How post-truth media fuels polarisation in Georgia

An ordinary evening in Tbilisi since protests began on 28 November against the Georgian Dream government’s decision to suspend EU accession talks until 2028:

– Are you alone at the protest?

– Yeah.

– And Where’s your sister? What’s she doing?

– At home. She’s not talking to me. She says, “How can you stand on their side?”

– Really? I didn’t know that.

– Yeah, she watches government media day and night. She thinks everyone here is radical and controlled by the opposition.

The area is packed with people; the square in front of the Georgian parliament is full of demonstrators and the streets are blocked. Special forces and police are guarding the area around the parliament. The patrolling police take their orders from the head of the department, who is accompanied by a cameraman with a shoulder-mounted camera.

I was surprised – normally the media aren’t allowed this close to the police, especially when they are surrounded by security. “The cameraman must be from their TV station,” I thought. Then I noticed the logo on the camera, which confirmed that it was from the government-controlled TV station. Everything became clear. The state media was filming the police under the control of the administration.

But I wasn’t surprised, because critical opposition media would never be allowed such close proximity in a situation like this. Law enforcement and government officials usually adopt a particularly aggressive tone towards opposition media, avoiding their uncomfortable questions. This is further evidenced by violent incidents against journalists during protests.

“Stop violence against the media,” “Hands off the media,” read the signs held by protesters. Some carried pictures of seriously injured journalists. The demonstrators are showing solidarity with the media.

Since 28 November, special forces have been brutally attacking members of the media. Some journalists have had to be hospitalised and operated on. More than 70 journalists and cameramen have been injured during this period. Violence against journalists by the Georgian government has become increasingly common in recent years. However, what is happening during the current protests marks a new level of brutality towards the media.

Physical attacks on journalists by the system come as no surprise, as the television media landscape in Georgia has been polarised for years, with stations either supporting government rhetoric or opposition parties. Unsurprisingly, the main targets of these attacks are journalists from opposition-aligned television and independent online media.

The reality is that polarisation in Georgia is political and is fuelled, orchestrated and instrumentalised by Georgian Dream

Television media play an important role in the dissemination of information in Georgia, serving as the primary source of news about current events. Therefore, when discussing media polarisation, the focus is primarily on the television.

This division within the television contributes to political polarisation, which in turn has been instigated by the ruling Georgian Dream party. The term “polarisation” itself is often used by representatives of the ruling party. Through this narrative, they try to present the situation as if Georgian society is inherently divided and polarised. However, the reality is that polarisation in Georgia is political and is fuelled, orchestrated and instrumentalised by Georgian Dream.

Political polarisation – from the media to everyday life

The political polarisation generated by Georgian Dream has increasingly permeated everyday social relations. Protesters often tell stories of families divided by politics, with some members supporting the government and others siding with the opposition. As a result, one family member may actively participate in demonstrations, while another – often a parent – watches government-controlled television and not only refrains from attending protests, but also breaks off communication with their child over the issue.

A striking example of family conflict and division caused by political polarisation is the case of activist Niko Managadze. In the summer, he took part in a protest at Tbilisi State University that coincided with a lecture by Georgia’s prime minister, Irakli Kobakhidze. His mother blamed the opposition for the incident, while expressing support for the government. This incident illustrates how political divisions can tear families apart and turn them into battlegrounds of opposing views.

Almost two months have passed since the 26 October parliamentary elections. Since then, demonstrations have continued in Georgia’s capital, Tbilisi. The protests intensified significantly after 28 November, when Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze announced at a press conference that Georgia would suspend EU accession talks until the end of 2028, sparking widespread outrage as EU membership is a highly sensitive issue for the majority of Georgian society. In Georgia, the EU is associated with security, prosperity and a better quality of life – a goal the country has been striving to achieve for years.

According to the Georgian Central Election Commission, the opposition parties together received around 800,000 votes in the parliamentary elections, while the ruling party received 1.12 million votes.

The television media play an important role in deepening the divisions between these groups. An example of this occurred on the night of the 26 October elections. After the polls closed, different TV channels celebrated different winners. Both pro-government – and pro-opposition – TV channels had conducted their own exit polls, reflecting expectations that favoured their respective sides. Experts on each channel provided analysis and predictions that reflected their partisan perspectives.

As a result, viewers of pro-opposition media were led to believe that the elections had ended in an opposition victory, while viewers of pro-government media were celebrating the victory of Georgian Dream. This shows how two alternative realities are created with minimal overlap.

Opposition media viewers typically do not watch pro-government channels and vice versa. Government media viewers reject pro-opposition channels. Information disseminated by one side is often completely ignored or excluded by the other, reinforcing the divide and isolating audiences within their preferred narratives.

