Between repression and resilience: The struggle for independent journalism in Georgia and Moldova

Independent media worldwide have been facing growing operational pressures in recent months. Eastern Europe is a vivid example. This is especially true in countries undergoing democratic transitions, such as Georgia and Moldova. The years 2024 and 2025 marked a period of heightened instability, where disinformation campaigns and foreign propaganda converged with financial hardship and, above all, escalating political repression. These developments exposed just how fragile media ecosystems can be, particularly those that seek to operate free from political interference.

This blog explores how media independence is conceptualized and exercised in Georgia and Moldova, and examines the current threats that jeopardize it. Drawing from my ongoing research, I share selected insights to contribute to the broader public and academic understanding of the challenges facing independent journalism in these countries.

Re-defining independent media?

The term “independent media” has long been present in public discourse, gaining renewed prominence amid the global rise of authoritarianism. To understand its significance and role in today’s societies, it is essential to first clarify what we mean by it. Independent media refers to media outlets that are free from control by governments, political actors, or other vested interests. In practice, this means editorial autonomy, transparent funding, and adherence to professional and ethical standards. While the term is frequently used in media development discourse, its meaning is often debated, especially in fragile democracies where media outlets operate in difficult financial and political environments.

At its core, media independence is rooted in the capacity of journalists and media organizations to serve the public interest without fear or favour. It encompasses the freedom to investigate abuses of power, expose corruption, give voice to the marginalized and neglected, and offer diverse perspectives on social and political issues.

To sustain both editorial independence and operational viability, financial autonomy is a core prerequisite. Ideally, this is achieved through diversified income streams such as reader contributions, ethical advertising, or service-based revenue (e.g., studio or equipment rentals).

However, in countries like Moldova and Georgia, the feasibility of such models is deeply challenged, not only by economic hardship and political pressure taking various, yet increasingly severe forms, but also by structural obstacles such as limited public awareness of the value of independent journalism, low levels of media literacy, and a lack of culture around supporting public interest media. In such environments, the audience may not be sufficiently mobilised to financially sustain independent outlets, while trust in journalism remains fragmented and easily undermined by disinformation campaigns and state-sponsored narratives. The central question, then, is not only how to build sustainable revenue models, but whether they can meaningfully function in political and social ecosystems that are still developing the civic and institutional foundations that media independence requires. To give more clarity on the concerns that hinder the meaningful functioning of the sustainability of independent media actors, the following paragraphs will outline and describe the essence of the challenges faced by Georgia and Moldova, both shared and country-specific.

Georgia and Moldova

Joint challenges for independent media outlets

1. Financial insecurity: Low income levels significantly reduce citizens’ ability to financially support independent journalism through subscriptions, donations, or audience membership. As a result, media outlets are left dependent on external donor funding or limited and politically influenced advertising markets, which weakens their financial autonomy and long-term sustainability. In addition to that, the suspension of U.S. aid and, in Georgia, legal restrictions on grants have left many unable to operate or pay staff for producing high-quality content.

2. Low media literacy: Many citizens lack the skills to distinguish between trustworthy journalism and politically motivated or misleading content. This deficit in media and information literacy undermines public demand for high-quality reporting and creates fertile ground for manipulation, particularly through disinformation and populist narratives.

3. Intimidation and harassment: Journalists face physical attacks, lawsuits, and blocked access. In Georgia, reporters were brutally beaten and specifically targeted during protests. In Moldova, especially in the Gagauzia region, journalists have faced pressures and assaults during their fieldwork.

4. Foreign interference and disinformation: Both Georgia and Moldova are on the frontlines of ongoing information warfare, primarily orchestrated by Russian politicians, state institutions, media outlets, and proxy networks. These actors exploit social divisions to spread propaganda that corrodes public trust in independent media and democratic institutions.

5. Hostile legal and regulatory environments: Perhaps the most alarming and rapidly escalating threat to media independence is the increasingly hostile legal environment. Across the region, independent media face mounting pressure through restrictive, punitive, or deliberately vague legislation. Georgia stands out as a particularly concerning example, where a series of legal initiatives have been introduced to silence dissent, criminalize journalistic activity, impose excessive fines, and restrict access to information.

