September 7, 2022<\/p>\n
Written by: Danica Djokic, source: Slavko Curuvija Foundation<\/em><\/p>\n From April to July 2022, the Slavko Curuvija Foundation (SCF) monitored the reporting on critical journalists and the media from five portals \u2013 Alo.rs<\/em>, Republika.rs<\/em> (the portal of newspapers Srpski telegraf<\/em>), Informer.rs<\/em>, Kurir.rs<\/em> and Objektiv.rs<\/em>. The portals were selected based on the latest report of the Press Council<\/a> indicating that the newspapers Alo<\/em>, Srpski telegraf<\/em>, Informer<\/em>, Kurir<\/em> and Objektiv<\/em> violated Serbian Journalists\u2019 Code the most in the period from 1 July until 31 December 2021.<\/a>[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n Apart from often failing to respect ethical and professional norms, these tabloids implement campaigns against critical journalists, discrediting them, insult and devalue, along with almost daily attacks from politicians, creating an atmosphere for journalists who work professionally not to feel safe to work.<\/p>\n The website tags, such as: journalist, female journalist, and media outlet (in Serbian language, it was necessary to use case forms, gender and number forms) were used for the monitoring.<\/p>\n The monitoring showed that analysed portals often repeat identical insults when reporting on specific media outlets, so during the monitoring, the SCF started additionally observing whether new articles would appear under tags or keywords such as: tycoon media outlet, tycoon scums, Solak\u2019s media outlets, Djilas\u2019s media outlets, Solak\u2019s machinery, Solak\u2019s mechanism, tycoon outlets, opposition media and similar.<\/p>\n As the daily production of these online media outlets is really high, it is impossible to say that all articles and features that exhibit the relationship of the analysed media towards critical journalists and media companies were used in the SCF monitoring \u2013 it is without a doubt that there had been more articles in which the journalists were even more discredited.<\/p>\n The monitoring includes not only those articles in which the media outlets or journalists have been directly insulted but also those in which they are labelled as media outlets or journalists affiliated with a specific political party, political actor or businessman, and those who, because of their critical media nature and editorial policy are described as haters of \u201ceverything Serbian\u201d and Serbia, haters of the President of the Republic of Serbia, who are spreading the anti-government propaganda, and other.<\/p>\n Therefore, all articles in which journalists or media were targeted in a negative fashion, mentioned or discredited were considered relevant for this monitoring. It was also recorded who were the most criticised journalists.<\/p>\n While the monitoring was undergoing, five topics were almost identically considered by two or three portals (Alo<\/em>, Informer<\/em> and\/or Objektiv<\/em>), but without reference to other sources, being exclusively reported as features from their own newsrooms. On these topics, 11 articles were published on either two or all three portals. In these articles, the media outlets concerned would change a headline or subheadings, some words here and there, but it was obvious those were articles from the same source.<\/p>\n Moreover, another eight topics were covered by two or three mentioned portals in a similar manner \u2013 in total 18 articles were published on these topics. All these articles \u2013 in total 29 \u2013 were considered autonomous in this monitoring as they did not refer to any source.<\/p>\n The analysed portals did not mention specific names of the media outlets they had attacked in any of the articles but included cover page photos or videos of portal screens. From the photos, it was obvious which media outlets those were, so these attacks were assigned to them.<\/p>\n NOTE: In this monitoring, the word \u201cattack\u201d shall mean any form of pressure, targeting, humiliation and negative speech about a critical media outlet or a journalist<\/p>\n The Slavko Curuvija Foundation monitoring indicated that in the course of four months on the portals of tabloids Alo<\/em>, Srpski telegraf<\/em>, Informer<\/em>, Objektiv<\/em> and Kurir<\/em>, at least 132 articles were published<\/strong> attacking critical media or journalists.<\/p>\n As in some articles, several journalists are often attacked, 132 articles included minimum of 197 negative mentions of critical media or journalists<\/strong>. The attacked media usually included portals, newspapers and TV Nova <\/strong>(minimum 66 times<\/strong>), TV N1 <\/strong>(minimum 47<\/strong>) and newspapers Danas<\/em> <\/strong>(minimum 41 times<\/strong>).<\/p>\n The United Group media outlets are most often criticised in the analysed articles due to their editorial policy and also their selection of guests, interlocutors and column writers, the behaviour of their journalists, and even \u2013 the journalists\u2019 tweets<\/strong>.<\/p>\n In minimum of nine articles, the analysed media outlets referred to the United Group, in general, without mentioning a specific media outlet, but with a particular negative focus on the owner Dragan Solak<\/strong>. All the articles are written with the purpose of creating a completely negative image of the United Group media outlets.