Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/12/25

Oleksandr Tsyvinskyi is Director of the Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine (ESBU), appointed in August 2025 after more than two decades in law enforcement. A PhD in Law from Lviv, he previously served as an investigator and head of organized crime units, then as a leading detective and unit head at the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine. A combat veteran of the Anti-Terrorist Operation and the full-scale war, he links security, the rule of law, and economic resilience. As ESBU chief, Tsyvinskyi focuses on dismantling the shadow economy, protecting honest business, rebuilding public trust in Ukraine’s recovery, and anchoring Ukraine’s long-term EU-oriented future.

In this two-part interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Oleksandr Tsyvinskyi, Director of the Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine, about rebooting the ESBU amid Russia’s war. Tsyvinskyi explains his plan to rebuild the team, move from many small cases to a few systemic ones, and focus on business security and the shadow economy. He links tax evasion norms to Soviet-era contempt for the state, arguing that independent institutions, radical transparency, and cultural change—from schools to kitchen-table conversations—are essential to make corruption shameful and the rule of law non-negotiable. They also discuss Western support, avoiding coercive conditionality while strengthening Ukraine’s institutional resilience.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Looking at the big picture for the 4th quarter of 2025 and the first and second quarters of 2026, what is the most important message to convey about economic security, anti-corruption efforts, transparency, and related issues in Ukraine?

Oleksandr Tsyvinskyi: The first and most important thing for us is to reload the system. That means reloading our team to start producing the results everyone expects. We have to begin this work this year. Next year, in the first two quarters, this process will continue, and we must complete it by the end of 2026. This is the top priority in human capital management. Secondly, we are completely reordering the Bureau’s priorities. We are shifting from minor cases to large ones. We are moving from quantity to quality. Moreover, the most important development is the creation of an entirely new direction: business security, which we have not addressed before. The next element is working with the shadow economy—black-market business—and then working with those who violate the legal sphere. Our results will include, first, reloading the team; second, reformatting our approaches; third, formally registering our three main priorities; and fourth, identifying organized criminal groups and bringing them to responsibility in the first two quarters of next year.

Jacobsen: How much of this is a holdover from the Soviet legacy in terms of institutions and how people conduct themselves, and how much is not? I do not mean this in a critical sense; I am trying to clarify. If a historian were to look at it, we would see that we are all shaped by our national histories. How does that post-Soviet history feed into the practices that built systems that led to higher corruption, and into the institutional ways in which people worked? I want to be very clear, because I know it can be susceptible to some if they are reading this, in terms of someone from what they call “the West.” For some reason, they do not include South Korea and Japan in that definition. Looking at it objectively as a historian, you have the post-Soviet timeline, you have the institutions, you have the cultural habits people carry, and then you have the reforms you are talking about—moving away from all of that.

Tsyvinskyi: First of all, for many years, people were taught that you cannot change the system, that private property does not exist. Moreover, when private property began to function, we found ourselves in a situation of complete irresponsibility. Because now there is a feeling—if a person does not pay taxes or tries to avoid them—that, in post-Soviet countries, this is unfortunately treated as usual. Before, everything was considered “the property of the state,” which supposedly belonged to everyone, meaning it belonged to no one. Moreover, the state could be deceived. That same attitude has remained the same now: not paying taxes is deceiving the state, and deceiving the state is normal.

The worst part is that from the post-Soviet past, when people sit at the table—drinking coffee in the kitchen or in a bar—and someone says they deceived the state or did not pay taxes, it is received normally and not criticized, unlike, for example, European countries such as Finland, Germany, or Canada. If two friends in Canada sit down and one tells the other that he deceived the state by not paying taxes, I do not think he would receive moral support for it being acceptable or admirable. However, in Ukraine and other post-Soviet countries, deceiving the state is treated as usual. Because the state is perceived as nothing, and there is no feeling of shame. There is no feeling that you have actually stolen from a children’s home, from a hospital, from a road project—stolen from somewhere real.

Jacobsen: Why?

Tsyvinskyi: Why such an attitude? Because the state has constantly humiliated and punished people, and now there is a persistent negative attitude toward the state, unlike in European countries. For me, this is part of the Soviet legacy. It is an entire culture, and this culture changes very slowly. That is why these consequences remain.

Jacobsen: What can be done?

Tsyvinskyi: Today, our institution is beginning to work on changing the culture—on the idea that not paying taxes is shameful, that it is not good, that it is harmful, and that people should feel responsible for this. Because to this day, people are not ashamed; they are proud of it. Our task is to change the culture around this.

Now if you fool the state, it is considered acceptable. Everyone will support you. They will say, “You are a good guy, let us drink beer,” and you will say, “I fooled the state today,” and they will answer, “You are a cool guy.” This is perhaps a lasting part of the Soviet heritage.

Until recently, it was considered acceptable for a long time. If you managed to avoid paying taxes and told your friends, they would support you. Moreover, if you said something like this in Canada, somewhere in a bar, people would definitely not help you. That was part of the Soviet legacy. However, now it is changing. Moving forward, as Oleksandr said, in our institution, we are trying to change the culture by saying: we need to promote different values—paying taxes is normal. If you do not pay, you are essentially stealing money from hospitals and educational institutions. This is a cultural issue, and that is what we are trying to change.

