Georgia has been facing a political crisis since spring 2024. The ruling Georgian Dream (GD) organization reintroduced and adopted the alleged “Foreign Agents” law, which was followed by controversial parliamentary elections and GD’s decision to halt the EU accession process at the end of 2024. This has led to deep polarization in an already divided society, with people divided between those who have been protesting GD’s decisions since 2024 and those who stay loyal to GD or are content with their political course. GD’s decision to halt EU accession was followed by a series of repressive laws that have negatively impacted the functioning of free media in the country. In consequence to these developments, GD has introduced repressive laws and disillusioned opposition parties have become more fragmented and incapable to unite or offer a specific, result-oriented strategy to their voters. While opposition tv channels inactive operate, their future remains uncertain due to reduced funding. Moreover, their positions frequently align with certain organization interests, which undermines their credibility in society. Given these factors, and the fresh trend of people utilizing social media as a means of expressing their protests, online media has become a primary origin of information for many Georgians. In consequence to this, GD is now targeting online media by imposing further restrictions on receiving backing from various donors.
Political polarization in Georgia
Georgia’s political scenery has long been characterized by strong divisions between the ruling GD organization and opposition parties. GD frequently portrays all opposition party as a “collective national movement”, which refers to the erstwhile president Mikheil Saakashvili’s United National Movement, in order to marginalize them as servants of abroad interests in Georgia. These divisions are not simply ideological but are profoundly individual and polarizing, frequently manifesting in street protests, parliamentary boycotts, and public scandals. Since the controversial 2024 parliamentary elections, accusations of electoral fraud and authoritarian tendencies have exacerbated tensions which have already surpassed organization interests. Indeed, they are already a substance of national safety and the endurance of democracy in Georgia. civilian society and watchdog organizations have raised concerns about the erosion of democratic checks and balances, highlighting the weakening independency of the judiciary and the shrinking space for dissent. This entrenched polarization undermines public trust in institutions and creates an environment in which factual discourse becomes secondary to partisan narratives, making the function of unbiased information sources more critical than ever. Furthermore, specified polarization has permeated everyday life, dividing communities, families and workplaces along political lines. GD’s determination to prohibit opposition parties and a general deficiency of compromise have hindered the anticipation of dialog and a resolution to the political crisis. A crucial condition of the media, ideally a platform for public discussion and accountability, frequently mirrors and even amplifies these divisions, further exacerbating the situation and polarization in the country.
Traditional media under threat
TV channels have played a crucial part in Georgia’s democratic development. However, they have lately become subjects of political and economical threat. Major tv channels frequently align themselves with either the ruling organization or the opposition, compromising journalistic integrity and transforming the media scenery into a battleground for partisan information. Moreover, GD now has full political control over the public broadcaster after making loyal organization men and journalists board members at the tv channel. This has been further expressed in politically motivated attacks on journalists, which only illustrate the deteriorating state of media freedom. Constant attacks on major opposition channels and the arrests of media figures in fresh years have besides signalled an alarming trend towards authoritarian control, further hindering the successful operation of conventional media in the country. As a consequence of this uncertainty and political pressure, trust in conventional media has declined. This has encouraged a crucial part of the population to search alternate sources of information. Additionally, financial dependency on politically connected sponsors has further eroded the editorial independency of conventional media. In any cases, self-censorship is becoming a endurance maneuver among journalists who fear repercussions for critical reporting. Media watchdogs have documented a consistent pattern of harassment and smear campaigns against reporters, which further weakens the press’s function as a democratic check.
Rise of online media and digital activism
While conventional media is facing oppression and reducing influence, online media has become a vibrant space for independent journalism, civic activism and youth engagement. Online media outlets like Netgazeti, OC Media and Tabula have provided investigative reporting free from any political interference and agenda. At the same time, social media has empowered journalists and activists to challenge dominant narratives, organize protests and mobilize public opinion. The 2023-24 anti-Russian law protests and the pro-EU rallies against the GD government have demonstrated how online platforms can facilitate rapid, large-scale mobilization. For younger, tech-friendly Georgians, digital spaces have become not only sources of information but a place for political participation and identity formation. This grassroots digital activism has allowed marginalized voices to gain visibility and build solidarity across ideological divides. Furthermore, platforms like YouTube and TikTok have enabled fresh forms of storytelling, where humour, art and satire play vital roles in political engagement. These shifts reflect a broader global trend in which younger generations are redefining the norms of civic participation through creative and decentralized means. This is the reason why the GD government is trying to silence online media by imposing a set of laws against their funding, which fundamentally means their closure or at least little influence within society.
