The war is two weeks old and some people seem to want to inject the news from Ukraine straight into their veins. That also makes it easier for disinformation and propaganda to spread. Both sides have an incentive to spread propaganda (although moreso for Russia since this is not a righteous war on their part by any stretch of the imagination).
The Wikipedia page for the Ghost of Kyiv currently says that some sources claim that it is “an urban legend or war propaganda”. “Urban legend” is the most frequent name that I’ve seen. It would have been called “disinformation” if it had been fighting on the Russian side.
I doubt that most Western sources will be as critical of falsehoods coming from the Ukrainian and Western side compared to the Russian side. If the Ukrainian/Western side gets labeled as simply “false” (intent unclear) while the falsehoods coming from the Russian side gets labeled as “disinfo” then I would imagine that DDG could downplay Russian falsehoods while leaving up Ukrainian/Western falsehoods.
Most Western media that I follow are very quick to point out that information from Ukraine is not necessarily trustworthy. They're quite likely to portray the situation in a way that makes it look like they're winning. The number of reported Russian casualties is very likely to be exaggerated and this is pointed out rather consistently.
The label "disinformation", like "terrorism" often depends on your individual context. "War propaganda" is a pretty accurate descriptor for that silly story. War propaganda isn't always meant strictly to misinform. Consider the "Eating carrots is good for your eyesight" trope produced by UK propaganda during WWII. One of it's goals was to cover up the success of radar in night conditions, but it also had the goal of encouraging citizens to grow more carrots in their victory gardens. Hilariously, retrospectively it can't even be called disinformation anymore because carrots DO contain a compound that is necessary for your eyes to operate in a healthy manner
The Wikipedia page for the Ghost of Kyiv currently says that some sources claim that it is “an urban legend or war propaganda”. “Urban legend” is the most frequent name that I’ve seen. It would have been called “disinformation” if it had been fighting on the Russian side.
I doubt that most Western sources will be as critical of falsehoods coming from the Ukrainian and Western side compared to the Russian side. If the Ukrainian/Western side gets labeled as simply “false” (intent unclear) while the falsehoods coming from the Russian side gets labeled as “disinfo” then I would imagine that DDG could downplay Russian falsehoods while leaving up Ukrainian/Western falsehoods.