Ukrainians on social media: how the digital audience and its behavior are changing under the influence of war

Social networks in Ukraine remain one of the key infrastructures of digital everyday life. Despite the war, mass migration and economic instability, Ukrainians have not only not abandoned digital communications, but are increasingly actively adapting their lives to the virtual space. However, behind the outward stability of use, there are changes — an uneven recovery of the Meta audience, a decrease in the number of YouTube viewers, difficulties with TikTok, noticeable shifts in the demographics of users and a decline in the level of culture.

Interesting results of social network audience research

In April 2025, a new study of the Ukrainian social network market, based on open advertising data from Meta and Google, was published. Its results make it possible to trace both the total volume of the audience and nuances — age, gender, and regional characteristics. This allows you to better understand which networks are holding their ground and which are losing users.

Meta audience (Facebook and Instagram) is 20.8 million users in 2025 – the highest number among the platforms available for targeted advertising. Although the company experienced a significant drop in activity after the start of the full-scale invasion, the dynamics turned positive during 2024-2025. It is interesting that after the peak in the first half of 2022, both Facebook and Instagram sharply lost users.

Schedule: IA “FACT”

The graph, which shows the change in the number of Facebook and Instagram subscribers in Ukraine from 2020 to the beginning of 2025, shows a characteristic sinusoidal dynamic that is closely related to historical events, primarily a full-scale war. During 2020-2021, both platforms showed steady growth. At the same time, Instagram, which started from a lower mark, was actively catching up and by the middle of 2022 it actually equaled Facebook, and at a certain point even exceeded it in terms of the number of followers. This testifies to the popularity of visual content among the Ukrainian audience and the strong development of mobile traffic and interest in light, fast formats.

However, after the beginning of the full-scale invasion of the Russian Federation in February 2022, both platforms experienced a sharp decline. This was most noticeable on Instagram, from a peak value in the spring of 2022 to a decline over the following months. This is due to the nature of the content: Instagram has traditionally been a visual lifestyle platform – travel, entertainment, fashion, personal moments, but these topics have taken a back seat. The platform turned out to be unprepared for a new role — the space of urgent news, coordination and distribution of vital information. It would seem that we are only talking about social networks, but in fact we are dealing with the social echo of traumatic events that have changed the daily lives of millions of people.

Facebook also declined, albeit less dramatically, and has held relatively steady ever since, with slight growth in late 2024 and early 2025. This resilience may indicate that Facebook maintains an older and more stable audience base that has not left the platform even during the most difficult times.

The drop in the number of subscribers on these platforms was a consequence of not just a technical outflow of users, but a deeper transformation of information habits, living conditions and the psychological state of Ukrainians. This is a kind of digital indicator – an invisible front line that can be measured.

There are several explanations for this decline, and all of them are directly related to the war. First, mass migration. Millions of Ukrainians went abroad, and a significant part of them automatically fell out of the domestic statistics of platforms that tie the user to the country by IP address, mobile operator or language settings. Secondly, the destruction of infrastructure. In the regions affected by hostilities or shelling, there were long-term interruptions with the Internet, electricity supply and communication. In such conditions, access to social networks became unstable or impossible at all.

Third, changing user behavior. In the first weeks of the invasion, people turned to Telegram as a source of operational information and a coordinator of humanitarian aid. Many have deliberately reduced their activity on Facebook and Instagram, considering them dangerous for personal safety due to the possibility of recording geolocation, photos or habits.

It is also important to take into account the psychological factor: in a state of stress, losses and evacuations, a person naturally reduces his presence in social networks. Some Ukrainians deactivated their accounts for a certain period or completely stopped public activity.

Already in 2024-2025, both platforms show signs of gradual recovery. Instagram is slowly regaining its audience, but still has not reached pre-war figures. Facebook shows moderate but steady growth. In 2024, the chart first showed slow but steady growth. This may indicate the adaptation of Ukrainians to new conditions, the return of some emigrants, or the renewal of interest in public online activity. But Facebook and Instagram have not yet reached their pre-war figures.

The tendency of a gradual restoration of the audience looks like a signal: Ukrainians are once again looking not only for information, but also for social connections, space for their own voice and dialogue. But the format and function of social networks has changed. Now it’s not just entertainment — it’s part of the social, humanitarian, and even security environment.

Overall, the graph demonstrates both the adaptation and vulnerability of the Ukrainian digital environment during the war: platforms reflect social upheavals, information requests, and a gradual return to usual online activity.