Although these five categories are presented separately, they are closely interconnected, with each one influencing and reinforcing the others. Financial insecurity, driven by limited audience support and shrinking donor contributions, increases the vulnerability of media outlets to political pressure and foreign interference. At the same time, low levels of media literacy allow disinformation to spread more easily, weakening public trust in independent journalism and reducing resistance to repressive legislation. This dynamic is further intensified by ongoing intimidation, harassment, and legal restrictions that hinder critical reporting and drive professionals away from the field. Additionally, structural issues such as understaffing, journalist burnout, and limited access to quality training for young professionals continue to erode the long-term resilience and sustainability of independent media in both Georgia and Moldova.

Georgia: From the Law on Transparency to funding paralysis

As of 2025, Georgia’s independent media sector is facing a compounded crisis marked by legislative repression, the collapse of donor engagement, and a rapidly shrinking civic space. This deterioration is reflected in Georgia's precipitous fall in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), where the country dropped 11 places to rank 114th globally. This decline underscores the increasingly hostile environment for independent and opposition media, characterised by a growing number of verbal and physical attacks against journalists and the introduction of repressive legislation that exposes journalists to censorship and reduces space for free speech. What began with the reintroduction of the Foreign Agent Law has escalated into a full-blown strategy of legal and financial suffocation. Independent media outlets in Georgia, historically dependent on international grants due to the fragility of the domestic media market, now face a state of paralysis. They are trapped between increasingly repressive legal frameworks and the growing retreat of foreign financial support. This dual pressure is not only eroding media pluralism but also fundamentally reshaping the landscape of democratic discourse in the country. The following developments have contributed to and intensified this unfolding crisis:

1. Collapse of traditional revenue streams

Independent media in Georgia have long depended on international donor funding due to a lack of sustainable revenue from subscriptions, audience donations, or advertising. As confirmed through interviews with over 20 media outlets in the country for ongoing research by me these organizations cannot survive without foreign grants because “the Georgian audience is not yet willing to pay for media content, especially for high-quality journalism.”

The local advertising market is both small and politically distorted. Independent outlets are either blacklisted or sidelined by businesses afraid of political repercussions from advertising on critical platforms.

2. Donor retrenchment after the foreign agent law

The adoption of the “Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence” (May 2024) triggered a wave of concern and confusion among international donors. The law requires entities receiving over 20% of funding from foreign sources to register as “organisations pursuing the interests of a foreign power” under threat of high fines and intrusive scrutiny.

In the pre-election period, many donors paused or cancelled funding disbursements. They feared that supporting a media outlet might expose them to legal complications, particularly if a grant was followed by asset freezing, a fine, or forced registration of the outlet as a foreign agent. As one media outlet put it in ongoing research by the author of this essay, “Donors are afraid that once the government starts implementing the Law on Transparency, the bank accounts of the targeted media might be frozen.”

3. US Funding Suspension and Post-Election Crackdown

In late January 2025, the United States suspended foreign assistance to Georgia, deepening the financial crisis for media organisations. This move came amid criticism of Georgia’s democratic backsliding and violent suppression of protests around the foreign agent law.

Following the controversial parliamentary elections and harsh police crackdowns (including beatings of journalists during May and October 2024 protests), the working environment deteriorated further. Media professionals described conditions as "worse than any time in their careers,” citing financial, physical, and psychological pressures.

4. New legal measures in 2025: Total control over grants

In 2025, the situation worsened with especially two additional legal initiatives:

●      Amendments to the Law on Grants (April 2025) now require prior government approval for issuing grants to Georgian NGOs, including media outlets. Failure to obtain approval may result in fines, criminal liability, and asset seizures. Importantly, if a media outlet receives a grant without government consent, it is the outlet, not the donor, that is punished.

●      The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA, April 2025) introduced criminal penalties of up to five years' imprisonment for failing to register as a foreign agent, thereby enabling the government to criminalize journalistic and civic activities based on vague accusations of foreign influence.

5. Current Situation: Paralysis and Insecurity

Today, many media outlets find themselves unable to apply for grants at all because doing so would mean submitting detailed grant proposals to government bodies such as the Anti-Corruption Bureau for prior approval - a process widely regarded as a trap for labelling and sanctioning independent actors. Many international donors refuse to accept these terms, resulting in a standstill. As a result, “outlets are left without operational funding, unable to pay salaries or produce content,” as reported by multiple journalists in interviews conducted between March and May 2025. Several media outlets have been forced to either downsize, consider relocation abroad, or halt operations. Others attempt to continue producing content despite a lack of resources, often relying on volunteers and unpaid staff, highlighting their resolve but also exposing them to burnout and mental health decline.

