PODGORICA, 06.11.2020. – Beside the five TV channels of the National Public Broadcaster of Radio Television of Montenegro (RTCG), there are five other local public TV broadcasters, 15 local public radio broadcasters, 14 commercial TV broadcasters, 35 commercial radio broadcasters, two non-profit radio broadcasters and 85 electronic publications, which adorn the Montenegrin media scene. Four dailies and one weekly are published in Montenegro, and if we take into account that two local governments want to open new televisions, we come to an impressive number of over 165 media that share the same media space.
This, however, does not mean that the Montenegrin media scene is pluralistic. In contrast, the media in Montenegro are deeply polarized, and can most often be divided into two groups: “pro-government” and “pro-opposition”. The first is led by RTCG, which is recognized in numerous reports of relevant organizations, while the second group is best represented by the dailies “Dan” and “Vijesti”.
The different understanding of the profession and the role of journalists in a democratic society is the biggest common denominator of the Montenegrin media. That is why it is not surprising that self-regulation, despite numerous efforts by international factors, is at an extremely low level. Although the media scene has gone through numerous challenges since 2002 and the adoption of the Code of Ethics for Journalists of Montenegro, to date no single and / or efficient system of self-regulation has been established for all media. Until 2010, there was a Journalistic Self-Regulatory Body, which was disbanded precisely because of the different understanding of the profession of the two currents in the media system.
Several media outlets, mostly those less critical of the government, decided in 2012 to establish a Council for Media Self-Regulation. This body received petitions and complaints about ethical media coverage, even against those who did not access it and did not recognize its authority. This Association has never managed to build credibility, either due to the fact that it was financed by the Government, or due to “stronger” criticism of the media that are not its members. The association stoped accepting complaints in 2018, due to financial problems.
In April 2012, 11 local media established a Self-Regulatory Council for the local press. The way in which citizen can address this association, what their activities are and the results of its work, is still unknown to the public. This association does not have its own website.
The independent daily “Vijesti” appointed the Ombudsman in 2013. The website of that media outlet published how he could be addressed and the decisions of the Ombudsman are public. The analysis of the published decisions gives the impression of great professionalism of the Ombudsman, but also of the limited scope of his decisions. The daily “Dan” appointed the Ombudsman in 2014, since when he periodically publishes his decisions on the daily’s website. For the first 9 months of this year, the ombudsman of this highest-circulation print media decides on two complaints (both rejected). TV Vijesti also had an ombudsman, although not continuously. As far as the public is aware, this mechanism does not currently exist and the procedure for filing complaints is not known. The Ombudsman has recently introduced on the FOS media portal, but the details of who performs this function are not known and no report has been published so far. These self-regulatory mechanisms have their own rules, some of which can be problematic (one of the rules is that the applicant can only be the person mentioned in the article or his authorized representative).
Within the RTCG Council, there is a Commission for Petitions and Complaints of Listeners and Viewers, which consists of members of the Council. The Commission received 110 complaints for the period 2015-2018. The new Law on the National Public Broadcaster RTCG, which entered into force in August, plans to appoint an Ombudsman to take over the Commission’s responsibilities, which has not yet been done.
Although almost two decades have passed since the adoption of the Code of Ethics for Journalists of Montenegro, the process of self-regulation is still in its infancy. Disunity, lack of proactivity and relevance describe the activities of fragmented self-regulatory bodies in the Montenegrin media system. A broad consensus is needed on the understanding of ethical principles and their interpretation, in order to apply self-regulatory mechanisms in the same way. Greater transparency strengthens respect for ethical principles, and thus the role and reputation of the media. The problem of financial unsustainability of self-regulatory bodies has been recognized by relevant international organizations, but also by the state, so the new Law on Media envisages assistance through the new Fund for Media Pluralism.
