Researchers have shown how media hype is created around advocacy in Ukraine

Communication campaigns aimed at creating the impression of a supposed «crisis of legitimacy» of the self-governing bodies of the advocacy in Ukraine have become noticeably more active in the public sphere. By their very nature, these processes go beyond the scope of normal professional discussion or reasonable criticism.

These conclusions were reached by the American Armada Network based on the results of its research. The corresponding analytical report «The Ukrainian National Bar Association in the context of the rule of law and European integration», was presented in early February at the European Parliament.

The researchers noted a number of recurring patterns that contribute to the information bubble effect and the artificial reinforcement of certain narratives.

First, there are synchronized publications in the media or «leaks» when materials with similar structures, wording, and key messages appear in different publications almost simultaneously. Such synchronization creates the impression of a broad public consensus on the existence of an institutional crisis, even in the absence of independent confirmation.

Second, attention should be paid to the use of anonymous or pseudo-anonymous digital channels as sources of alleged «insider information». Such content is often retransmitted in traditional media as semi-factual material, despite the lack of primary verification or a clearly identified source.

Third, the technique of associative accusation is widespread, where insinuations, assumptions, and associative links are used instead of institutional or legal analysis. Although such methods have no evidential value from a legal or methodological point of view, they have a significant psychological impact on the audience's perception of information.

Finally, there is a systemic lack of corrective mechanisms: initial statements are rarely accompanied by clarifications, refutations, or updates, even if the facts change or the initial publication was incomplete. In the digital environment, the first version of a narrative usually has the greatest impact, regardless of any subsequent clarifications.

Together, these factors create media «resonance», in which the repetitiveness and popularity of messages replace their analytical quality. This effect poses a particular risk to institutions that play a key role in the justice system, as it can influence public opinion and regulatory decisions without a proper factual basis.

The resulting media «resonance» poses a separate risk for external partners and international stakeholders. In such an information environment, quantitative indicators of visibility — the number of publications, the emotional intensity of headlines, the repetition of key messages — can be mistakenly perceived as empirical evidence of a systemic problem, even in the absence of a proper evidence base.

This risk is particularly sensitive in the context of European integration. Simplified or campaign-driven media narratives can influence the framework for discussing reforms, shifting the focus from institutional strengthening and the development of self-government mechanisms to decisions that actually lead to institutional weakening. Such a substitution of an analytical approach with media intensity can have long-term negative consequences for the quality of reforms and the sustainability of institutions.

Instead, researchers argue that analysis of empirical data obtained during the survey does not reveal any signs of delegitimization of the Ukrainian National Bar Association. On the contrary, the survey results show that the institutional stability of the advocacy sector and the high level of professional trust are maintained even in conditions of martial law.

Thus, 69% of citizens trust the advocacy sector as an institution to one degree or another. Among judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials, 70% fully or partially trust advocacy as an institution, and 63% of respondents in this group consider the UNBA to be a strong and influential organization in the justice system.