THE SEASON OF SERVILE JOURNALISM

- Montenegro -

            The virus of servile journalism still rules the Montenegrin information space. State media resign themselves to it too easily, but even those who are reputed as “independent” are not immune to it. The former are controlled by the authorities, but their big influence is also obvious on the majority of private media.

            Under the new Law on Public Information, there is no censorship in Montenegro. However, there is journalist self-censorship, probably a more dangerous enemy to professional journalism. Editors and journalists of state media seem to be falling over themselves in servility to the authorities and in dressing up reality. But, how can one expect professionalism from media whose directors and editors are appointed by the authorities, which can remove them whenever they feel like it? The heads of three state media – Radio, Television, and “Pobjeda,” – were appointed by the ruling tripartite coalition. The director of “Pobjeda” is at the same time the head of the ruling Democratic Party of Socialists Caucus. Such management and editorial structures have turned state media into propaganda services for the ruling coalition.

            One should also not forget perhaps the most important fact. State media are financed to a high percentage from the state budget. And who would pay for negative publicity? The matter of funding becomes even more significant when known that information in Montenegro is becoming a business faster and faster. For private media owners, in order to survive, profit is the priority, and in today’s Montenegro making profit is difficult for opponents of the authorities or those who are far from them. That is why they are tolerated in exploiting journalists and other media staff: dozens of young people, striving for affirmation, work for private media for 100 to 200 marks a month with the status of part-time associates.

            Servile journalism, however, has not enslaved all media.

            The weekly “Monitor,” Radio Free Montenegro from Podgorica, and Radio Montena from Niksic stand out by professional journalism standards. Critical stand towards events, authorities and opposition, and pluralism of views and opinions, are the guidelines of their editorial policy. These examples only confirm that professionalism in journalism, if journalists want it, has room to develop regardless of political pressure. However, for many it is much more comfortable to be in the shelter of politics. The authorities sometimes boast that no new suits have been filed in Montenegro against journalists. That is true, but it is also true that some suits, which were initiated five years ago and which have become classical political processes, are a big warning to all journalists that truth which does not suit the authorities has a big price tag on it. Therefore, objectively looking, the authorities in Montenegro actually have no reason to try journalists or media – most of them are generally on their side as any other position would be too costly anyway.

            What also has a reflection on the media are political affairs outside Montenegro. What exerts particularly negative impact are the constant disputes between the authorities in Montenegro and Serbia and FRY, which have not stopped even after the start of destruction of Milosevic’s regime. That is why Montenegro’s media portrait almost entirely reflects Montenegro’s division into two blocs, meaning that media are generally under the control of either the pro-Montenegrin bloc or the pro-Yugoslav bloc. This will probably continue.

            Politics has never abandoned the ambition of ruling media and journalists. Political parties strictly adhere to their rule to take election results as the measure of legitimacy for running all public affairs, including state media. Politics and elections are not understood as services for the welfare of the citizens and the state, but as a mandate for dominance and arbitration in all areas. This maintains the symbiosis of authorities and media, while what belongs to the state and society in general is turned into what belongs to the party, and the other way around.           

            The latest example is the second attempt of the People’s Party to remove the editorial board of Television Montenegro. This is a minor party, but it has found itself part of the ruling coalition. The People’s Party, whose program states that the Montenegrin nation and culture are part of the corps of the Serb nation and culture, and which does not recognize Montenegrins the right to their own church, is accusing the Television of leading a campaign against SRY and the Serbian Orthodox Church.

            If the People’s Party succeeds in carrying out its intention, that is to say if the authorities, which have monopoly over state media, introduce the practice of dismissing editors of state media if they are not following the ideological positions of the ruling parties, new pressure should be expected on media, as well as even more obedient sets of journalists and editors.

This anachronistic practice can be changed first of all through a just privatization of state media and their transformation from propaganda services for the authorities into responsible public services, and also through faster democratization of the entire state infrastructure.            Until then, politics will hold media under its coat-tail, impose partial interest as the dominant interest, and favor propaganda as a method of information. (Veseljko Koprivica – SAFAX)

  source: Media Online 2001
published by: Roland Brunner rbr@medienhilfe.ch date of release on this site: 23-08-2001

go to top

P.O. Box, CH-8031 Zürich, Switzerland
Phone +41-1-272 46 37,  Fax +41-1-272 46 82, email: info@MEDIENHILFE.ch