<\/p>\n By using a similar rhetoric as the representatives of the government, the analysed media use the rhetoric that connects the owner of United Group with Dragan Djilas<\/strong>, the leader of the opposition Freedom and Justice Party, which creates an image in the public that the newsrooms and critical media journalists are linked with some political parties and that they work in their interest.<\/p>\n During these four months, the most fervent was Alo<\/em> tabloid portal, with as much as 70 negative mentions of the media outlets or journalists in 47 analysed articles.<\/p>\n The media outlets of the United Media group were named: tycoon scumbag, tycoon mercenaries, tycoon lackeys, tycoon media empire, and even \u2013 tycoon \u201cbutt-flies<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n Alo<\/em> labelled them Djilas media outlets, and their journalists \u2013 Solakovci <\/em>(Solak\u2019s soldiers).<\/p>\n For them, the United Group is \u2013 a media octopus or Solak\u2019s centrifuge.<\/p>\n Other analysed portals are also prone to similar or the same kind of insults against the media outlets of the United Group.<\/p>\n For Alo<\/em>, the critical media outlets \u201cachieved golden standards of Goebbels propaganda machinery\u201d, \u201conly working on fulfilling their political bosses agenda\u201d and \u2013 harming Serbia.<\/p>\n By the words of the same portal, the critical media outlets are \u201cdrowning in auto-chauvinism\u201d, meddling, manipulating, brutally lying, deceiving and not hesitating to use any means to harm Serbia but also \u2013 Vucic.<\/p>\n In addition, Alo<\/em> also claimed that judging from the media outlets criticising the government, \u201ceveryone is innocent until proven to be a Serb\u201d, and that hard and bleak times are desired for Serbia, and that they are even \u2013 \u201ccollaborating with Ustashas\u201d.<\/p>\n Alo<\/em> said that the only goal these media outlets have is to hit Vucic where it hurts most, breaking Serbia\u2019s spine, smearing viscously and leading the chase against Vucic\u2019s family.<\/p>\n The critical journalists are \u201cSerb haters blind from hate\u201d, who \u201cdo not feel any shame\u201d.<\/p>\n All things mentioned in reference to Alo<\/em> repeat in other media outlets\u2019 analyses.<\/p>\n They also label critical journalists as: Djilas-type haters, rotten Djilas liars, domestic hypocrites, Djilas mercenaries, vultures, second-grade Serbs, Serb haters and spin masters.<\/p>\n Because of the Eurovision song contest in May, all critical media outlets were often named \u2013 \u201clievision\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n According to these portals, critical journalists and media do not love their country and its president, work against it, lie, and twist facts for their benefit, being hypocrites, and change attitudes depending on what they prefer at the moment.<\/p>\n The analysed portals agree that the critical media outlets are far from being objective, that they are hypocrites with double standards, supporting \u201cUstashas\u201d, that \u201cSerbs are to be blamed for everything\u201d, that they \u201cburied the professionalism\u201d, and that \u201ctheir only preoccupation was to spit on everything good that president Vucic did for the citizens\u201d.<\/p>\n Although the analysed media most often write about media companies in general, in some articles, they targeted specific journalists. Those were most usually Jelena Obucina<\/strong>, Slobodan Georgiev<\/strong>, Zeljko Bodrozic<\/strong>, Marko Vidojkovic<\/strong> and Dragoljub Draza Petrovic<\/strong>.<\/p>\n In several articles, they attacked the Press Council (PC) and the Independent Journalists Association of Serbia (IJAS).<\/p>\n Several times, the PC was attacked due to failure to adopt a decision on Marko Vidojkovic column, and Istvan<\/strong> Kaic<\/strong>, in one article of the portal Republika<\/em>, named IJAS \u201cmedia umbrella for protection of the United Group media\u201d.<\/p>\n In the portal Republika<\/em>, they emphasised that the Independent Journalists Association of Serbia is \u201cindependent but only from truth and objective reporting, while it is very much depended on spinning, misinformation and semi-information and foreign donations\u201d.<\/p>\n The analysed media outlets not only label journalists or media but also try to discredit them by calling out their guests and interlocutors.<\/p>\n In their articles, they sometimes call out journalists or media, other times analysts or interlocutors. Occasionally, there were columns with topics on critical journalists and media and their work, as a rule \u2013 in a negative context.<\/p>\n They sometimes published statements of interlocutors from other media outlets, with pronounced negative attitudes against some critical media or a journalist.<\/p>\n Occasional labelling of critical media or journalists was detected in columns \u201cNo gloves\u201d on Kurir<\/em> portal, signed by an unknown person, and columns of Dragan J. Vucicevic <\/strong>and Istvan Kaic on the Informer portal.<\/p>\n Among analysts who write about critical media, the persons who appear often are the executive director of the Centre for Responsible Media Marko Matic <\/strong>and Mario Spasic<\/strong>, who is presented as the general secretary of the Council for monitoring, human rights and anti-corruption in \u201cTransparentnost<\/em>\u201d. Istvan Kaic himself is also an interlocutor.