Telegram is the most popular source among social networks — 64% of respondents used it to read news. 44% of respondents take it as the main source of information. Its key advantage is urgency.
56% of respondents used Facebook, it became the main source of news for 15%. The advantage of this social network is the automatic selection of information, the disadvantage is about the long time to publish a piece of news and how it is displayed on the feed. YouTube was viewed by 51% of respondents, as the main source of news it is used by 12%.
It is best suited for watching television channels and personal interviews. Viber for viewing news was chosen by 47% of respondents, but only 8% consider it to be the main source of information. The peculiarity of this messenger is personalization and a sense of communication thanks to comments, sharing, and recommendations. Instagram was used by 44% of respondents, it was the main source of news for 7%. It attracts with its efficiency, brevity, personalization of accounts and touch to the personal life of immigrants
The study “Media Consumption and Public Activity of Ukrainian People Who Found Temporary Shelter in Poland” was conducted on the basis of analytical research and commissioned by the All -Ukrainian NGO Civil Network OPORA , with the support of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). The survey was carried out by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology during October , 26 — November , 30, 2022 in the Republic of Poland. The purpose of the study is to identify how and from where the news updates are learnt by Ukrainian people who found temporary shelter from the war in the Republic of Poland after February, 24, 2022. The researchers also examined the extent of respondents' involvement in the political and public life of Ukraine, as well as their interest in it. The study included two parts: a diary online survey of 200 respondents, and 15 in -depth interviews
The initiative is implemented by the Civil Network OPORA with the support of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Canada, and the UKaid from the British people. Any opinions expressed in this material represent OPORA's position and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Canada, the Government of Canada, or the Government of the United Kingdom.