Sejdinović: Vlast da ostavi medije na miru i već je dovoljno

17/08/2018

BEOGRAD, 17.08.2018. – Vlada ima mogućnost da poboljša stanje na medijskoj sceni, imaju alate, a dovoljno bi unapredili medijsku scenu i samo da je malo ostave na miru – to bi bio veliki pomak, rekao je predsednik NDNV Nedim Sejdinović, govoreći o današnjem sastanku predstavnika novinarskih i medijskih udruženja i Koordinacionog tela u zgradi Vlade Srbije.

Šest novinarskih i medijskih udruženja predalo je danas zahteve Vladi Srbije u kojima navodi da od ispunjenja tih zahteva zavisi i njihovo učešće u izradi medijske strategije i davanje legitimiteta tom dokumentu. Zahtevi su predati na sastanku predstavnika novinarskih i medijskih udruženja sa Koordinacionim telom za saradnju sa medijima Vlade Srbije.

Sejdinović je u Danu uživo rekao da su udruženja izašla sa konkretnim zahtevima šta konkretno treba da se uradi kako bi medijska scena, na kojoj je, kako je rekao, jako loša situacija, bila makar malo unapređena.

Kroz 13 zahteva iznet je veliki kompleks problema sa kojima se savakodnevno suoačava medijska scena, kaže Sejdinović.

“Ukazali smo da dok mi vodimo dijalog, istovremeno se pogoršava stanje na medijskoj sceni, primer toga je i slučaj Južnih vesti”, rekao je on.

Jedan od glavnih zahteva je i promena odnosa političara prema medijima, dodao je.

“Tražili smo da se preduzmu neki koraci na poboljšanju medijske scene, jer ako hoće to i mogu, vlast je glavni generator problema, i da nam predoče šta su po našim zahtevima i učinili”, rekao je Sejdinović i dodao da se stekao utisak da je predstavnicima Koordinacionog tela “apsolutno jasno o čemu govorimo”.

Dodao je da su udruženja u razgovoru sa Anom Brnabić dobila čvrsta uveravanja da vlada želi da medijsku scenu promeni na bolje, i ne samo zbog želje da iz Brisela dobije bolju ocenu.

“Ali ako shvatimo da ne postoji političa volja i da (dijalogom) samo dajemo legitimitet za izradu Medijske stategije, mi ćemo od tog posla odustati,“ kazao je.

“Nisam siguran i uveren da vlada zaista želi da promeni stvari, ali nekada se u politici neke stvari donose pod pritiskom, i mi verujemo da proaktivnim stavom možemo da učinimo barem nešto za medijsku scenu”, dodao je on.

Kako je naveo, ako udruženja nastave dijalog i paralelno rešavaju tekuće probleme i ne bude opstrukcija “možda nešto i bude urađeno”.

“Možda ćemo se i povući (iz dijaloga), ali lopta je u dvorištu vlade, imaju mogućnosti da nešto promene, imaju alate, a dovoljno bi unapredili medijsku scenu samo da je malo ostave na miru – to bi bio veliki pomak”, zaključio je on.

Transparent media financing from public budgets and funds: trends and consequences

BHJA

17/08/2018

SARAJEVO, 17.08.2018.-According to available data provided by the NGO sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina, media houses in BiH receive over BAM 10,0 million on an annual level from public budgets and funds and there is no access or inquiry in the criteria of these allocations. Money is allocated to media houses from different income lines and the biggest problem of transparency is present in media houses on local levels.

This form of media financing contributes in the process of media sustainability in the small and rather poor market in Bosnia and Herzegovina and under the circumstances where most media houses dispose of insufficient potential income financial sources. Absence and lack of transparency of amounts and procedures of allocation of these financial means, including undefined and unclear criteria, open room for possible and eventual misuses and also obstruct the perception of the general public, regarding the legitimacy of such allocations, including media independence, as the users of these financial means.

Sarajevo Media Center implemented a survey covering this specific issue and their report comprised the information and data provided by the CRMA (Center for Media Development and Analysis) from 2013 and 2014 suggesting that media financing from public budget, including regular and public media financing, individual financing for both, public and private media houses, and money allocated for various promoting and commercial advertising, was around BAM 30, 0 million per year.

Branka Mrkić-Radević, zurnal.info (local website) female journalist, claims that one of the most important segments that governing bodies implement is an allocation of financial means through commercial advertising of public companies. Zurnal. info also did a survey and research regarding this specific issue. “Despite the fact that these (public) companies are partially owned by entity-level governments, which means that they also are entitled to budget financial means receiving, the information regarding the allocation of these financial means are often not transparent and unavailable. The biggest financial budget for this particular purpose is certainly in hands of telecom operators and providers such as BH Telecom and HT Eronet”, claimed Radevic – Mrkic.

