In September 2026, the research company Active Group completed the latest wave of its nationwide study “Online Safety,” the results of which record a sustained public demand for regulating internet content in Ukraine. According to data published by RBC-Ukraine, 80.4% of respondents supported the introduction of clear rules for removing or blocking illegal and terrorist content. At the same time, respondents emphasized: support for regulation does not mean unconditional trust in control mechanisms — Ukrainians expect transparent procedures, reasoned decisions, and a real opportunity to appeal the actions of moderators.
The problem remains, but perception is changing
The dynamics of key indicators over six months paint a mixed picture. If in May 2026, 73.5% of Ukrainians considered the spread of illegal content a serious or rather serious problem for the country, by September this share had fallen to 64.5%. At the same time, the share of those who do not consider the problem serious grew from 17.7% to 22.9%. At first glance, this could be interpreted as “habituation” to digital threats. However, a rise in actual exposure to dangerous content is recorded in parallel: the share of respondents who encountered disinformation increased from 59.1% to 63%, and exposure to radical content rose from 14.4% to 23.1%. The only indicator that showed a decline was reports of fraud and phishing (from 64.8% to 52.6%).
Who bears responsibility: authors, platforms, or the state
On the question of who should bear the main responsibility for dangerous content online, Ukrainians distribute it among several parties. Most often — 40.9% of respondents — responsibility is placed directly on content authors. Almost as many, 39.9%, name website owners and online services. Compared with May, the share of respondents shifting the main responsibility to law enforcement agencies, online platforms, and social networks has decreased. At the same time, positions on the joint responsibility of all ecosystem participants and on the role of users themselves in shaping the digital environment have become more common.
Fear of abuse and censorship
Despite high support for clear rules, respondents highlight significant risks of their application. Ukrainians are most concerned about the possibility of abuse by the regulator or the state — so say 54.8% of respondents. Fears of possible censorship grew over six months from 38.9% to 43.8%. At the same time, fewer respondents cite privacy intrusion and corruption as risks. For users, transparent procedures are critically important: 51.5% believe the law should clearly define the grounds for content removal, 47.4% demand mandatory justification of such decisions, and 38.9% insist on the user's right to appeal a removal. Stricter mechanisms find less support: only 32.9% agree with removing harmful or terrorist content within an hour of a request or complaint, and platform moderation reports are supported by only 19.2%.
Contradictory data
The survey results contain several notable internal tensions that are important to consider when interpreting them. On the one hand, 80.4% of respondents support the introduction of clear blocking rules, and 55.1% believe it is necessary to implement moderation rules similar to European ones. On the other hand, 53.2% of respondents, when choosing between freedom and safety on the internet, lean toward freedom (23.1% — for maximum freedom, 30.1% — rather for freedom), while safety as a priority was chosen by only 33.7%. In addition, the decline in the share of those who consider illegal content a serious problem (from 73.5% to 64.5%) paradoxically coincides with a rise in actual exposure to radical content (from 14.4% to 23.1%). This may indicate that some respondents do not always correctly assess the scale of the threat, or that the perception of the “seriousness” of the problem is shifting toward acceptance as the norm. Finally, 64.3% are ready to support European moderation standards, but only on the condition of their compliance with European norms — that is, support is conditional and depends on the quality of implementation.
Comment from the researchers
“These results show that the public demand is not reducible to simply strengthening control over content. People simultaneously want greater safety online and clear boundaries for the regulation itself,” commented Alexander Pozniy, director of Active Group. According to him, trust in such rules will largely depend on the transparency of procedures and the possibility to appeal a decision. Thus, the key condition for the legitimacy of future regulation becomes not the strictness of sanctions, but institutional transparency and judicial protection of the user.