Jacobsen: My follow-up to that. In my conversations with Ukrainian colleagues, it typically goes like this: in private, we debate, challenge each other, and learn from one another. In public, in interviews, things are more polished, and that shapes the questions. In media, I sometimes ask—from your perspective as Ukrainians—what the West is getting right, getting wrong, and missing entirely in its coverage? Similarly, support for Ukraine is often conflated with imposition. Do you see what I mean? When it comes to supporting Ukraine’s anti-corruption efforts, how can people who are not Ukrainian but support Ukraine ensure they remain sensitive and supportive without imposing? Ukrainians should be able to work on anti-corruption on Ukrainian terms. Support is good, but if it comes with strings, it becomes coercive. So: anti-corruption efforts without coercion.

Tsyvinskyi: If we ask our Western partners how they view anti-corruption efforts, the real question is how to convince people in the West that, on the one hand, we need to fight corruption, and on the other hand, we must ensure that this does not harm Ukraine or create the wrong perception of what is happening here. How do we convince people in the West to support Ukraine in its fight against corruption without creating problems for Ukraine? When I worked for 10 years at the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, almost every significant case we opened involving top officials generated strong reactions, and sometimes coverage in the Western press, focused on the existence of a corrupt official and presenting it as a systemic failure. However, it is better to diagnose and treat a disease, even if it requires surgery and pain. Only then will the patient recover and become effective.

In this context, the correct way to communicate is as follows: if there are independent authorities in Ukraine capable of holding the highest officials accountable, then this is proof that Ukraine is on the right track. In many countries—even in developed democracies—there are significant obstacles to enforcing the law against top officials. In Ukraine, this is possible. Ukraine demonstrates this, and there are more and more such bodies. We have two paths: to hide our problems and pretend everything is fine, or to perform the surgery, accept the pain, and grow into a democratic and effective state.

Objectively, today in Ukraine—especially in public policy and among officials—we have one of the most transparent systems in the world. The requirements placed on public officials, even those that limit their privacy by obliging them to disclose nearly all information, are unique. This is a powerful demonstration that we are rushing in the right direction. Moreover, the situation is straightforward: yes, we have problems, but we will solve them quickly and decisively. I think this is the best way to communicate with everyone.

If we did not have these bodies, and we did not identify the problems that exist—as was the case 15 or even 10 years ago—there would be no corruption scandals, no dramatic headlines. However, that would not mean there were no problems or no corruption. Everyone knew it existed. Now it is painful, but this pain is an obvious marker that Ukraine is moving in the right direction and choosing democracy.

What is very important is that when issues arose concerning the existence of anti-corruption bodies, the people made their position very clear. This is another marker that Ukraine not only has institutions that work correctly, independently, and without fear, but also that civil society is strong enough to defend these institutions. The point is not only about institutions themselves; it is about people defending their right to move toward a European society. This is the best form of communication.

If there are no independent anti-corruption bodies, then we cannot know the scope of the corruption problem, because no one will address it.

Jacobsen: So you are arguing that this is the pain period right now. Moreover, on the index—at least in Transparency International—there is a significant improvement.

Tsyvinskyi: It is like having a disease and pretending that everything is fine. Everyone may seem happy, but the disease remains. Alternatively, you can accept the pain of treatment and actually make the patient healthy. In Ukraine, we have anti-corruption institutions, including the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine. The Economic Security Bureau of Ukraine investigates some corruption offenses. We say, “Yes, we have corruption—but we are treating it.” That is the difference.

Compared with other countries, Ukraine is one of the most transparent. In terms of requirements for public servants and civil servants, we have obligations that very few countries share. We must publish everything on a special website. Anyone can read how much money we have, how much is in our bank accounts. Any citizen of Ukraine can read how much money my wife has and in which accounts. Almost no other country requires this. Ukraine has a very transparent monitoring system.

This is why, when scandals arise, they are actually a sign that Ukraine is trying to fix its problems. In Ukraine, even if you earn money legally, are an official, and buy something for yourself, you will be publicly criticized for it. You must include it in your public declaration; it is on the website, and everyone can read it. Even if you can afford it, you will be heavily criticized across all media.

Jacobsen: And if you buy something for this amount?

Tsyvinskyi: You must register this information in your civil servant declaration. Everyone will criticize you—media outlets will say, “Oh, look, he bought something. He bought a $3,500 item,” and so on. That is why Ukraine’s system is very transparent today. $3,500 is about two monthly salaries in our Bureau. Any amount above this must be officially declared on a public website. 

Jacobsen: I think it is important to note, in my analysis as an independent journalist from the outside, that people outside of Ukraine tend to highlight, and it is essential to highlight, the case involving Zelensky’s lifelong friend and former aide in the corruption scandal. However, the silver lining is that it demonstrated, first, the institution’s independence in the speed and firmness of its response. Second, it is part of a larger and more critical trend. Previously, Ukraine ranked low in transparency, comparable to Sudan or Nigeria. Now it sits among mid-level countries, which is a massive improvement that most states cannot claim. About reform, what are the key areas Ukraine needs to reform further—on Ukrainian terms—to move from that mid-level position toward the rankings of the least corrupt countries in the world?