As for the quantitative composition of the audience of social networks, it is not uniform, there is noticeable regional asymmetry. Visualization of user presence on Facebook and Instagram by region shows that the greatest penetration of Facebook is observed in the west of the country — more than 75% in Chernivtsi, Uzhhorod, and Ternopil. The most active users on Instagram are from Khmelnytskyi (61%) and Odesa (62%). At the same time, the critically low level of activity in social networks — in Kharkiv (23% on Facebook, 22% on Instagram), Donetsk, and Luhansk regions — reflects both the migration factor and real losses of digital coverage due to hostilities.

Schedule: IA “FACT”

This concentration of social networks in the west of the country is explained by the mass resettlement of residents from the frontline regions. Official user registration remains tied to pre-war residence, but actual residence is in the west. For example, a person may be registered in Zaporizhzhia, but actually live in Khmelnytskyi, where he is included in the local statistics of the use of Facebook or Instagram.

In the east, the opposite is the case. In the Luhansk region, Instagram has only 23% coverage, Facebook – 22%. Coverage is also minimal in the Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv and Kherson regions. This is partly due to infrastructure destruction, emigration, weak internet or occupation. The greatest parity between social networks is observed in the Poltava and Kherson regions, where Facebook and Instagram have approximately equal shares (within 1–2%). However, in Kyiv — a conditionally neutral region — Facebook still dominates: 60% versus 58% on Instagram.

At the same time, the age structure shows a familiar picture: young people under 34 mostly use Instagram. The peak activity of this network falls on 25-year-olds (more than 670 thousand users), then the curve goes down. On Facebook, on the other hand, more active users are 35+, with a noticeable presence among people aged 45-55. Threads does not yet have a clear demographic core, but two concentrated segments are visible – 23 and 31 years old. At the same time, within all age groups, social networks have a clearly defined gender dominance: women make up the majority of the audience, which is most noticeable in Instagram and TikTok.

Schedule: IA “FACT”

As for YouTube, the situation is less clear-cut. Despite the fact that it is still the largest social network in Ukraine in terms of reach – 16.1 million users, the platform lost 2.7 million viewers for the year, which is minus 11.1%.

Why some Ukrainians distance themselves from YouTube, TikTok and Facebook in the last two years

The reasons for the decline in the number of YouTube users are not limited to one trend, they should be looked for in technical difficulties, competition with short video formats of other platforms and the growth of paid content models. First of all, users are increasingly faced with the lack of transparency of the platform itself. Complaints about unjustified blocking of videos, channels, or demonetization of content are on the rise, and attempts to appeal decisions tend to be unsuccessful. In most cases, YouTube does not provide detailed reasons why a video or channel has been blocked, and the messages are limited to general statements about violations of the “community guidelines”.

This policy particularly affects Ukrainian authors who, since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, have mass-produced content about the war, social issues, mobilization or politics. YouTube’s automated algorithms often fail to distinguish documentary or analytical content from propaganda or manipulation, resulting in the removal of videos without warning and sometimes the complete loss of account access.

The second reason is a general change in audience behavior. In the conditions of fast-paced life and information overload, users prefer to consume short and fast content, such as Reels, Shorts or TikTok videos. The format of a traditional long video on YouTube requires more time and concentration, which makes it less attractive to the younger generation, who want to “swallow” information in a few clicks.

A separate role is played by monetization: more and more interesting or in-depth content becomes paid. Authors close their videos from wide viewing, opening them only to sponsors or through third-party platforms like Patreon. This reduces organic traffic and limits access to users who are unwilling or unable to pay.

In general, the decline in YouTube coverage in Ukraine is a consequence not only of external competition or economic factors, but also of the platform’s own technical inertia: unclear algorithms, lack of dialogue with users, restrictions on access to content, and changes in the motivation of creators. All this together forms the basis for the gradual flow of attention of the Ukrainian audience to other digital platforms.

Despite the impressive total figure — more than 20 million Ukrainian TikTok users — it is quite difficult to measure the real activity on this platform within Ukraine today. Due to the technical ban on the launch of advertising on the territory of Ukraine, official analytical tools, in particular TikTok Ads Manager, do not give a complete picture. It is only known that approximately 1.2 million active Ukrainian users are abroad, and it is they who form the main layer of the advertising accessible audience. Domestically, while the platform remains popular among teenagers and young adults, it has increasingly raised questions, from content uniformity to data security and feed toxicity.

