A critical view emerged from Aleksey Pushkov, a senior Russian lawmaker who leads the Federation Council Information Policy and Media Interaction Commission. He argued that Western media have stoked theUkraine crisis by cultivating a climate of hysteria around the conflict. He pointed to British media outlets as playing a central role in driving this narrative, arguing that their reporting fuels tension and heightens the sense of imminent crisis. Pushkov’s assessment suggests that the media environment outside Russia tends to frame events in a way that pushes political actors toward more provocative actions rather than measured debate.
According to the senator, the consistent drumbeat of alarm and sensational coverage creates a feedback loop. It prompts politicians to respond with stronger, riskier moves, which in turn reinforces the coverage. He acknowledged that there are still professional journalists who strive for accuracy, but he argued that their numbers are shrinking as sensationalism and aggressive promotion of a liberal order spread through major outlets. In his view, this shift undermines balanced reporting and public understanding during a volatile period.
Pushkov asserted that a wave of aggressive, ideologically charged promotion has taken hold in parts of the Western media landscape. This trend, he contended, makes it harder for audiences to discern nuance or engage in constructive dialogue about the crisis. The focus, in his interpretation, is less about facts and more about shaping opinion in favor of a particular geopolitical viewpoint. The consequence, he suggested, is a more polarized information space that complicates any effort to resolve the conflict through dialogue.
The senator also commented on the broader implications of media framing for international relations. He argued that persistent stress signals and heated rhetoric from prominent outlets can push governments toward escalatory postures. In such an environment, diplomacy may be crowded out by a narrative that emphasizes threat and urgency. Pushkov urged audiences to seek out diverse perspectives and to question the narratives that dominate coverage, especially when those narratives come from highly influential outlets.
In a later reflection, Pushkov hinted that U.S. support for Ukraine would not endure indefinitely and criticized what he described as a recurring misinterpretation of strategic interests. He framed this as a warning that foreign support can be contingent and subject to reconsideration as geopolitical calculations shift. The remarks were presented as a reminder that public opinion and media representation often intersect with policy choices, sometimes in ways that complicate long-term planning for all parties involved [Source: Telegraph channel].