Tsyvinskyi: It is essential to understand one thing: corruption and its reduction are not the responsibility of the Anti-Corruption Bureau alone. It is the responsibility of both sides. It is the responsibility of the entire system of government, on the one hand. Moreover, it concerns the people. It is also a matter of culture. When corruption begins to be condemned in the kitchen, at home, while drinking tea—as it is in many civilized countries—when it becomes shameful, unpleasant, humiliating, and socially condemned, then we will reach the point where corruption will be significantly reduced.

On the other hand, this must begin in school. Unfortunately, people very often do not pay attention to this. Everyone tends to focus on the short term. No matter how many significant cases the Anti-Corruption Bureau exposes, if we do not start solving this problem in schools, universities, the workplace, and culture—teaching that corruption is bad, negative, and humiliating—then we will have this problem for a long time. My firm conviction is that this requires a set of measures that are not limited to one institution. The point is that integrity should be a must-have. It should be the norm. Moreover, it should not be civil society alone that influences or controls this; it must be embedded in the corporate culture of government officials.

When, within that culture, someone learns that a colleague is taking bribes or doing something wrong and immediately informs the relevant authorities, we can overcome this quickly. However, if wrongdoing is tolerated or the response is insufficient, it is not acceptable to look the other way. It is necessary to respond and take measures to stop it. Moreover, this sometimes means reporting a friend or colleague to the authorities. We are prepared for that. This is the path that will allow us to reach the minimum level of corruption.

If you know that a colleague—maybe even a friend—who holds a high position is corrupt, and you inform the relevant institutions, that is how we eliminate corruption. The number-one priority is working with culture, because this is not about one, two, three, or four institutions. It is about how corruption is perceived. Therefore, it is clear that everyone must do their job and have zero tolerance for corruption.

Without a comprehensive working system—where committing corruption is viewed as abnormal, just as it is abnormal to steal a wallet, assault someone, kill someone, or commit any other crime—we will continue in a cycle where some people think they are heroes for doing what they do, and others try to catch them. It becomes an endless process. There is a saying that culture eats strategy for breakfast. This is often considered acceptable in private companies, but in state institutions, it is not always applied. That is why I said the public must consider corruption on the same level as other crimes. Everyone agrees you should not steal, kill, or assault someone. Along the same lines, corruption should be considered equally unacceptable.

When people think that way, the work begins in schools and universities. It is a long-term project, but it can significantly reduce corruption. Today in Ukraine—unlike in many countries that believe their corruption level is lower—in just ten years, we have gone from a situation where tens of thousands of people were untouched to one where no one in Ukraine can feel safe if they commit corruption offences. Ukraine is the only country that cannot feel safe amid corruption.

Jacobsen: In the war, in the context of Russian aggression, I often ask—perhaps you have heard the phrase “All that glitters is not gold.” Is there a phrase or aphorism in Ukrainian culture that, for you, captures what it feels like to be in the war with Russia? It means that everything valuable is not monetary in nature.

Tsyvinskyi: There is a similar metaphor—”All that glitters is not gold.” However, if you mean a phrase that describes the state of Ukrainians during the war, a general saying or metaphor, yes. I can translate it directly so it fits the context. Ukrainians are a very benevolent and very stubborn nation. Unlike others—I will not compare directly, but perhaps some would have given up—we stand our ground. There is a phrase: We should burn rather than surrender to anyone. And this is about us.

Jacobsen: Alright, we will call that an interview. Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Oleksandr.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices.  In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/12/24

Denys Sharlai is a Ukrainian journalist and television host based in Toronto, Canada. Educated in journalism at universities in Kyiv and Zurich, he began his career as an online lifestyle reporter for ICTV in Ukraine, where his travel and consumer pieces drew millions of readers. After emigrating, he joined Kontakt Ukrainian TV Network under producer Jurij Klufas, first as a freelance video reporter and later as a host. Working in Ukrainian with English segments, he covers diaspora life, culture, and war-related issues, while navigating linguistic shifts, editorial constraints, and the goal of building stronger links between Ukraine and its communities.

In this interview, Scott Douglas Jacobsen speaks with Denys Sharlai, a Ukrainian journalist and TV host at Kontakt Ukrainian TV Network in Toronto. Sharlai recounts his path from ICTV online journalism in Ukraine to hosting a diaspora-focused program in Canada, developing on-camera confidence and video-reporting skills in a second language. He reflects on editorial pressures, tensions between independent journalism and propaganda, and his role in connecting Ukrainian communities abroad with those in Ukraine. The conversation explores differences between homeland and diaspora cultures, his festival work, audience feedback, aspirations for higher-quality diaspora media, and dreams of hosting major Ukrainian news programs.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: All right. Hello, welcome to the Denys Sharlai Journalist Profile interview. How are you?

Denys Sharlai: I’m good, thank you. What about you?

Jacobsen: I’m good. I just got back from extensive travel, and now I get to interview the excellent Denys. When did you become a TV host?

Sharlai: It’s a complicated story. When I moved from Switzerland to Canada, I tried to find a new job as a journalist, but it was really hard because my English wasn’t strong enough for either Canada or journalism. One day, I sent an email to Ukrainian media in Toronto. It was a Ukrainian newspaper and two channels.

About three months later, I received a response from the Ukrainian TV Network Kontakt, from Jurij Klufas.

I received a message from Jurij. He wrote that he would like to meet me at a Ukrainian gallery in Toronto. I had a meeting with him, and he offered me a freelance journalism job. I started producing different video reports.