However, the most interesting and alarming situation is observed with Facebook. Despite the fact that the platform still has a significant share of the Ukrainian audience (and is conveniently used for professional contacts, media and ads), many users are gradually losing trust in it. The reasons for this process are complex and much deeper than a banal change of preferences. First of all, this is the problem of bans without explanations. In 2024-2025, Facebook will continue moderation in the mode of automatic algorithms, which often work incorrectly. Many users report blocking posts and pages due to publications about the war, the Ukrainian army, political discussions or even jokes. Most often, the platform does not provide clear explanations of the reasons for the ban, and attempts to appeal the decision remain fruitless or receive a standard response without details. Of particular concern are cases where entire volunteer pages or posts with fundraising for the military are blocked – even if they do not contain any violation of the platform’s policies.

The second reason is the high level of politicization and distortion of the news feed. Facebook users increasingly complain that they cannot see the posts of their friends or the public pages that they consciously read. Instead, the feed is filled with “neutral” or entertaining content unrelated to topics important to the user. Algorithms work opaquely: they artificially raise some posts and completely hide others, even if they are gaining activity.

No less important is the feeling of general “fatigue” from the platform. For many, Facebook is associated with a politicized space where it is difficult to express an opinion without the risk of conflict or losing the page. In addition to this, weak moderation of comments, abuse of bots and ineffective reports create an atmosphere in which many are simply uncomfortable.

In general, although TikTok and Facebook remain among the largest platforms, the level of user engagement no longer always correlates with the overall audience numbers. Issues of trust, comfort, justice and open politics become decisive. In 2025, these factors will increasingly influence the choice of Ukrainians: to stay on the platform or switch to alternatives.

The war of words: what is happening with the communication of Ukrainians in social networks

In 2025, one of the most unpleasant trends is clearly visible in the Ukrainian segment of social networks: the rapid growth of aggressive communication and complete disregard for the basic culture of communication. Despite the fact that the platforms are designed to create an environment for the exchange of opinions, discussions and the search for joint solutions, in practice, comments under posts increasingly turn into a space of verbal abuse, humiliation, sarcasm and open hostility.

Today, almost any post — whether it’s about politics, volunteering, culture, sports, or even personal stories — instantly garners comments in which the tone is not discussion, but conflict. It is not only about different views. The problem is that any alternative position is automatically perceived as hostile. More and more often, discussions begin with sarcastic remarks, transitions to personalities, and end with streams of obscene language. Public broadcasting culture retreats before rudeness and virtual rage.

This problem is especially acute in comments on political topics, posts by volunteers, publications about the military, and even posts about language, education, or children. Instead of arguments, there are labels, humiliation, accusations of “betrayal” or “naivety”. People are not only not ready to listen, they demonstrably do not want to hear anything that breaks out of their “soap bubble”.

Moreover, many, without facts or arguments, resort to devaluing the interlocutor: “what do you understand”, “you are not to judge”, “don’t write nonsense”. This is a language that erases the very idea of ​​dialogue. In some cases, the comments openly call for violence or demean people because of their social status, region of origin, gender or language. At the same time, moderation on the platforms often fails: posts with open aggression remain undeleted, while sometimes completely adequate comments are blocked due to algorithmic failures.

The lack of emotional maturity in many users is no less disturbing. The feeling of impunity online, the lack of live contact and the instant reaction to trigger topics create the effect of “splashing anger” that one would have to answer for in real life. People who offline would hardly allow themselves to shout or insult a stranger, on the Internet easily throw comments such as: “shut your mouth”, “you’re a moron”, “people like you should be banned” in the feed.

Another aspect is a lack of constructive argumentation skills. In most cases, discussions are not reduced to an attempt to find points of understanding, but to the desire to win, to prove one’s “correctness” and to humiliate the other. Even if both sides are talking about something important – for example, about education reform or military decisions – instead of analysis and counterarguments, a lexical battle begins.

This aggression did not arise out of nowhere, it is a reflection of the general level of culture of Ukrainians, stress, loss of trust and constant tension in which the country has been living for a long time. But instead of acknowledging these emotions and trying to discuss them openly, many users unknowingly vent their inner tension on anyone they can get their hands on in the comments. This is how a closed circle is formed: aggression breeds new aggression, and the virtual space becomes a mirror of the greatest emotional discomfort of society.

Today, this is one of the most important social threats to the online space in Ukraine. And if platforms, media, opinion leaders, and educational initiatives don’t start working systematically to bring back the culture of discussion, we may lose the very idea of ​​what public discussion is. Then no social network will be able to fulfill its key function — to be a platform for communication and understanding.

Therefore, social networks in Ukraine in 2025 remain an important indicator not only of digital habits, but also of economic, demographic, migration and even cultural changes. The growth of Meta after the collapse, the loss of YouTube positions and the specific mode of TikTok – all this shows that the digital environment is adapting to new realities slowly but steadily. Clearly, user streams are still forming and audience segments are shifting between platforms, especially among young people.

Oksana Ishchenko