The presentation was delivered on September 17, 2025, at the Round Table “From Dispelling Myths to the Search for the Common Good: Contemporary Dialogical Initiatives in Ukrainian Orthodoxy and the Prospects of Post-War Renewal,” organized by the Sophienbruderschaft with the support of The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) and held within the framework of the joint project of the Sophienbruderschaft and the German foundation Renovabis, “Modern Ukrainian Orthodoxy: Debunking Myths for the Sake of Reconciliation among the Orthodox in Ukraine and the Consolidation of Ukrainian Society.”
The Sophienbruderschaft may not share the positions of the speakers; likewise, individual opinions expressed by representatives of the Brotherhood within the framework of the project may not represent the consolidated position of the Sophienbruderschaft.
Ilona Sokolovska, Editor-in-Chief of “Viche”
Dear brothers and sisters of the Brotherhood, fathers, colleagues, friends!
It is a pleasure to see so many familiar faces. Most of you I had previously seen only in a little window on a monitor. And now—you are in 3D, and we do not even need to adjust the sound! Offline is much nicer than via Zoom. So I sincerely welcome you all!
YouTube as a New “Public Square”
The ancient Greeks had the agora. Medieval Ukrainians had the viche. And modern people have Telegram, YouTube, Facebook. 73.5% use these platforms to obtain information. YouTube occupies second place after Telegram. Almost 60% of Ukrainians are regular consumers of YouTube channels. Discussion-based, socio-educational, and analytical projects on YouTube are a kind of contemporary viche for Ukrainians.
In this virtual “assembly,” thanks to the possibility of commenting, people argue in the same way—sometimes shouting, sometimes applauding. Only instead of the bell of the viche, there is the subscription bell. Thus, the “Viche” YouTube channel, within the activities of the Sophienbruderschaft and in particular the project “Debunking Myths,” has produced: 21 interviews, 22 dialogue programs, and 285,000 total views.
My Observations
The audience follows not so much the topic as the guest. This was shown by the statistics of our broadcasts: views fluctuate, and each time there is its own dynamic.
Some watched in order to hear the position of those “close to the leadership”—this is what people wrote to me in private messages: “You know, I cannot stand this guest, but he is close to such-and-such a bishop, so I am watching because I want to understand what the hierarch or a representative of the State Service for Ethnopolitics and Freedom of Conscience thinks.” That is, people perceive a particular guest through the prism of their levers of influence in society or their access to exclusive information.
Priests and viewers from the diaspora, from abroad, wrote: “I watch you because this way I can understand what is happening in Ukrainian Orthodoxy.”
Thus, the viewer is not passive—they are searching. They want not only answers to questions, but also to anticipate developments. It is impossible to force them to watch any topic we present. Is this good or bad? On the one hand—excellent: Ukrainians think independently, make their own choices about what to watch and whom to listen to. On the other hand, we face a challenge: how to form a unifying metanarrative for post-war Ukraine and involve the audience in the search for the common good—which is precisely the task we want to set for ourselves in the new season—if people come not so much for the topic as for a specific person? Or they come for a topic only when it has caused public resonance on the verge of social fever.
Such topics included, for example: the situation around the cathedral in Chernivtsi, the relics of the Lavra, and at the very beginning of the project—the topic of banning the UOC after the entry into force of Law No. 3894.
And here an important remark about the “space of truth.” Everyone has their own truth. For us Christians, the Truth should be the Gospel and the Word of Christ, but the paradox is that everyone interprets it in their own way, adapts it to their own worldview, even interprets Gospel stories in their own way—let alone the perception of the socio-church-political reality outside the window.
Therefore, convincing someone of something in the YouTube space, in my view, is almost impossible. And such a task does not exist and should not exist. We can provide information, show the guest’s way of thinking, раскрыть a topic, and only hope that the viewer will hear, reflect, and become your like-minded person—or at least not a radical ideological enemy.
But what I can note regarding our programs on “Viche” is that the guests were as truthful and sincere as possible. There were even cases when people refused to participate, explaining: “Ms. Ilona, in this topic I would either have to be evasive, or lie, or later face serious consequences for myself and my family. So please allow me to remain silent this time.”