The first one was from the meeting with Zelensky and Trudeau. That was about two years ago. About a year later, Jurij Klufas had difficulties with the previous TV host. Her name is Diana. In that situation, we had only one solution, but I do not really know how to explain it.

I began working as a TV host for the first time. We thought Diana would continue as a TV host, but she no longer wanted to. That is how I started to be a TV host. That was about a year ago.

Since then, I have been a TV host at the Kontakt Ukrainian TV Network in Toronto. It is a long story. 

Jacobsen: Were you nervous taking on that role?

Sharlai: A bit. It is much easier now, but at the beginning, I was really nervous because I had no experience as a TV host or with making video reports. In Ukraine, I only wrote text. I worked as an online journalist for ICTV, an online media outlet. It was a morning program, and I worked on the website, writing lifestyle articles. This was before the full-scale invasion. I wrote many articles about travel, including how to find cheap tickets.

This was very interesting for Ukrainians. Once, I received about 3 million views on one of my articles. It was the most popular article on that website, and I wrote it.

That was a big deal for me because my name was on the article. It felt really good. I also received extra money for it, which was nice.

Now I work as a TV host. Sometimes it is not easy because I have to speak in English, which is not my strongest skill.

But I need to improve my English. Every day, I try to be the best version of myself, the best version of a TV host.

Sharlai: And now I can speak English, but it is still a bit broken. I do have a Ukrainian Slavic accent, and some people may think it sounds Russian, but you can understand me, and I can understand you.

The first time, I was really scared to record any video. If it was in the studio, that was different, but doing an interview or an intro for a TV program outside, where people can see and hear you, was really scary for me. Now it works well. I do not care what people think about how I do my intro. That is enough of my speech.

Jacobsen: When you look at your progression as a TV host, particularly within a language-specific cultural community, what do you see as the development of your skills over time? In other words, what are the core skills, and how have you developed them in the process of doing your work?

Sharlai: It is a bit difficult to explain my skills. Sometimes I am losing some of my Ukrainian skills. The Ukrainian spoken here is very different from that spoken in Ukraine. Sometimes when I try to speak quickly in Ukrainian, Canadian Ukrainians do not understand me.

I speak fast and use modern vocabulary, and sometimes Russian-influenced words appear because the USSR’s leadership changed Ukrainian vocabulary as part of assimilation policies. As a result, we now have different words, and it is hard for someone born in Canada who learned heritage Ukrainian to understand someone born in Ukraine speaking modern Ukrainian fully.

As a TV host, I have to speak very slowly. It sounds like: “Hello, my name is Denys, and today I would like to tell you about…” But on Canadian TV and Ukrainian TV, a host usually speaks quickly while still being understood, because we do not have much time for all the news, and something is happening every moment.

For Ukrainian TV, it works differently because we actually have much time, and sometimes we do not know what will be shown. Our boss can change the whole video at the last moment, and then we have to redo the entire intro for the program. It is really difficult, and it has been a new skill for me — learning to work under stress.

When you know a better way to do something and your boss says, “I am your boss, so I know better,” it is not always true. I have an education. I graduated from two universities, one in Kyiv and one in Zurich. In journalism, I often know better how to create content and write news.

In Ukraine, we have what we call a beze — very short news, one or two sentences. A slang term used in Ukrainian journalism meaning a very short news item or brief mention; essentially, a quick, minimum-detail news brief. One time, I tried to do that for our program, and many viewers told me, “Denys, this is very good, you are doing something new for the TV program.” But my boss told me, “We will not do that anymore. We do not need it.” I said, “OK, it is not a big deal. You pay me, and I will do what you said.”

Sometimes I feel less confident because I am losing some of my Ukrainian journalism skills. But I am improving my language and improving my video skills. I am no longer scared of the camera. I feel very open when I see the camera and need to say something. That is good.

But in another way, I have lost some of my real journalism skills — like how to produce independent meaning. My boss sometimes does not focus on journalism but on something closer to propaganda. We do not show other viewpoints on a situation. Real journalism must show two or even three perspectives on the same problem.

It feels like completely different skills and a different feeling. I am very happy to be a TV host. It is a good opportunity to improve my skills. It is a great honour to be a TV host for the Ukrainian diaspora, as many older people watch this channel. It is not for young audiences, like people around 20 to 35. It is mostly for older people, aged 50 to 70.

Do you know about the Ukrainian festival in Bloor West Village? It is the biggest Ukrainian festival in North America. In three days, about one million people visit this event in Toronto. I was a master of ceremonies with Anastasia Romashko this year at the Bloor West Village Ukrainian Festival.

Many people recognize me. They know my name and tell me, “Denys, it is so good to see you in real life. Every week I see you on TV, and I really like how you do the program.” Someone might tell me, “Denys, maybe you can speak more slowly,” or someone else says, “Tell Jurij he needs to make better videos because there are problems with the video quality or the sound.”

All of that makes me feel a bit… I do not know how to explain it. When I am in a stressful situation, I try to calm down and stay calm, without letting my emotions get the better of me. In real life, I am a very emotional person — I laugh, I talk a lot, I express myself. But in journalism, I try to be neutral and not show what I feel or think. I try to be polite and give answers like “OK, yes, we will do that” and “Thank you for your question, it is very nice to see you.”