The Georgian government’s hostile legal and political environment has created a landscape in which independent media face existential threats. The combined effects of the Foreign Influence Law, the FARA, and the Law on Grants amendments have effectively criminalized the financial lifelines of critical journalism. With international donors largely retreating and domestic support structurally weak, the very survival of independent media in Georgia now depends on coordinated international advocacy, emergency core funding, and protection mechanisms from diplomatic and media freedom actors.

Moldova

Financial instability and strategic manipulation

As of 2025, Moldova’s independent media sector is contending with a dual crisis: a collapse in external funding and an unprecedented level of political and information warfare. The economic insecurity of independent media is deepening against the backdrop of high-stakes electoral cycles, direct foreign interference, and rising repression of journalists. The most triggering challenges are: 

1. Disinformation and Russian electoral interference

The October 2024 presidential elections and EU referendum became a flashpoint for foreign meddling, particularly through the actions of fugitive oligarch Ilan Shor and the Kremlin-backed NGO “Evrazia.” Investigations by CU SENS, RISE Moldova, Ziarul de Gardă, and OCCRP revealed that more than 130,000 Moldovans were paid to vote against EU integration, with over $15 million funnelled into Moldova from Russian sources for bribery, vote-buying, and media manipulation. These operations included direct financial incentives to voters in Gagauzia and Orhei, the so-called “humanitarian aid” disguised as cash payments from Russian-linked banks, or social media campaigns, deepfakes targeting President Maia Sandu, and cyberattacks against the Central Electoral Commission. This information warfare strategy aimed to undermine the credibility of independent journalism and polarize public opinion through systematic manipulation, identity-based messaging, and economic coercion.

2. Assaults and smear campaigns targeting journalists

Independent journalists in Moldova are increasingly targeted by physical violence, legal intimidation, and coordinated smear campaigns, particularly in politically sensitive regions like Gagauzia. On February 12, 2025, CU SENS reporter Malvina Cojocari was verbally assaulted and physically obstructed by supporters of pro-Șor politician Evghenia Guțul while covering her court case in Chișinău. Protesters attempted to seize her notes, and two later filed lawsuits against CU SENS for defamation (SLAPP cases), even before any report was published. Two weeks later, another CU SENS team was harassed by security officials in Gagauzia while filming outside a public building. Though police confirmed their right to report, the incident highlighted growing local hostility toward independent media.

Simultaneously, leading outlets, including Ziarul de Gardă, TV8, and the Center for Investigative Journalism (CIJM), have been targeted by smear campaigns branding them as “grant-eaters” and “foreign agents.” These narratives, often spread by Șor-affiliated actors and pro-Kremlin networks, intensified after the U.S. funding suspension, which has been misused to delegitimize donor-supported media and portray them as disloyal to Moldova. These tactics form part of a broader effort to erode public trust and silence critical reporting ahead of the 2025 elections.

3. US funding suspension: A financial shockwave

In a major blow to media sustainability, the United States suspended financial assistance to Moldova in early 2025, just as it did in Georgia. Many independent media outlets report that they have lost up to 50% of their funding, primarily from U.S.-backed programs and consortia. Given Moldova’s weak advertising market and the public’s limited capacity to pay for content, the sector has entered a state of financial paralysis, unable to pay salaries or maintain editorial operations.

4. Current climate: Paralysis and heightened insecurity

Moldova’s independent media sector is facing a deepening crisis driven by structural vulnerabilities and mounting political pressure. The suspension of U.S. funding in early 2025 has triggered severe financial instability, stripping many outlets of up to half their operating budgets. Simultaneously, a human resources deficit, marked by staff burnout and declining interest among young professionals, has weakened newsroom capacity.

These internal strains are compounded by persistent Russian disinformation campaigns, cyberattacks, and populist narratives that brand journalists as “foreign agents” or enemies of the state, eroding public trust. Legal safeguards continue to deteriorate, with rising cases of restricted access to information, smear campaigns, and targeted lawsuits designed to intimidate and silence critical voices.