A Change in Rhetoric
At the beginning of the project, the atmosphere in the comments was, to be honest, toxic. Comments prevailed such as:
“We are the UOC, we are with Christ, and the OCU are raiders and worse than beasts.”
Or:
“Moscow Church, you are being deceitful! You will answer before God for this lie!”
There was a feeling that we had gathered all seven deadly sins in the comments—from wrath to pride.
But several months passed—and suddenly the tone changed. This does not mean that everyone began to profess the same ideas or demonstrate a single vision for solving one problem or another. However, notes of reflection began to appear; people shifted from openly contemptuous insults toward opponents to a desire to explain, argue their position, or propose options for resolving the conflict. That is, the level of tolerance increased significantly.
Remarks began to appear such as:
“If all Christians of the UOC and OCU thought this way, there would have long been one single Church.”
“A very interesting meeting… everyone should listen to such reflections. The knot is slowly being untangled. I am a parishioner of the UOC. We must have one Church, as in an independent state.”
And in the “Doctrine” series we saw something even more interesting: even those who had always tried to “jab” their opponent unexpectedly united against the real enemy—the Russian ideology of the “Russian world.” This is a small miracle, although predictable, because this was what we hoped for when launching this project. It is similar to how Ukrainians united at the beginning of the full-scale war.
And although the number of views of this project leaves much to be desired, I think this tendency toward cohesion/consolidation still needs to be analyzed in the context of the possibility of using it to achieve the results and tasks of the new challenge facing all responsible Ukrainians in the search for the common good.
Ukrainian society finds it difficult to unite purely for something—because this “for” is different for each of us; this is a national trait and a characteristic mentality. But we unite quite well against something. Perhaps these are the pressure points we should focus on. This is the field for reflection that I would highlight for myself.
Quality Over Views
Thus, our approach at “Viche” is not the number of views, but the quality of conversation. Yes, we certainly risk having lower numbers, but we provide an example of intelligent, constructive, respectful, thoughtful dialogue, fact-checking, attentiveness to details, an effort not to chase hype but to distinguish fakes from truth.
Here, friends, we walk a thin line. Because there is always a temptation: “What if we turn up the show a bit, add provocations—and views will soar?” But then we risk becoming manipulators ourselves. And we see how this works in Russia, where priests and propagandists have raised an entire army of people ready to kill “by the word of the Primate.”
Therefore, it is obvious that today YouTube, among other things, shapes public opinion and is capable of increasing or decreasing the level of conflict—if educational formats operate there.
A Bit of Philosophy and Bismarck
There is a famous phrase: “Wars are won by teachers and priests.”
Putin, by the way, constantly quotes this phrase—and stakes on the Russian Orthodox Church as a “weapon of mass destruction.” Bismarck’s thought is good—but it has been defiled by Putin, like everything he touches.
At “Viche,” we have taken this thought differently: if wars are won by priests and teachers, then let them win them by the word of truth, by dialogue, by the ability to dispel manipulation and teach people to hear one another.
Our episodes were quoted by various Orthodox media with diametrically opposed positions. And now they are no longer just quoting, but drawing conclusions and predicting developments in the Ukrainian Orthodox space, relying on the opinions of our guests. And this is already recognition as producers of serious content—and a very high level of responsibility.
Where to Go Next?
We all understand that YouTube is no longer just entertainment. It is a space where public opinion is formed, where one can sow either wheat or tares.
Friends, if we manage to teach people dialogue, to see the enemy where it truly is—and not in the neighbor in the next pew—then we are already working toward the renewal of Ukraine.
The task of “Viche” is to remain a platform where the common good is cultivated. Not hype at any cost, but honest, constructive conversation. Because the common good is not an abstraction—it is concrete things. And here the ability to hear and understand society is extremely important; viewer comments are very helpful here, and against this background—to unite and to unite ourselves.
Are all means justified by a noble goal in this work? Definitely not. But it is important for me and for the “Viche” team to hear your opinion.
So I hope for feedback. And I sincerely thank all the guests, viewers, and commentators of our channel.