That is an example of what happens when I meet someone who knows me from TV. It is a good feeling when strangers know your name. I feel a bit like a star — but only within the Ukrainian diaspora, especially among older people.

I really want to make Kontakt TV much better because this TV network has real potential to become a major media outlet for the Ukrainian diaspora, like Voice of America. But we need to change our logo, our visual identity, and our approach to journalism.

That is it. Sorry for the long speech. It may not be the answer to your question, but it is what I feel.

Jacobsen: How do you feel, or what sense do you get, of the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada in contrast to those in Ukraine? As people separate geographically, they retain core elements of the culture, yet they develop a distinctive flavour of it in their new geography. In the Canadian context, how would you characterize the Canadian Ukrainian community compared to your home city in Ukraine? I mean this outside of the war context, although the war obviously affects the answer. I want to explore how culture evolves as people move around the world.

Sharlai: First of all, I still cannot believe that people who were born thousands of kilometres from Ukraine still speak Ukrainian, follow Ukrainian traditions, go to Ukrainian churches, and share Ukrainian culture.

For example, I have been to Brazil, and it was very interesting to me because I never would have imagined that there are about half a million people of Ukrainian descent in the Ukrainian diaspora there. They even created a Ukrainian city there more than a hundred years ago.

It is the same in Canada, the United States, and Brazil , wherever Ukrainians live. It feels strange to me because people so far away from Ukraine can still be Ukrainian. They may have Canadian, American, or Brazilian passports, but they still feel Ukrainian.

Meanwhile, in Ukraine, some people do not feel Ukrainian in the same way. They still speak Russian and sometimes feel more culturally Russian.

This is why we sometimes have small conflicts or tensions between the Ukrainian diaspora and people who have just arrived from Ukraine. Newly arrived Ukrainians may speak Russian, while the diaspora — people born in Canada to Ukrainian families — cannot understand why. They say, “You are Ukrainian, you must speak Ukrainian.”

This creates conflicts between the new generation who moved from Ukraine because of the war and the Canadian-born Ukrainian community.

For me, as a host, it is important to explain to the Ukrainian diaspora that the new generation coming from Ukraine is also good people, a good part of the community. They are not bad because they speak Russian. They are Ukrainians — but in a different situation, shaped by assimilation and by living with Russian influence. That must be explained to the diaspora.

It is a big task to help unite all parts of the Ukrainian community with Ukraine itself.

When I was in Brazil, I spoke with the Ukrainian consul there. He told me that Ukraine “lost this connection” with the Brazilian Ukrainian community because no one in Ukraine pays attention to them. They want to renew this connection because it is very important.

I said, “Yes, this is why I am here. This is why I am making a video about you — so Ukraine and Ukrainians can see the diaspora, whether in Canada or Brazil.”

It is wonderful that people living so far away can still be Ukrainian, can feel Ukrainian, can think like Ukrainians. We may be different, but we remain part of one country, one culture. Sometimes, it is really hard to explain, because every part of the Ukrainian diaspora changes Ukrainian traditions a little bit. For example, in the Canadian diaspora, many families who arrived around a hundred years ago usually came from the Lviv and Ternopil regions of Western Ukraine. They have different traditions.

I am from central Ukraine. We have a tradition called Kalyta. A traditional Ukrainian ritual sweet bread made for St. Andrew’s Day. It is hung on a string, and participants try to bite it while another person raises it to make the task playful and challenging. The ritual is part of festive winter folk traditions. It was just three days ago, on Saint Andriy’s Day. When I asked my friends in the Ukrainian diaspora, “Do you know what Kalyta is?” they had no idea. This tradition exists mostly in the central regions: Cherkasy, parts of the Kyiv and Zhytomyr regions.

It is good to share this tradition with other Ukrainians and introduce something new to the diaspora.

Now we also have huge corruption scandals in Ukraine, which is a big issue for the diaspora. Many Ukrainians here work hard to raise donations to help the Ukrainian army. But when corruption scandals appear, it can discourage people. If you hear that a country has a corruption problem, you might hesitate to donate because you think the money will be stolen.

But to answer your question: yes, I feel a responsibility to unite the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada with Ukraine. I am a TV host. I am a face of the Ukrainian diaspora in Toronto, maybe even in all of Canada.

I also have many friends who are journalists in Ukraine. They tell me, “Denys, we need a strong connection with the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada. We need news from the diaspora, and we have no idea how to get it because we cannot find a strong TV channel in Canada that covers Ukrainian diaspora life.”

This is a problem for both the Ukrainian diaspora here and journalists in Ukraine. There is no clear connection for sharing news about Ukrainians in Canada. For me, and for Canadian Ukrainians, this is a big deal.

Jacobsen: Do you have a favourite interviewee so far in your career? And do you have a favourite topic that you tend to cover? My own favourite topic when I interview…

Sharlai: Usually, we speak about Ukraine and the Ukrainian diaspora, and honestly, I do not love that question. I prefer speaking with a person about their personality and life experiences. For example, if it is a Ukrainian singer, actor, politician — anyone — I love learning about the person.

I love learning about what someone is doing in their life and how they became who they are today. The main topic, of course, is always the war. When a famous person from Ukraine arrives here, the diaspora wants to know how they feel and what life in Ukraine is like right now.