<\/p>\n The critical media were commented on by the members of the Serbian Progressive Party, Sandra Bozic<\/strong>, Suzana Vasiljevic<\/strong>, Milenko Jovanov<\/strong>, Aleksandra Tomic<\/strong>\u2026<\/p>\n The analysts from the analysed articles include Predrag Sarapa<\/strong>, Milomir Maric<\/strong>, Nebojsa Krstic<\/strong>, Ilija Zivotic<\/strong>, Stevica Dedjanski<\/strong>\u2026 Their attitudes against critical media were all negative.<\/p>\n In almost a quarter of the analysed articles (23.5%), the grounds for articles were tweets from the account Lie Detector (@LaziDetektor<\/em>). This account publishes TV show clips or parts of interviews with actors and analysts from the social and political scene in Serbia on a daily basis.<\/p>\n Its Twitter profile description says: \u201cWe occasionally only check the information published in the media and on social media. We remind you of what was said and promised\u201d.<\/p>\n The articles referring to tweets from this account were published by all analysed portals besides Kurir<\/em>. Almost a third (31.9%) of the analysed articles on the Alo<\/em> portal had based their attacks on the tweets from this account.<\/p>\n Some media were referring to tweets by the SNS officials Goran Vesic <\/strong>and Vladimir Djukanovic<\/strong>. This monitoring did not include articles on how political officials attack journalists and\/or media. It only concerned those articles in which, apart from politicians, the attacks come from the analysed media outlet itself or an interlocutor who is not a political official.<\/p>\n The Slavko Curuvija Foundation maintained the separate monitoring of the attacks by the politicians.<\/p>\n During monitoring, it happened more than once that the same or similar article was detected in more than one analysed portal, but each of them would mention themselves as the source. They often repeat the same headlines or parts of headlines, and the greatest parts of articles are the same or very similar. The only difference is that, e.g. Informer<\/em> occasionally concludes \u2013 \u201cWe see what is going on\u201d \u2013 or Alo<\/em> bolds some text box.<\/p>\n Some phrases are replicated \u2013 e.g. some media are, as they write, \u201cstaunchly defending\u201d Zorana Mihajlovic and \u201cwant to keep Ustashas sweet at all costs\u201d.<\/p>\n Since about 22 per cent of the analysed articles are similar or the same, it is understandable to have doubts that these media outlets receive written articles from some source and only adjust them to their editorial policy and then publish them<\/strong>.<\/p>\n In these four months, apart from the commonly attacked United Group media, other media were also discredited and insulted, such as Cenzolovka<\/em><\/strong>, NIN<\/strong>, Nedeljnik<\/em><\/strong>, Vreme<\/em><\/strong>, Deutsche Welle<\/em><\/strong>, Voice of America<\/strong>\u2026 These media outlets were treated by the analysed portals in a similar fashion as N1, Nova and Danas<\/em>.<\/p>\n During the monitoring, it was detected that only twice the critical journalists were mentioned in the analysed media in the non-insulting context.<\/p>\n When Jelena Zoric <\/strong>said that, on the basis of her research, \u201cAndrej Vucic has nothing to do with Jovanjica\u201d, the analysed media reported on that without criticising this journalist, however, mentioned numerous critical liars whose statements were refuted by Zoric\u2019s claims after her statement.<\/p>\n In its article, which Cenzolovka<\/em> mentioned as hypocritical, Kurir<\/em> used the comment by Zoran Kesic <\/strong>from the Nova.rs portal that \u201che sometimes feels ashamed\u201d, because \u201cthey are the same company\u201d.<\/p>\n At the same time, portal Republika<\/em> described Kesic as \u201cSolak\u2019s poodle\u201d.<\/p>\n We want to reiterate that based on the Slavko Curuvija Foundation data, publishers of Alo<\/em>, Kurir<\/em>, Informer and Republika<\/em> (Srpski telegraf<\/em>) were allocated more than 95 million RSD from the budget <\/strong>after media competitions from 2017\u20132019. The publisher of Objektiv<\/em>, which launched its company in 2021, received 150,000 RSD <\/strong>at one competition that year, as mentioned in Raskrinkavanje<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/a>[1]<\/sup><\/a>Source: https:\/\/savetzastampu.rs\/lat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Monitoring-jul-decembar-2021.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" September 7, 2022 Five pro-government portals, on average, published an article per day to discredit, insult or target all those who critically write about the government, but primarily Nova, N1 and Danas journalists. Written by: Danica Djokic, source: Slavko Curuvija Foundation Methodology From April to July 2022, the Slavko Curuvija Foundation (SCF) monitored the reporting on critical journalists and the media from five portals \u2013 Alo.rs, Republika.rs (the portal of newspapers Srpski telegraf), Informer.rs, Kurir.rs and Objektiv.rs. The portals were […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":7705,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7886","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-content-en"],"yoast_head":"\nMethodology<\/h3>\n
More than 30 attacks per month on critical media and journalists<\/h3>\n
Media outlet Alo<\/em><\/h3>\n
Same matrix<\/h3>\n
Analysts, columnists and \u2013 Lie Detector<\/em><\/h3>\n
Tabloids are obviously using the same source<\/h3>\n