Moldovan independent media are not only economically vulnerable but are also strategically targeted in a broader geopolitical struggle between democratic consolidation and authoritarian influence. The convergence of foreign interference, domestic repression, and donor disengagement has pushed the sector to a breaking point. Like in Georgia, the current state of affairs reflects paralysis and insecurity, with few avenues left for sustainable, independent reporting unless a robust international response is urgently coordinated.

Georgia and Moldova: Parallels across borders

As Moldova prepares for its September 2025 parliamentary elections, the country's independent media find themselves at a critical juncture - not just domestically, but within a broader regional pattern of democratic erosion. Many Moldovan journalists are closely monitoring the rapid deterioration of press freedom in Georgia, where foreign agent laws, criminalization of grants, and donor paralysis have nearly collapsed the independent media sector. The fear is palpable: if pro-Russian forces secure a majority in Moldova's upcoming elections, similar legislative and institutional tools could be introduced to stigmatize, suppress, or even criminalize critical reporting.

This anxiety is not unfounded. Moldova’s own media community has already witnessed increased disinformation, smear campaigns, and physical intimidation, trends that eerily echo the early phases of Georgia’s media crackdown. Journalists and editors now speak openly of a “Georgian scenario” where foreign-backed propaganda and populist pressure may be used to justify hostile legislation under the guise of “transparency” or “national sovereignty.”

In both countries, independent journalism is caught between shrinking financial resources and growing political hostility, intensified by foreign interference, declining donor engagement, and institutional fragility. What happens in Georgia serves as a warning, and, for Moldova, perhaps a mirror, of what could lie ahead if democratic safeguards falter.

If Moldova is to avoid a similar fate, the international community must urgently support the country’s independent media, not only with emergency funding but with legal protections, cyber-resilience programs, and high-level diplomatic pressure to uphold press freedom as a cornerstone of Moldova’s European integration path. Despite the deterioration of the media landscape in both Georgia and Moldova, hope persists - not in institutions or policies, but in the resilience of the journalistic communities themselves.

In Georgia, independent media outlets continue to produce hard-hitting investigations, organize public resistance, and collaborate with civil society despite facing threats, criminalization, and financial ruin. Meanwhile, international attention has not entirely waned,  European institutions, media freedom watchdogs, and donor coalitions are actively seeking ways to support independent voices without legitimizing authoritarian structures.

The future of Georgian media, therefore, is not written. It remains a contested space,  between repression and resistance, between isolation and solidarity. The courage of journalists, the solidarity of civil society, and the strategic creativity of allies still offer a pathway forward.

Sources:

Independent Journalism Centre. We condemn the degrading treatment of the press by Bashkan Evghenia Guțul’s supporters and ask law enforcement authorities to ensure journalist safety. Chișinău: IJC, 2025. Available from: https://cji.md/en/

German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF). Russian Meddling in Moldova. Washington, D.C.: GMF, 2024. Available from: https://www.gmfus.org/download/article/23667

OCCRP, CU SENS & Important Stories. A Russian Non-Profit Interferes in Moldova’s EU Referendum - And Builds an Anti-Western Influence Machine. OCCRP, 2024. Available from: https://www.occrp.org/en/feature/a-russian-non-profit-interferes-in-moldovas-eu-referendum-and-builds-an-anti-western-influence-machine

Media Development Foundation. Disinformation and Media Monitoring Reports – Georgia 2024. Tbilisi: MDF, 2024. Available from: https://www.mdfgeorgia.ge/eng/view-library/10

Council of Europe – Platform for the Safety of Journalists. Georgia: Media Freedom Rapid Response (MFRR) Mission Report, October 2024. Strasbourg: CoE, 2024.

International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL). Brief on Georgia’s “Foreign Agents” Registration Act (FARA). Washington, D.C.: ICNL, 2024.

International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL). Brief on Georgia: Draft Amendments to the Law on Grants. Washington, D.C.: ICNL, 2024.

About author: Eva Karlikova is a Master’s student in the Area Studies program at Charles University in Prague, specialising in independent media in the South Caucasus and Eastern Europe. She works as a project coordinator for CU SENS, a Moldovan investigative media outlet, and has previously worked as a project manager for Moldovan, Georgian, and Ukrainian programs of Czech NGOs, including People in Need and Caritas Czech Republic. In 2025, Eva interned at Media Voice as part of a credit-bearing internship course at Tbilisi State University.