Svitlana Stetsenko - attack 22.08.2026

On August 22, 2026, a Facebook user named Vitalii Kuprii published a post illustrated with a photograph of Svitlana Stetsenko, a presenter for Bihus.info. The post included the following text:

“I watched Bihus.info’s investigation into MP Mykytaś, whom I know personally. Disappointment. Why? A young woman who speaks very well about corruption was drawn into corrupt journalism. I listen to the report and am amazed. They talk about the 2017 National Guard apartment scams and… not a single word about one of the main suspects in this case—the permanent ‘overseer’ of Ukraine’s law enforcement system, an Anti-Maidan participant, Deputy Head of the Office of the President, OLEH TATAROV!!! Bihus covers for Tatarov. But not only him. Supposedly opposition MPs Zhelezniak and Honcharenko, the outlet Ukrainska Pravda, and Mykhailo Tkach… None of them raise the issue of this person’s corruption. But in fact, he is the one who controls the police, the Security Service of Ukraine, and even the courts.”

The post referred to a Bihus.info episode published on August 21, 2026, titled “A Guide to the NABU Tapes: Who Is Who, Hackers, Bags of Money, and the Raiding of Kyiv.”

Users subsequently left comments under the post containing the following statements about Svitlana Stetsenko and the newsroom she represents:

• “And how much did you pay for the ‘corrupt journalist,’ you disappointed acquaintance of Mykytaś?”
• “The journalist is young and inexperienced, while you are already old and battle-hardened and consciously defend corrupt officials and raiders?!”
• “Maybe all these ‘independent journalists’ receive their salaries from the same cash desk?”
• “The girl really is pretty, though :)”
• “Whore.”
• “All the devils from hell live in Ukraine. And plenty of people support them, including this corrupt journalist.”
• “Bihus is a Soros-funded dump. Eighty percent of journalists and their little newspapers are Soros-funded windbags.”
• “This scoundrel has long been kissing the green ass for 30 pieces of silver.”

This case shows signs of technology-facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV). First and foremost, there are gender-based insults and sexualized attempts to discredit the journalist: she is called a “whore,” while her professional work is associated with alleged “corruption” or being “bought.” There is also a devaluation of her professional competence based on gender and age. The author of the post emphasizes that a “young woman” was supposedly drawn into “corrupt journalism,” while comments describe her as “young and inexperienced.” Another form of abuse is objectification and comments focused on her appearance.

Such attacks can harm a journalist by undermining her professional reputation and public trust in her work. Gender-based insults and sexualized language can also contribute to a hostile environment, encourage other users to engage in further attacks, and shift attention away from the substance of journalistic reporting toward the journalist’s personality and appearance. As a result, this can create additional psychological pressure and have a chilling effect on professional activity, potentially encouraging self-censorship or greater caution when covering sensitive and controversial topics.