We live in a system where hate speech, methods of shaming, and degrading certain groups—primarily women and the LGBTIQ population—have been normalized. The consequences are increasing intolerance, conflicts, and incidents like those we saw at the Džada Film Festival. This was the key message from the second panel of CDT’s conference Disinformation and Human Rights: Who Is Bothered by Equality?
Marijana Camović Veličković from the Media Trade Union stressed that the biggest problem is that hate speech and inflammatory rhetoric often come from people holding state positions, from politicians, and then spill over onto political party sympathizers who are active online.
“We saw the case of Tea Gorjanc Prelević, where her husband and family were mentioned… That silencing attempt went on, and parties left it to their female members to carry out,” said Camović Veličković, also recalling the campaign waged against journalist Dragana Šćepanović.
“She was the target of the portal Aktuelno and businessman Zoran Bećirović, who made her life unbearable. It ended with Dragana seeking psychological help. The portal Aktuelno was ordered to compensate her and delete 12 or 13 articles out of a sea of them. These campaigns exist on social media, in real life, through the media—most often against women, who are the easiest target,” she said.
She added that many politicians, if stripped of their inflammatory rhetoric about religion and nation, would be left with nothing.
“We have ministers who have nothing to say except that kind of speech,” said Camović Veličković.
Danijel Kalezić from ERA LGBTIQ emphasized that Montenegro lacks a support system for people targeted by hate speech and disinformation.
“We don’t talk enough about the victims of hate speech. Those of us who work with victims of violence know that aspect, but as a society we don’t discuss enough what victims go through,” he said.
Regionally, he noted, all countries face the same problem with hate speech, but also the paradoxical situation where hate speech unites sides that are otherwise divided by national narratives and religious issues.
“When we start analyzing hate speech and link it to religious organizations and political parties, and the methods they use, it’s clear—they cooperate very well when it comes to hate speech. The goal is the erosion of democracy so that religious communities and political parties can exercise power unhindered. This is happening in Russia, and now in America. In Montenegro, we face the strongest Russian influence via Serbia and the Serbian Orthodox Church, and now also Turkish influence,” said Kalezić.
Anita Stjepčević from the Center for Women’s Rights said that the media serve as platforms of indoctrination, dissemination, and distribution of everyday waste reaching a mass audience.
“We live in a system that normalizes hate speech, that normalizes methods of shaming and degrading certain groups, primarily women and the LGBTIQ community. Its impact on human rights is evident in the case of the Džada Film Festival, or the incident with football fans in Zagreb,” Stjepčević noted.
Camović Veličković added that without external incentive, media rarely cover topics concerning vulnerable groups.
“Now Pride is coming up, so there will be coverage, but outside of such events, we don’t address any aspect of marginalized groups,” she said.
She highlighted the reporting of the Public Service broadcaster and its tolerance of hate speech in programs.
“On public service television, a journalist has the right to ask whether Pavle Đurišić was a war criminal. If you open a program with such a question, you’ve already broken all the rules—how will the rest of the program go? It went catastrophically, and in the end nothing came of it. There were some reactions, and then Džada happened. Instead of questioning the topics we should, we ask whether Pavle Đurišić was a war criminal with some obscure figures presented as university professors,” said Camović Veličković.
Kalezić noted that LGBTIQ activists used to take part in programs alongside people who openly supported discrimination and violence—under the pretext of objectivity and giving space to “the other side.”
“Journalists continuously invited us to participate with them, and we eventually said no. Public service no longer addresses these topics—they only did so the first year after the political shift. On the International Day Against Transphobia, they aired a report without a single Montenegrin voice,” he said.
Asked where the line is between constructive criticism of women in public life and misogyny, Stjepčević said that in a society steeped in undemocratic practices, it is very difficult.
“The moment we lack valid arguments, we ‘dig up’ husbands or alleged illegal properties. Regarding the insults directed at Tea Gorjanc Prelević—you can imagine how difficult it was to critically address a woman in politics from whom those insults came, a woman who was a guest at our panels, who built her career on gender equality, and it turned out to be spin. That is a mockery of gender equality. Her statement about ‘pretending to be a victim of supposed attacks’ was a huge disservice to our decades-long struggle against violence and for gender equality,” concluded Stjepčević, adding that in Montenegro, not only women in positions of power are targeted, but all women in public life.
Source: CDT