She stated that significant funds are allocated by Elektroprivreda (op.a. Electrical Distribution Public Enterprise), Autoputevi RS (Motorways of the Republic of Srpska) and Autoceste Federacije (Motorways of the Federation of BiH) as well. “Taking into consideration that leading functions and executive boards are run and managed by political party individuals or groups, financial means are often allocated and distributed to biased media houses, that would, in particular, way, make and broadcast reports regarding the affirmative and positive results conducted by local governing authorities in return. By doing this, public companies represent an ideal channel for dispersing personal interests and media control. Pre-election campaigns are also financed in this specific way, because the financial means for commercial advertising are significantly increased during the pre-election period”, claimed Radevic – Mrkic Radevic – Mrkic also confirmed the existence and presence of “alternative” media houses, having absolutely no chance in allocation of the above mentioned financial means, because they can manage and operate without being subjects to political party influences and impacts the politics often impose.

“Media means are also dispersed through various projects implemented by governments at all levels through grants, funds etc. The government of the Republic of Srpska allocated millions of BAM for all media houses supporting the present governing authorities and their political system. During the survey and research process Elektroprivreda HZHB (op.a. Electrical Distribution Public Enterprise), and HT Eronet Mostar were exceptionally non – transparent in terms of cooperation and information sharing”, said Radevic – Mrkic.

Money for media through public budget sources non – transparent

Anida Sokol from Sarajevo Media Center explained to us, through the interview we had with her, about how the governing authorities allocate money to media houses, how transparent those allocations are in reality; what kind of criteria the governing authorities accept and do all media houses have the same treatment as far as financing from public budget sources is concerned. “There are two basic ways by which the governing authorities in BiH finance media houses: through direct allocations and through commercial advertising.

It is important to outline here that in BiH, biggest money amount is dispersed (almost two-thirds of the total amount) to public cantonal and local broadcasters (there are 81 TV public radio and TV broadcasters in BiH), as well as to entity-level news agencies (FENA and SRNA). Public broadcasting service media houses (BHRT, FTV, and RTRS) should normally be financed through the system of RTV Tax Fess payment and through commercial advertising marketing sources, which represents (to some extent) editing independence. However, because of the fact that the amount that should have been collected through the RTV Tax Fee payments has rapidly decreased, BiH governing authorities (at all levels), have been allocating financial means to public service broadcasters as well.

Additionally, Republic of Srpska government allocated BAM 2, 0 million last year to RTRS due to financial struggle this public broadcaster was in. This year, Republic of Srpska government shall allocate less than BAM 3, 0 million to public media houses. Another way which governing authorities use for allocation of public budget financial means is through commercial advertising which again is part of the public procurement system. Most public money for commercial advertising is spent by public companies with telecom operators (providers) leading this list, but also governments at all levels buy this media space, including advertising services and prepayments.

Therefore, for instance, local governing authorities spend around BAM 200,00 for a single greeting post message in the local newspaper and this amount often reaches up to BAM 100.000,00 for television broadcasting advertising the work of local authorities, including city or municipal mayor, local assemblies etc”, claimed Sokol. After being asked about the transparency and criteria required for media financing, Sokol said that detailed and precise long-term surveys and analysis are required in order to attain at least partial information regarding the amount of money that the governments have been allocating to media houses and this fact, as far as the non-transparency of this process is concerned.

Allocation to media houses should be issued and released by government authorities in a proactive manner and the allocated money amounts should be consolidated and available to the general public. Budget by governing authorities is to some extent unavailable and subject to further survey and research and often it is very difficult to determine the exact amount of money allocated to certain media houses. Media financing is often classified as the collective budget item such as “means aimed for informing”, and thus it is almost impossible to identify the end user of these financial means.

Furthermore, governing authorities do not reply and respond to inquiries regarding these specific kinds of allocations, and the media houses also fail to release an issue proactively all relevant information in relation with the amount of money they receive from public budget funds. Public media should, pursuant to entity-level laws and legislative on public companies, release and issue information regarding their financial business operating, although no public media houses have ever done this.

For example, Media Center has implemented the survey and research on local public media houses and our researches sent a questionnaire to public local and cantonal broadcasters in BiH (81 in total) and only 14 of these replied and answered to our questions, in regard with earnings and incomes deriving from public budget funds”, said Sokol. The fact that media houses (broadcasting and posting reports where they openly criticize governing authorities) do not receive money from governing officials, does indeed speak for itself. However, we cannot claim that media houses are the only entity biased towards political parties that receive public budget money through many different ways; but also, media that do not broadcast or post critics directed to local governing officials.

