?"). Other formats such as photo and video selections, memes, and uplifting news collections also contribute to the positive tone.

At the same time, there is no correlation between neutrality (or, conversely, emotionality) of presentation and popularity, both emotionally charged channels (Meduza among "oppositional" media and Readovka among "pro-government") and those striving for a neutral tone (Context among "oppositional" media, TASS and RIA Novosti among "pro-government") can be widely followed.

Topic Composition

Popular news channels can have entirely different focuses. There is no correlation between the share of any specific topic in a channel and the number of respondents who named it. Among the most popular Telegram channels in Russia, some specialize in military analysis (Mir Segodnya s "Yuriy Podolyaka" [World Today with "Yuriy Podolyaka"]), international politics (Ranshe Vseh. Nu Pochti. [Ahead of Everyone. Well, Almost.], Ostashko! Vazhnoye [Ostashko! Important], and others), lifestyle and daily news (Pryamoy Efir • Novosti [Live Broadcast • News], Topor [Axe], and others), crime and emergencies (Mash, Baza, SHOT), and economics analysis (RBC, Brief, Kommersant).

It is also important to note that a channel’s popularity does not correlate with how much it covers the war. Most popular "pro-government" and even "neutral" channels continue to report on shelling and international events related to Ukraine, albeit often from a different angle than "oppositional" channels. A relatively high proportion of war-related content (a median of 31% for "pro-government" channels, 17.6% for "neutral," and 21.9% for "oppositional") does not hinder their popularity.

Popularity also does not correlate with posting frequency, the uniqueness of covered news (i.e., how many other channels report on the same story), the diversity of topics covered, or the representation of various political viewpoints.

However, "oppositional" channels are noticeably more thematically similar to one another than "pro-government" and "neutral" channels. While our analysis does not confirm that this directly affects the lower popularity of "oppositional" media, it could be one contributing factor.

We measured thematic diversity across channel categories using two different methods, both of which produced similar results.

First, for each channel, we calculated the average embedding vector of its news posts, essentially a quantitative representation of the typical post in that channel. Then, we computed the average vector for each category of channels: "pro-government," "oppositional," and "neutral." Separately, we measured the distance between each channel’s average vector and its category’s average vector, indicating how much the typical post in that channel differs from the category’s overall average post. We then calculated the standard deviation of these distances from zero, using this value as an indicator of diversity. In other words, we assessed the spread of average posts within each category to determine how much channels within a category differ from one another.

The second method measured the distribution of topic proportions derived from thematic modeling, an automated process of identifying topics within posts. Here, instead of using an average embedding vector of news posts, we represented each channel as a vector where each coordinate corresponded to the proportion of posts dedicated to a particular topic. The rest of the methodology remained the same, with the standard deviation from the category’s average vector serving as the measure of diversity.

Recommendations

Write About People's Everyday Problems

Gregory Asmolov, a researcher at King's College London specializing in digital marketing and crisis communications, believes that the thematic similarity of "oppositional" media may stem from the role they assume — filling in gaps left by "neutral" and state-affiliated media. Since these gaps are very specific, for example, covering repression and the consequences of war, independent media outlets end up resembling one another.

Maxim Alyukov, a sociologist from the same university, argues that audiences are gradually growing tired of such uniform content. He notes that in-depth interviews conducted by PS Lab reveal how people feel exhausted by the repetition of the same five to seven topics. Repetition triggers various psychological reactions; some perceive it as a form of manipulation, while others simply find it boring. Even anti-war audiences, despite agreeing with the content, expressed frustration at constantly hearing the same messages and admitted they could no longer listen to them.

Solutions can be found in the strategies of media outlets that are popular among both supporters and opponents of the current government, so-called "neutral" channels. These channels are less uniform and attract a broad audience that extends beyond a narrow group of politically engaged readers. For "oppositional" media seeking to significantly expand their reach and break out of the bubble of politically active audiences, studying these channels and their approaches could be beneficial.

Compared to "oppositional" outlets, these channels pay much more attention to everyday and local issues, particularly in the following areas.

Economy

In this area, "neutral" channels focus on domestic economic issues that directly affect daily life rather than on state budgets or international trade relations. Examples of such news, largely ignored by "oppositional" media, include: "Prices for refrigerators and air conditioners in Russia are set to soar due to new environmental regulations", "Starting 1 November, banks will no longer be allowed to charge fees on payments to the government (taxes, fines, kindergarten fees, etc.), according to the Central Bank", and "The Bank of Russia has proposed limits on mortgage loans exceeding 30 years starting 1 July 2025, as their share has doubled over the past year from 10% to 20%."

