Media under pressure in the Eastern Partnership and Baltics

This article presents a recent regional report of the state of media development in the Easter Partnership States and the Baltic states, looking at three interconnected themes that cut across the six OECD Principles : Funding, local ownership, and adaptation. This is a guest article by Maryia Sadouskaya-Komlach and a Georgian co-author. 

One of the most consequential shocks for the media development sector was the reduction of US funding in early 2025, which led to immediate staff layoffs, program cancellations, and diminished operational capacity across media development organizations. These shocks were compounded by rigid funding structures, including heavily earmarked budgets and compliance-heavy grant conditions that limited organizations' ability to reallocate resources or respond dynamically to emerging needs. In several contexts, legal pressure and security risks also reduced organizations' ability to participate in broader sectoral  initiatives, forcing them to prioritize immediate operational survival over long-term planning.

Diverging contexts, shared vulnerabilities

The Baltic states Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia are firmly embedded within the European Union. They demonstrate relatively high resilience, both institutionally and financially. They also play an active role in supporting media freedom beyond their borders. In contrast, the Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries — Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine — follow divergent political paths. Ukraine and Moldova are advancing toward EU accession, albeit under severe strain in Ukraine's case due to the ongoing war. Georgia's trajectory has stalled amid growing authoritarianism, while Belarus and Azerbaijan remain authoritarian regimes where independent journalism survives largely in exile. Armenia occupies a comparatively hopeful position in the region, with democratic reforms and closer engagement with European institutions creating more favorable conditions for media development.

Despite these differences, the region is exposed to growing information threats. Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (FIMI), platform-driven disinformation, and deepening polarization continue to erode public trust and increase pressure on media development actors to respond more strategically.

Funding: Crisis and instability

Media development funding in the region has followed a pattern of volatility rather than continuity. The 2025 US government cuts left the sector in a state of shock, with few donors supporting the organizations. Interviews showed that over the past five years, funding has tended to surge during periods of crisis, including political unrest, election cycles, and war, only to contract again once donor attention shifts elsewhere. This stop-start dynamic undermines long-term planning and institutional sustainability. The research also showed that with heavily earmarked funding, media development organizations are unable to swiftly reallocate funds to the areas of urgent priority. Interviewees did not describe funding distribution as consistently fair or needs-based. Instead, allocation patterns were perceived as influenced by geopolitical attention and donor preferences, with smaller countries or less visible ecosystems feeling overlooked. Several interviewees noted that visibility within donor ecosystems increasingly shapes funding outcomes, leaving smaller or less geopolitically prominent countries at a structural disadvantage.

Local ownership: Formal inclusion but lack of real power

While local and regional actors are increasingly included in international media development projects and discussions, their actual influence varies considerably. The research highlights a persistent gap between formal participation and substantive decision-making power. In many cases, local organizations are formally included as partners or co-applicants, yet have limited control over agenda-setting, budget allocation, or implementation strategies.

At the same time, networking and peer exchange were consistently identified as critical for coordination and reducing fragmentation in an increasingly competitive funding environment. These practices offer a pathway toward more equitable governance — though they remain unevenly developed across contexts.

Adaptation: Uneven capacity in constrained contexts

Adaptation is deeply conditioned by structural factors such as funding flexibility, political constraints, and technological disruption. Across the region, media organizations face a rapidly evolving digital environment. Platform dominance, algorithmic distribution, and evolving AI technologies are reshaping how content is produced, distributed, monetized, and consumed. Yet many outlets lack the resources to invest in sustainable digital models.

Political conditions further influence adaptive capacity. In the Baltic states, resilience is relatively high, though not immune to polarization. In parts of the Eastern Partnership region, realities are far harsher: Shrinking civic space, legal restrictions, and, in some cases, forced exile. Belarusian media, for instance, operate largely from exile, relying on dispersed teams, cross-border infrastructures and precarious funding streams. Ukrainian outlets must balance innovation with survival in wartime conditions. Armenia stands out as a partial exception, where democratic momentum has created a more conducive environment for media development. However, even here, long-term sustainability remains uncertain.

What to do: Shift from short-term interventions to long-term priorities

The report proposes various recommendations to consolidate media development efforts in the EaP region and the Baltic states. Here are the most important ones:

1. Funding: From crisis response to structural support

• Long-term core funding and bridging finance need to become standard instruments rather than exceptional crisis responses.
• Flexibility must be built into grant design, allowing for larger unearmarked options, rapid reallocation and adaptation in volatile environments.

2. Ownership: From participation to shared governance

• Participation models need to move beyond symbolic inclusion toward genuinely shared governance.
• Donors should revise structural access constraints embedded in eligibility and contracting which limit local media development organizations' access to funding without international intermediaries.
• Media development organizations can strengthen their position by forming coalitions, coordinating advocacy, and engaging with donors collectively.

3. Adaptation: From standardized solutions to context-specific strategies

• Donors should intensively fund transformation. This means multi-month product and revenue accompaniment, experimentation budgets for audience growth and distribution strategies, and organizational development packages that allow outlets to implement change rather than only learn concepts.
• Both donors and media development actors should take into account: For wartime continuity organizations need flexibility and safety-first design (Ukraine). To operate exile, organizations need channel resilience and secure participation (Belarus). In restrictive environments, organizations require alternative disbursement and low-visibility support options (Georgia). Organizations in the Baltics need long-term support for transformation.

Maryia Sadouskaya-Komlach is a media development specialist, editor, and journalist with more than 20 years of professional experience. In 2015, she advised the European Endowment for Democracy on its feasibility study on Russian-language media initiatives. In 2019, she co-wrote a comprehensive analysis of Syrian exiled media for the International Media Support (Denmark). She was the author of the Vibrant Media Barometer by IREX between 2016 and 2024. Maryia is currently the Global Engagement Strategist at Free Press Unlimited. She holds a Master's degree in Journalism/Politics from Columbia University and is a non-resident fellow of the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). 

Due to the sensitive media and political environment, the co-author from Georgia will remain anonymous.