That is the main topic — what is happening in Ukraine, how the war is affecting people.

But personally, I prefer talking about personality, getting to know someone better. I want to be more of an interviewer than just a TV host, because I enjoy talking with people of different personalities. That helps me improve my communication skills and learn how to work with different people.

That is a new skill for me. And yes, that is it.

Jacobsen: We have a few minutes. What is your dream interview — or your dream job in general?

Sharlai: My dream interview? That is a good question. A year ago, I wanted to interview the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, but now I don’t. It would still be nice to do that interview, but now I feel that I am not really into politics.

I am considering starting my own YouTube channel and doing different interviews. For example, I really want to interview Maria Efrosinina. She is a famous Ukrainian TV host—she was very popular about 20 years ago.

She is very famous in Ukraine. She interviews artists, journalists, politicians — many different people.

Right now, I would like to interview her, Masha Efrosinina. Her name is Maria or Masha — I do not know exactly what is on her passport. Twenty years ago, she used “Masha,” which sounds more Russian, and now she uses “Maria,” which sounds more Ukrainian. The situation is always changing.

As for my dream job, I would like to be a TV host for 1+1 Media in Ukraine. That was my dream when I was a child.

We have TSN — Television News — the most popular and famous news program in Ukraine. I always wanted to be a TV host for that program. That is my dream.

Jacobsen: Do you have any favourite aphorisms or quotes within Ukrainian culture? We can close on that.

Sharlai: Aphorisms? Honestly, I do not think much about that in relation to Ukrainian culture. I know many stereotypes about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian diaspora, but I am not sure about aphorisms about Ukrainians.

Jacobsen: You have probably heard the phrase “all that glitters is not gold.” It means that many things that truly matter do not have monetary value. I mean something like that, but describing Ukrainian culture — an idea, an ethic,  not necessarily a funny stereotype.

Sharlai: I know many stereotypes, both good and bad, about Ukrainians and the Ukrainian diaspora. First of all, there is the stereotype that Ukrainians love salo — but I hate salo—the same with horilka and vodka. But we also have good stereotypes: Ukrainians are very hard-working.

I already mentioned stereotypes about Ukrainian dishes and food: that Ukrainians love salo and love drinking horilka. But that is not true now. Many Ukrainians live a healthy lifestyle. For example, I hate salo, and I hate alcohol. 

A good stereotype is that Ukrainians are good workers — we can work in construction, journalism, medicine, be doctors , whatever. We are smart and flexible, with extensive life experience. We know how to change countries, create new documents, and build a new life in a completely new place.

For example, I have already changed countries twice. I lived in Ukraine, then Switzerland, and now I live in Canada. That is part of my life experience, and part of that stereotype — Ukrainians adapt well. The Nation has good and bad people. But in Canada, one stereotype is that Ukrainians are smart.

There is another stereotype about our faces — our “resting face” — that we look rude. But when you start speaking with us, we are very friendly.

Jacobsen: Thank you for your time today. We will be in touch. I need another cup of coffee.

Sharlai: Thank you so much. Thank you for your time and for your interview. This was really nice. It was my first interview ever with a Canadian journalist, so it was very nice. Thank you.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices.  In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/12/19

Anastasiia Romashko is a Ukrainian journalist and media professional whose career spans radio, social media, and television production across Ukraine, Switzerland, and Canada. She began in the press centres of the Ivan Bohun Military Lyceum and the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, covering defence, education, and international economic cooperation. During the full-scale war, she returned home, training live on local radio and hosting programmes that highlighted volunteers and civic resistance. After moving to Canada, she joined Kontakt Ukrainian Television Network, where she works across content creation and assistant production, focusing on community information, social impact projects, and diaspora engagement.

This interview with Scott Douglas Jacobsen traces Anastasiia Romashko’s path from student internships in Ukrainian press centres to her current work with Kontakt Ukrainian Television Network in Canada. She reflects on learning the craft of live broadcasting in a small hometown radio station during the full-scale war, when she reported on volunteers, defence efforts, and local civic life. Romashko then compares academic training in Kyiv and Zurich, explains her shift into social media management and assistant production, and describes projects that support newly arrived Ukrainians. Throughout, she highlights resilience, community service, and the distinctive sensibilities of Ukrainian and diaspora media cultures in her practice.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: How long have you been involved in media?

Anastasiia Romashko: I finished my studies six years ago. When I completed university—and even during my studies—I had already begun working in media. I have been involved in media for approximately six years.

My first experience was through internships in the military education system. The first place was the Ivan Bohun Military Lyceum, where I interned at the press center. I covered various events and activities at the Lyceum, including matters related to the Armed Forces as well as the students’ education and daily life. After that, I spent some time at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, again working in the press center. That role focused more on international relations between countries.

Different countries presented proposals to Ukraine to develop manufacturing and related sectors, and I covered these initiatives for a period of time. Then the COVID-19 pandemic began, and I had to move. After COVID, we faced the full-scale phase of the war. When the full-scale invasion started, I moved back to my home city. I was not very occupied there, so I decided to look for practical media work, especially since my studies mostly involved internships and I wanted real professional experience in journalism. The only real option in my hometown was the local radio station.