Two alternative realities – media bubbles and public perception

Cases of television creating two alternative realities are common. In fact, this has been happening in Georgia for years, with much of the population living in their own media bubbles. The result is a perception that Georgian society is exclusively divided between supporters of the ruling party, Georgian Dream, and those associated with the former government, the United National Movement, and other allied parties.

This dichotomy fosters the belief that anything that opposes the government is necessarily pro-opposition and directed by them, while anyone who criticises the opposition is automatically pro-government. However, the research shows a different reality. When asked “Which political party is closest to you?”, the majority of the Georgian population does not identify with either the opposition or the ruling party. Most voters support neither side, highlighting the disconnect between the political landscape and the broader public.

The political polarisation supported by Georgian television media is evident in the ongoing demonstrations. Pro-government TV channels focus exclusively on portraying the protesters as radicals, highlighting incidents such as the burning of a coffin allegedly containing an image of Christ on it, while inside there was a photo of Georgian Dream leader Bidzina Ivanshivili. It was later revealed that the coffin was not even Georgian, but had been ordered from a Chinese website and had an uncanonical image of Jesus. This story provoked outrage among state media audiences, as the majority of Georgians are deeply religious, making such issues highly sensitive.

This pattern is repeated during protests, with opposition media reporting the stories of injured protesters, while government media only report injuries to police officers. It is also worth noting that protesters have been arrested and face imprisonment for allegedly assaulting and resisting police officers. However, no police officers have been held accountable for the brutal beatings and torture of demonstrators – a fact that has been persistently ignored by the pro-government television.

This pattern recurs during protests, with opposition media covering the stories of injured protesters, while government media reports only on injuries sustained by police officers. It is also worth noting that protesters have been arrested and face imprisonment for allegedly assaulting and resisting police officers. However, no police officers have been held accountable for the brutal beatings and torture of demonstrators – a fact stubbornly ignored by government-aligned television.

Shaping perception – Media narratives and lost debates

Debates have long been absent from Georgian television. As a result, there is no platform for opposing views – only the demonisation of the other side. The pro-government media label the opposition as the so-called “radical opposition” or agents of the “global war party”. In contrast, opposition media refer to the ruling party as “Russian Dream” or describe Bidzina Ivanishvili as “Russia’s man”. Beyond these narratives, there is little space to discuss the many pressing issues and crises facing the country. Viewers remain confined to these polarised representations of the so-called other side.

One notable achievement of the ongoing demonstrations, however, has been the protests at the Georgian Public Broadcasting Corporation and the demand for live broadcasts, which have had tangible results. A special evening programme now features the voices of protesters. Despite being funded by the state budget, the Georgian Public Broadcaster is biased towards the government, silencing dissent and promoting government rhetoric.

Opposition parties failed to develop counter-narratives to effectively challenge the ruling party

It is also important to highlight the factors driving voter support for the Georgian Dream. During the pre-election period, the party actively created narratives that largely centred on the fear of war with Russia and the need to warm relations with it. Religion, homeland and traditions – as opposed to “pseudo-liberal and LGBT+ ideology” – served as the key pillars on which Georgian Dream not only built its election campaign, but has relied on for years to shape its broader messaging.

In contrast, opposition parties failed to develop counter-narratives to effectively challenge the ruling party. Instead, they chose to ignore and avoid engaging with this rhetoric, relying solely on the Russia versus the EU dichotomy. As a result, voters were left with narratives that resonated deeply on an emotional level, tapping into their fears – particularly the fear of losing their homeland to war, or the erosion of faith and traditions through closer alignment with the West and Europe.

Post-truth era media

The government’s propaganda, based on various narratives, is often unsupported by facts or based on distorted ones, playing on the emotions and impulses of the electorate. This is to be expected; otherwise it wouldn’t be called propaganda.

The 21st century is often referred to as the post-truth era, where facts matter less and emotions and personal beliefs take precedence. Georgian television media, much like the country’s political reality, is an example of this phenomenon.

In the Georgian TV media, programmes mostly feature guests and experts in line with the interests of the station’s owners and sponsors. Live broadcasts are reserved for representatives or supporters of the political parties supported by these media outlets. As a result, what is presented is not factual reporting, but perspectives and personal interpretations, often lacking proper critical filters. Television coverage is largely based on emotions and subjective beliefs, where there is no truth or falsehood – only narratives and perspectives.

Facts have long since lost their relevance in Georgia’s political and media landscape. This creates two different images of a deeply divided Georgian society: those protesting in the streets, and those who are largely absent from opposition media images but are targeted by government media channels, who will quietly and calmly vote for the government again.