Some people who don't think Ukraine deserves the West's aid in defending itself from Russia (including those who even think the invasion is justified, since they keep going on about Ukraine violating the Minsk 2 agreements [as if Russia never did, even if we ignore how they violated the Budapest Memorandum]) claim that the Western media has radically changed its stance on Ukraine from before the invasion and is thus hypocritical.
One meme juxtaposing different headlines is the below:
From the watermark, presumably this meme comes from the Global Times, though I am unable to find it on their website.
I don't know why this juxtaposition is supposed to be some sort of gotcha for the Western media, since even we take the headlines at face value, it's clear that each headline in each row is talking about something different from its matched pair (presumably we're meant to compare the headline on the left of each row with the one on the right, and presumably they're supposed to contradict each other).
Let us look at each row in turn (the capitalised words are capitalised only in the meme, not the original headlines):
"Welcome to Ukraine, the most CORRUPT nation in Europe"
"The fight for Ukraine is a fight for liberal IDEALS"
A country might be corrupt, but that doesn't mean it's OK to invade it. Saying that you shouldn't invade other countries is a liberal ideal.
"Ukraine's neo-NAZI problem"
"For foreign fighters, Ukraine offers purpose, camaraderie and a CAUSE"
There might be a few neo-Nazis in Ukraine, but that doesn't mean that all foreign fighters who go there fight for the cause of neo-Nazism.
"A Ukrainian comedian-turned-president is embroiled in Trump's impeachment MESS"
"Ukrainians are giving two LESSONS in democracy that Americans have forgotten"
This is the most ridiculous of the juxtapositions. Zelensky could be involved in Trump's impeachment for any reason (he might not even be guilty of anything). This has nothing to do whatsoever with whether Ukraine can teach anyone anything about democracy. And just because Ukraine can give the US two lessons in democracy doesn't mean that their democracy is perfect. Or indeed that the US can't teach Ukraine anything about democracy.
"Ukrainian president's rule becomes increasingly corrupt, AUTHORITARIAN"
"Zelensky: The TV president turned war HERO"
Corrupt and authoritarian leaders can also be war heroes. Those are different attributes. Indeed, one could say that to be a war hero, it helps to be authoritarian - in Ancient Rome, dictators were granted emergency powers during times of crises, so they could be authoritarian - but this could help them get through the crises. Similarly, in emergencies, democracies can declare states of emergency under which full democracy is temporarily suspended.
Reading the actual articles, even more problems with the thesis of media hypocrisy come to light.
The article labelling Ukraine the most corrupt country in Europe is outdated - it is from 2015. Ukraine's score in the Corruption Perceptions Index has improved from 27 in 2015 to 32 in 2021 and the most corrupt country in Europe is now... Russia (with a score of 29).
Meanwhile, the article which supposedly contradicts it was incorrectly headlined. The true headline is The fight for Ukraine is a fight for liberal ideals. So how can Boris Johnson possibly lead it?. As the true headline suggests, this article is not really about Ukraine, but is instead an attack on Boris Johnson. It doesn't claim that Ukraine is a liberal paradise but, as I suggested, talks about how aggression against other countries is a Bad Thing.
The article on neo-Nazis in Ukraine is from 2018, and it just says that there is a far-right presence in Ukraine, which is sometimes tacitly supported by law enforcement. It explictly tells us that " the Kremlin’s claims that Ukraine is a hornets’ nest of fascists are false: far-right parties performed poorly in Ukraine’s last parliamentary elections, and Ukrainians reacted with alarm to the National Militia’s demonstration in Kiev" - the neo-Nazi presence is only a "reason for concern", rather than indicating that Ukraine is some sort of neo-Nazi state, as Russian apologists love to claim.
Meanwhile, the one on camaraderie talks about foreigners who join up with the Ukrainian government's forces - not the "neo-Nazi" militias.
The article linking Ukraine to Trump is about whether Trump tried to pressure Zelensky into investigating Biden, and doesn't have a negative spin on Zelensky, only noting possible ties to an oligarch, Ihor Kolomoisky.
On the other hand, the "contrary" article featured in the image does not claim Ukraine is a great democracy. It says that their people's struggle is inspiring - which is not praising the country's democracy. And the two lessons are about denial of democracy meaning people are more willing to fight for it and that ordinary people are the true heroes of democracy. None of these mean that Ukraine is a great democracy.
Indeed, the article even notes that "it’s not clear that everyone opposing Russia is fighting for liberal democracy in Ukraine. There’s evidence that ultra-nationalists and far-right groups are part of the armed Ukraine resistance", so it's not like the article is pretending Ukraine is 100% "good".
Lastly, we have an article denouncing Zelensky for being corrupt and authoritarian. It was published by the apparently-now-defunct publication, New Europe (since 1993, but RIP), which advertised itself as "an independent weekly newspaper bringing you the most important". I can't read the whole article, but it was written by Oleg Sukhov who studied and worked in Russia and is now at the Kiev Independent. So even if this article contradicted its pair, this wouldn't be evidence of "Western" media bias.
Meanwhile, the "article" on Zelensky being a war hero is actually a podcast episode.
I actually spent over 35 minutes of my life listening to it, and it's just a feature on Zelensky's life, where among other things we learn that he was the voice for Paddington Bear in both Paddington movies. It doesn't glorify Zelensky but talks about his social media and PR strategy.
One guest also says that Ukraine "is consistently ranked as one of the most corrupt countries in the world" (15:29; weird, since I thought the Western media had done a 180 since the invasion). It also criticises him and his aides in playing down the Russian threat before the invasion (23:07), quoting one guest:
"It's really vexing to people in the White House who don't think that Zelensky has his head in the game. They think that he genuinely is not being honest about what the White House thinks is, not a certainty but a high likelihood that Russia is gonna cross that border" (23:29)
They also go on to criticise him for blowing hot and cold in trying to get American support in playing down the chance of an invasion, and mentioned that before the invasion, in Ukraine he was perceived as weak, too pro-Russia etc, and that there were no plans for the invasion (30:43)
It concludes by noting that "the future does not look great for him" (34:30)
Furthermore, it's not like after the Russian invasion, the Western media has stopped publishing articles on problems in Ukraine. Take the following published since February 24, 2022 (the date of the invasion):
Corruption concerns involving Ukraine are revived as the war with Russia drags on : NPR (July 20, 2022)
Ukraine has a Nazi problem, but Vladimir Putin's 'denazification' claim for war is a lie. (NBC News, March 5, 2022)
Zelensky Accused of Censorship Over Ukraine Media Law (Newsweek, January 3, 2023)
In any event, Putin's favourite philosopher seems to be Ivan Ilyin, who promoted fascism, and Russia has a long history of neo-Nazis, so even if one believed that there were neo-Nazis in Ukraine, it's not clear that Russia's invasion is a setback for Nazis and/or fascists.