1. Introduction After five years of systemic human rights atrocities, the military attempted to finalise its coup objectives by holding elections between December 2025 and January 2026. These polls were widely condemned as a “sham” by the international community and failed to gain recognition from regional bodies.1 While our previous report, How the Military Blocked Independent Media During the 2025-5 Elections, examined the military’s capture of digital infrastructure, this report shifts the focus to the digital platforms. The objective was to document the lived experience of independent media as they navigated global social media ecosystems during the countdown to the polls. The lived experience included not only attacks online from the military and its allies, but also the effect of platforms’ policy enforcement. This report looks at the platforms’ content moderation systems and the effect on media editorial choices, monetisation, and ultimately their viability. The findings are grounded in the standards in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and international programmes like the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity. 1.1. Methodology The findings in this report are derived from a rapid-response mechanism that provided technical and advocacy support to media facing digital violations during the 2025 and 2026 election cycle. The report focuses on the digital platforms most commonly used by the Myanmar media, but many of the findings can be applied to all other and future platforms. We worked with 44 media outlets during this project and also conducted qualitative surveys with their senior personnel, editors, and media owners who were navigating systemic digital interference. The percentage figures throughout the report are based on those 44 outlets but are also illustrative of the broader media sector in Myanmar. We have preserved the raw sentiment of the media’s testimonies. This ensures that the report reflects not just quantitative data, but the professional perceptions of media regarding platform failures during this national political process. To protect the safety of all participants, no identifying information has been provided. 1 OHCHR (2026), “Myanmar: UN expert’s report highlights junta's fraudulent claim to legitimacy, urges States to denounce 2023 ‘sham’ elections”; AP (2026), “ASEAN does not recognize Myanmar’s elections, which militarybacked party claims to have won”. Page 5 of 19