Emergencies

"Neutral" media also devote significant attention to emergencies in Russia, such as fires, serious road accidents, utility failures, and extreme weather conditions. For example, the following incidents were barely covered by "oppositional" media: "Three children and two adults were injured in a fire at a shelter for victims of domestic violence in Odintsovo, Moscow region", "Ten people were injured, including three dead, in a bus accident in the Astrakhan region", "Marina Stepanova, a deputy of the Yaroslavl Regional Duma, crashed a 'TANK' vehicle into a bus in the Yaroslavl region. Seven people were injured in the accident", and "In Kamchatka, volunteers and rescuers spent 10 hours pouring water over four stranded orcas."

Health and Science

Another area where "neutral" media stand out is their focus on health and science. They regularly report on issues such as the spread of infectious diseases, potential restrictions on alcohol sales, food safety concerns, and consumer complaints about contaminated products. Examples include: "The Coxsackie virus is rapidly spreading across Russia", "Russia may introduce new restrictions on alcohol sales", "'80% of honey in Russia is fake': Producers continue replacing real honey with sugar syrup and even adding carcinogens", and "Customers of Perekrestok and VkusVill reported food poisoning from marshmallows."

Maxim Alyukov suggests that relevance is crucial for audiences in Russia today. People may engage with negative news, but it has to feel personally connected to their own lives. Distant or abstract issues are far less interesting than those that directly impact them.

However, Gregory Asmolov warns that simply covering everyday issues may not be enough. If this information is already provided by other media, especially state-affiliated ones, shifting audience demand may be difficult. For independent media to compete effectively, they need to offer a distinct advantage when covering these topics. Given that most independent outlets have left Russia, this poses a significant challenge.

Create Positive Content

Our analysis showed that the more positive content a channel produces, the more popular it tends to be on average. However, the level of neutrality (emotional tone) does not appear to influence the popularity. What matters is producing more positive content and less negative content.

"Pro-government" channels ensure a high level of positivity by portraying the actions of the Russian authorities in a favorable light. Naturally, this strategy would not work for "oppositional" media. However, it is still possible for them to find positive content.

For instance, Meduza, the most positive and most popular oppositional channel, produces a lot of unique content about culture and science. They have written about films shown on STS (a Russin entertainment TV-channel), reviewed the animated film that later won an Oscar, and covered archaeological discoveries. Moreover, a simple way to incorporate positive content is by compiling various lists: music, beautiful photos, good news, memes, and films.

"Neutral" media use other strategies that might work for independent media as well. For example, they publish positive and engaging news stories from people's lives, even if these stories have little societal significance: "In Russia, in two days, unknown individuals stole three kangaroos from zoos", "A millionaire left his business for his favorite hobby. George Eppling from the USA abandoned his career as a business analyst and turned to historical reenactment", "A man spent 10,000 bitcoins on two pizzas in 2010. Now it’s worth a billion dollars."

Another form of simple positive content is animal-related news: "Rescuers carried 700 cats and dogs out of a burning shelter. A fire broke out in one of the shelters in Barnaul", "A dog returned to its owners after three months of being lost in the Leningrad region. During that time, it walked almost 40 kilometers but couldn’t find its way home."

Journalism, media, and communications researcher at the University of Sheffield, Ilya Yablokov, agrees that positive content could attract more audiences: "If the news of the day consists not only of horrors and floods in Orenburg, but you also talk about the Berlin Film Festival, people will come to your media for positive news."

Maxim Alyukov points out that although negative news may attract attention to a specific event, over the long term, it tends to alienate people and cause fatigue.

***

Using a combination of survey data and machine learning methods, we analyzed dozens of Telegram channels to identify which content could be more attractive to people in Russia. Based on the findings, we proposed some recommendations for independent media on content selection that could help them expand their audience.

At the same time, the experts we surveyed note that the implementation of these recommendations depends on the media themselves, their priorities, resources, and external circumstances. For example, Ilya Yablokov believes that the media in general should move towards "more relatable stories from Russia, without condemnation of the Russian audience." But it’s unclear how far oppositional media are willing to go in this direction, given their established brands, existing audiences, and expectations from employees.

On the other hand, Maxim Alyukov notes that oppositional media sometimes face contradictory demands. Their audience in Russia wants to see less political content and more everyday topics, while international readers want the opposite. "It’s difficult to maintain a balance. Due to external pressure, it will be hard to completely reorient toward the Russian audience. These discussions will begin, as we see with the opposition abroad: some argue that they should address Russians, while others say it may no longer be necessary to do so because everything there is lost," the expert reflects.

In this text, we provide data-based recommendations, but we do not claim that they are universally applicable to any independent media working for a Russian audience. Ultimately, decisions about changing editorial policies can only be made by the independent media themselves, based on their mission and priorities. Gregory Asmolov concludes by reminding us that informing and entertaining are two entirely different functions, and media outlets experimenting with formats should not forget which of these two tasks is their primary goal.