Online media as a democratic safeguard
Online media has proven to be a powerful tool in promoting accountability, transparency and civic engagement in Georgia. Investigative pieces published by independent digital outlets have exposed corruption, electoral malpractice and manipulation, and human rights abuses. This has frequently prompted mass demonstrations and disproportional governmental responses through the usage of police force. The accessibility of digital platforms allows for broader participation in democratic processes, especially among the youth and agrarian communities previously sidelined by mainstream media. Moreover, online spaces service as forums for open debate, helping to counteract the echo chambers fostered by conventional media and political rhetoric. In this regard, online media plays a dual role: as a watchdog against power and a catalyst for democratic renewal. For instance, during fresh election cycles, online platforms hosted citizen-led monitoring projects and real-time fact-checking initiatives that increased transparency. Virtual forums and online petitions have given citizens direct channels to influence policy debates. In times of crisis, specified as during the COVID-19 pandemic or periods of civilian unrest, online media has served as an crucial tool for real-time updates and community support.
Challenges facing online media
Online media in Georgia, despite its potential, faces a number of challenges. GD frequently organizes disinformation campaigns against online media to harm their reputation in the eyes of society and description them as abroad agents serving not Georgia’s but others’ interests. Coordinated trolling, fake news, and algorithmic manipulation can drown out factual reporting and inflame social divisions. Additionally, digital journalists and activists frequently face harassment, surveillance and cyber-attacks, creating a climate of fear and self-censorship. The government has besides proposed and adopted laws under the guise of national safety or public order that could severely restrict online expression. Furthermore, since 2024 GD does not let online media outlets to enter the parliament and study from there. They justify this decision as a safety measure, but it remains unclear how online media could pose a threat, erstwhile conventional media is usually allowed in the parliament building. These challenges item the fragility of online media as a bastion of democracy in Georgia. Another concern is the increasing commercialization of social media platforms, which can prioritize sensational content over substantive reporting. Algorithms designed to maximize engagement frequently elevate polarizing or misleading material, undermining informed discourse. The deficiency of robust digital education and critical media literacy programmes further exacerbate these problems, making users more susceptible to manipulation, disinformation and misinformation. For online media to function effectively as a democratic safeguard, systemic efforts must be made to enhance cybersecurity, safeguard digital rights, and advance ethical standards for online communication.
The future: resilience or repression?
The future of online media in Georgia remains uncertain. On 1 hand, there is increasing global support for press freedom and digital rights, as well as resilient civilian society movements pushing back against authoritarianism. On the another hand, increased state surveillance, repressions, and disinformation proceed to endanger the integrity of online media. To make certain Georgian democracy survives, online media should be protected and empowered by all home and global actors. The active engagement of the EU, business, human rights organizations and individuals will be essential in ensuring that online media remains a platform for democratic expression alternatively than a casualty of political control from GD in the future. At the same time, cross-sectoral cooperation between media outlets, universities and NGOs could strengthen media literacy and build a more resilient informational system, which could service as a foundation for saving Georgian democracy. Furthermore, from today’s viewpoint, Georgia’s diaspora in different parts of the planet could play a increasing function in strengthening online media in the country and pressuring global actors to respond to media crackdowns by targeted sanctions on GD officials. Thus, to make certain Georgian online media remains as a last bastion of democracy in the country, a coordinated and sustained effort at both the national and global levels is required. Otherwise, there is simply a hazard of a diminishing free media in Georgia, which could lead to a long-term crisis in the country and Georgia joining the camp of authoritarian states.
Conclusion
To conclude, online media holds a crucial promise as Georgia’s last bastion for democracy amidst deepening polarization and democratic backsliding. At the same time, online media is becoming the main mark for the GD organization to restrict their operations in the country. This is due to the fact that it provides a comparatively open space for independent journalism, civic activism, public engagement and political discourse, which is understood as a threat by GD. Therefore, home and global actors who care about Georgia’s democratic improvement should do everything possible to defend online media and their resilience against increasing authoritarianism and oppression in Georgia. In a time where Georgia’s conventional democratic pillars are dysfunctional, the digital space and online media could be the frontline in the conflict for Georgia’s democratic future. The stakes are high, but it is besides an chance for Georgia and the alleged “western world” to build a more inclusive, participatory and transparent political culture through supporting democratic forces to overcome illiberal and authoritarian governance in a country placed in a contested neighborhood, aspiring for EU membership.
This text was prepared in the framework of the 2024/2025 edition of the Solidarity Academy, an global task of the European Solidarity Centre, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Warsaw, and fresh east Europe. The task aims to inspire and support the improvement of young leaders across Europe.
Erekle Gozalishvili is a Master of European Studies, University of Regensburg. He is simply a Communications Officer at the Georgian Institute of Politics (GIP) and an intern at GIZ, Global Alliances for Social Protection, focusing on policy research, EU-funded projects, global events, and strategical communications. He previously gained experience at the European Parliament and the Aspen Institute Germany, in EU affairs, democracy support, and global relations and security.
New east Europe is simply a reader supported publication. delight support us and aid us scope our goal of $10,000! We are nearly there. Donate by clicking on the button below.