I had no prior experience in radio, so it was my first time working in that format. I sent them an email with an audio recording we had made for a media class at the university. In the email, I wrote that I was looking for practice, an internship, or any available work. I attached my recording and said they could listen to it, and that I was open to volunteering or working, depending on what suited them. They replied within a couple of days and invited me for a technical interview. 

I went there. It is a small radio station—the only one we have in my hometown. It covers the city and parts of the Cherkasy region. It was a very enjoyable experience for me because I had never worked at a radio station before. The team consisted mainly of the owner and founder, Vitaliy Slobodianyk, and the main host, Nataliia Zhyrna under the pen name Viktoriia Solodka. They effectively became my teachers; they taught me how to think and work in a live broadcasting environment. 

I began by doing live broadcasts, mostly covering the morning and daily news. As I became more comfortable speaking live—knowing that everyone in the city could hear me in their cars or at home—we created a couple of morning programs. In these programs, we invited guests for interviews and discussions: politically engaged people from the region, activists, and volunteers. 

This was during the war, so our main focus was on war-related events and on people supporting the defense effort and helping civilians. It was a meaningful experience for me, and working at the radio significantly improved my confidence in live public speaking.

Jacobsen: Would you consider the live experience or the academic training to be more important to your development as a journalist?

Romashko: I tried to catch everything from every side. It is always better to hear from different people, because if you know someone, they will definitely be more loyal to you than someone from outside. It is better to hear each person, make your own conclusions, and compare. I was open to criticism.

After the radio, I decided to go to Switzerland to study because my university had an exchange program. It was technically my fourth year. In my final year, I moved to Switzerland and studied at the University of Zurich.

We had almost the same program there as in Kyiv—journalism and media communication. I had classes once in the morning in Zurich and then again in the evening in Kyiv. If I contrast studying in Kyiv and in Zurich, I would say that in terms of information, Zurich gave less theoretical content. What I really liked, however, was that they used more modern examples, books, and materials—things you can genuinely use in journalistic work. Back home, the university focused more on foundational basics that you should definitely know, but you may not apply them in real professional work.

When I finished studying, I decided to move to Canada. At first, I did not look for media jobs because I was overwhelmed by the need to find a “real job” that fit me. During that time, my friend Denis found a job at a Ukrainian media outlet here—Kontakt Ukrainian Television Network. He asked whether I wanted to join, but I was not sure, because it is difficult to compare two different jobs and decide.

When I started researching the media landscape here—what they do and how they work—I remembered that when we were planning to move to Canada, my first thought was that maybe I could find something similar to what I had back home, like a radio station. I really like the radio. It is the kind of media I enjoy working in; it does not bore or tire me. It feels natural to me.

So I checked whether there were any Ukrainian radio stations in Canada. When you search for Ukrainian radio in Canada, you find Kontakt Ukrainian Radio. Unfortunately, it closed a couple of years ago, but the website had not been updated, so I thought it still existed, though it does not.

When I finally decided to join Kontakt, I actually started as a social media manager. Well, first I started as a reporter, because I prepared a couple of reports for them. But I am not a fan of being on camera, so I looked for something more suitable and interesting for myself within the media sphere and the television network. I talked to the producer, Uliana, and she offered me the role of social media manager. I would be responsible for Instagram, videos, reels, and similar content. I thought it was a good opportunity to learn something new, especially since I had never worked in social media management before.

It became more interesting for me to create engaging content and to promote different projects or other people’s materials rather than producing reports myself. It was a fun time. I believe the first large amount of work I received was connected to the festival—the Bloor West Village Ukrainian Festival 2024. That was my first experience trying myself as a real content creator and social media manager. We created various videos and promoted the festival on the page. That became my first real success because, in journalism, the usual metric is the number of views, and in the press center, you don’t see how many people read your articles or give feedback.

For the first time, I could see a response from the audience. One of the short Instagram reels received over 8,000 views, and I was amazed that I made something people actually watched. It made me happy.

With time, as I continued doing social media, Uliana began offering me different projects. Eventually, it developed into an assistant producer role because we worked on multiple projects together. I realized it was even more interesting—not necessarily more interesting than social media, but deeper. As a project manager or assistant producer, you are not just doing social media; you combine everything. You arrange the venue, speakers for the conference or event, and interesting personalities, and coordinate the entire workflow. You talk to the host, the reporters, and the guests. It becomes a complete project.

I found this really matched me, because I enjoy organizing things. We created many interesting projects—ranging from entertainment to social events. One example was an event with Andriy Semotiuk, an immigration lawyer. Because so many Ukrainians were arriving in Canada each year, people were overwhelmed and stressed about documents, and the system being so different from Ukraine. They needed support from someone knowledgeable.

We decided to organize a live meeting with him as an interview and a Q&A session. It was the first time we tried selling tickets, simply to cover the basic costs of the rented space, the operators, and technical needs. It was a major project: we created the Instagram advertising videos, the Eventbrite post, arranged everything with Mr. Semotiuk, sold the tickets, gathered people in one place, set up the chairs and tables, arranged the interior, and everything. It was incredibly interesting.

I feel these kinds of projects are socially important because they bring valuable knowledge to people. Of course, we also have projects that are less stressful and more entertainment-focused. Kontakt is a mix of entertainment and social content; not fully serious, but not purely entertainment either.

Jacobsen: What has been your favorite piece to work on in terms of entertainment, and what has been your favorite piece to work on in terms of social commentary or social issues?

