The digitalization reform in Ukraine has been accompanied by the emergence of numerous myths and conspiracy theories. Some of them arise from a lack of reliable information, while others are deliberately spread to manipulate public opinion. In reality, the implementation of digital services helps reduce corruption risks, make government activities more transparent, and provide citizens with more convenient and accessible services. Therefore, it is important to distinguish real risks of digital transformation from imaginary threats. VoxCheck reported on this.
The digitalization reform involves moving public services into a digital format and creating new tools that increase the efficiency of interaction between citizens, businesses, and the state. In Ukraine, this process has been ongoing for more than ten years and is one of the most successful reforms, which the majority of Ukrainians consider socially beneficial. It is being accelerated by growing digital literacy, wider internet access, and the proactive role of businesses in developing new technological solutions.
Despite this, fears and distrust persist in society. A significant number of Ukrainians do not use state online services due to concerns about personal data security, technical failures, or potential government surveillance. These sentiments are intensified by the war, cyber threats, and instability in energy supply. However, such concerns are not unique to Ukraine—people around the world worry about privacy and data security.
Against the backdrop of real challenges, technophobic theories are actively spreading. For example, the fake claim that 5G networks supposedly transmit COVID-19 or harm human health first appeared in the United Kingdom and later spread to Ukraine. The WHO has repeatedly debunked these claims, confirming that 5G is safe for humans.
Another popular myth concerned the “Reserve+” application. Fake screenshots circulated on social media claiming that Ukrainians abroad would receive draft notices by email. In reality, the app only notifies users about the possibility of contacting Territorial Recruitment Centers to update their data. The fake screenshots had altered fonts and colors – clear signs of editing.
Similarly, the “Mriya” app, created for schools, became the target of a new wave of fears. Conspiracy theorists claimed that it determines children’s “life priorities” and controls their parents. In fact, “Mriya” simply provides convenient communication between schools and parents, offering access to grades, attendance, and homework, and has no surveillance or control functions.
Another fake concerned an alleged ban on cash in Ukraine. Some social media users presented this as proof that the country is turning into a “social laboratory.” In reality, the National Bank only discussed a gradual transition to a cashless economy, emphasizing that a complete rejection of cash is impossible during wartime. Such stories often arise from misunderstanding: discussing potential reforms does not mean their immediate implementation.
Fakes are also frequently used for fraud. For example, fake “eDopomoha” websites and counterfeit “Diia” chatbots were created online to steal users’ personal data or money. Such schemes not only harm individuals but also undermine trust in digitalization, especially among older generations.
Another widespread myth is that digitalization is a “luxury in wartime”. In fact, digital services help save resources and increase governance efficiency. For example, the electronic procurement system reduces bureaucracy and makes processes more transparent.
Many fakes are based on a misunderstanding of how online services work. For instance, false information claiming that drivers must retake exams to exchange their licenses, or that residents of occupied territories cannot obtain new licenses, is untrue – government regulations explicitly allow for license exchanges without additional conditions.