Romashko: In entertainment, because I enjoy media and the media space in general, the work does not feel like work. When you do something entertaining, it feels more like a hobby. You do something you enjoy, you create something fun, and you have fun while doing it. When you film, meet new people, and feel that work rush, you feel genuinely engaged. It is a very nice feeling.

For social or political topics, it feels more like my contribution to something important for people right now. There is a difference between the Ukrainian diaspora in Canada and the community in Ukraine. Even though everyone is Ukrainian, many here were born in Canada or have lived here for a long time, so their perceptions of the situation in Ukraine differ. Social projects or political highlights on our side help bring them closer to the actual situation and to the current Ukrainian context. That is the main purpose of that work.

Jacobsen: What would be your dream topic to work on, or what events would you most like to attend and report on?

Romashko: For politics, I would not say I am deeply involved in political or social topics. I like attending events for support and engagement, sharing information, and receiving information. But if I were to choose a direction for my own media development, it would likely be something entertainment-related. I would choose larger entertainment projects.

My favorite part relates back to when I worked in the Chamber of Commerce. I really enjoyed everything connected to national development, businesses, manufacturers, and similar topics. I do not know why, but I enjoy listening to it. If I were to create a project, it would probably be something about businesses. It would be interesting to create a series of podcasts or interviews with business owners—to hear their stories, why they decided to open a business, and to understand their paths. That is the kind of large series I would create about successful people.

Jacobsen: Do you notice any differences in reporting styles between North American media and diaspora media operating in North America? Kontakt TV is explicitly dedicated to the Ukrainian community and language, so I imagine there are both similarities and differences between established outlets here and those newly formed within the Ukrainian diaspora. Where do you think those differences originate?

Romashko: You mean in general—North American media compared to Ukrainian Canadian media?

Jacobsen: Something like that. In one sense, it could be something as small and subtle as the way someone greets a guest for an interview, and then how they sit and present themselves. Even what they wear. My superficial understanding is that Ukraine is more of a dignity-based culture. In 2014, the Revolution of Dignity at Maidan reflected something very old in the culture, not something created by the Soviet period. In Canada, people almost pride themselves—not necessarily on indignity—but on being casual about how they dress, speak, present themselves, walk, spend their free time, and so on. I am trying to understand how that broader context seeps into journalistic sensibility—not ethics, because ethics must be consistent—but the sensibility of journalism itself.

Romashko: I would say there is a difference. It is hard to compare Ukrainian Canadian diaspora media directly with all North American media, but in general, when we compare North American media with Ukrainian media, there is a noticeable difference. In Ukraine, they try to make everything look excellent. Everything has to be perfect. It is more of a setup than a natural presentation.

It is more of a staged approach than something spontaneous. Here, people are more relaxed. You can see that on television, in podcasts, reports—people feel more at ease, and that comes through in the media as well. In Ukraine, everything must meet the standard. If in school they teach you to do something a certain way, then you will do it that way. It shows up in clothing, speaking style, tone, everything.

It is stricter, but I am not sure whether that stems from educational differences, behavioral norms, or simply a different mentality. It is probably connected to a different way of living and certain habits we grow up with. Ukrainian media have not changed much in terms of becoming more relaxed. If it is entertainment, yes, people are relaxed. But if it is something serious, like the news, no one will present it in the style of YouTube creators or younger generations. They follow the traditional line. The news must be presented on television in a specific way.

Here, it is different. There are more channels. For example, CP24 is very formal, and others are less formal. There are variations. There are still standards in North America—certain expectations about how reporters present themselves and conduct their reporting—but the range is wider.

It is also a different educational tradition. People show what they were taught. Ukrainians present themselves the way they learned in university and through earlier training. There is not much “free will” in presentation style anywhere; people follow the models they were trained in.

Jacobsen: Any favorite aphorisms or quotes that come from Ukrainian culture and capture Ukrainian sensibilities for you?

Romashko: When I read the question, the first thing I thought of was, “What does not kill us makes us stronger.” Yes, it is not a Ukrainian aphorism, but it is something I associate with Ukraine in general. In terms of the war or even in everyday life, Ukrainians have gone through so much. Especially when you compare young Ukrainians to young people in parts of Europe. Someone might say, “You studied at two universities, you worked several jobs, you traveled,” and then they ask, “How old are you?” And you answer, “Twenty-two, twenty-one, twenty-three,” and they are surprised. It is simply a different style of living. There are many challenges people in Ukraine face constantly—well, not constantly, but often enough. I would say resilience is what defines Ukrainians in general.

Jacobsen: If you had a dream interview, who would it be? Denys said President Zelensky, but he said he has more or less given up on that one.

Romashko: I would say either General Valerii Zaluzhnyi. When he was in his position—when he was responsible for the military—I read so many reports about him while working at the radio: how he developed plans, created backup strategies, and so on. At that time, I thought it would be incredible to interview him. It would be fascinating to hear how he thought in critical situations, how he formed his decisions, and how he navigated the entire military network.

I think I still feel that way because recently we almost had the opportunity to interview him when he was sent to the United Kingdom to serve as ambassador. So I will focus on that, and maybe one day I will have the chance to interview him—not necessarily about his past, but about his current work as an ambassador. We will see.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Anastasiia.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In-Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices.  In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In-Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.