Bearing in mind the decline of earnings deriving from commercial advertising sources, the BiH governing authorities have become an increasing and significant source of earnings for media houses. Public money is required and necessary for media survival and this money should be directed to encourage media pluralism. However, without the existence and presence of clear and precise criteria, including transparent actions, this, as a result, could open room for eventual political and financial pressures. Sokol also said that with local and cantonal based media houses, for which local and cantonal governing authorities (as their founders) must allocate money based on the founding and establishing contracts.

There were cases of financial conditioning and blackmailing or even financial budget cuts. Journalists even mentioned the presence of auto-censorship and the fact that their writing was too critical towards local governing authorities since they were their main source of financing and incomes. “City and municipal mayors and local level assemblies could randomly make decisions regarding the amount of financial funding and thus impose local media houses with pressure. It is also problematic that certain local governments with already its local public radio, pay private radio station for following the work of this local government and there are many similar cases if you go through the site of public procurements.

The survey and research conducted by non – government sector also outlined to possible samples of the instrument – based and commercial relationships between the public sector and media, purely based on political interests. Similar misuses are normally not confirmed by court verdicts and it is certain that the lack of legislative and monitoring in this particular field allows eventual misuses”, claimed Sokol.

Money for biased, not for unbiased

Marija Arnautovic, a long-term TV Liberty female journalist, and editor working at Radio Europe emphasized that money in Bosnia and Herzegovina is in many different segments, allocated, dispersed and distributed to biased groups or individuals, rather than to unbiased groups or individuals and to those who indeed deserve it. The situation is the same with money allocation to media houses. Unfortunately, there is no reliable information indicating how much, how and when any governing level authorities allocated financial means and thus funded certain media houses; however, the fact is that this money has been unequally allocated and dispersed in rather non – transparent way.

“What is known today is the fact that local governing authorities finance local media houses and that these media houses are mostly under the strong influence of the same local governing authorities. This kind of operating does jeopardize and endanger not only media freedoms and liberties but also eliminates every single type of creativity and better broadcasting program. Also, the case of public service broadcasters confirms, particularly concerning those operating in the Republic of Srpska, about this, rather enormous influence and impact imposed by the local governing authorities. I personally believe that it is not only the money (deriving from public budget lines) that influences the work of certain media house but also the money coming from big companies investing into media as these companies, according to certain surveys and research, mostly include public companies such as Telecom operators (providers) or Elektroprivreda (Electrical distribution company) which again are, also under the political influence. All of this may lead to emerging of a bedazzled circle where limited number of media houses, independent from political influences or powerful lobbies or individuals, which eventually results in poor quality program, journalists’ safety and everything that journalism should comprehend and which, above any other thing, should serve the general public interest and sustain with providing of correct, true and accurate information”, claimed Arnautovic.

In BiH, there is a so-called “unofficial rule” claiming that parties making the govern- ing coalition is “determined” to automatically rule and manage state-owned and public companies, public services, and many other institutions, which should fundamentally serve all citizens in the most appropriate way. This, of course, is not the case and both, the institutions and media houses, become servants of governing authorities and eventually become their spokespersons. Ivana Maric, a female political analyst says that money allocation for media displays an impeccable mean for public service blackmailing. “Public media services are in exceptionally independent positions because of the power they possess in terms of influencing the public opinion.

Additionally, any changes to government levels produces the changes in managing or supervising boards within public media houses, in terms of employees; many people lose their jobs and are dismissed and those so-called “non-obeying” journalists are degraded; inconvenient analysts are no more invited and asked to provide their expert comments and views, and those that are considered biased and obeying are on the other hand, favored and made priorities””, said Maric. She reckoned that this is not the only way where governing authorities impose pressure upon media houses, including both private and public media houses. Punishing and awarding media houses is done by the governing authorities through marketing controlling, where they define and determine which companies they shall advertise and for how long. “If media houses obey and are biased towards the local governing politics, they shall in return be provided with extra incomes and consequently make extra profit, on the other hand, if they dare to instigate, initiate or launch any story they shouldn’t or story where they criticize the governing authorities, they shall certainly pay the price for disobeying such politics through the budget money allocation, which in most cases will be significantly reduced or even terminated permanently.

As long as financial flows and money allocation dispersed to media houses is not clearly distinct from an ongoing politics, we cannot expect professional and independent journalism. Until this happens we shall witness media houses and journalists “playing the tune as conducted by a band leader”, because they shall find themselves in a position where they (and this does make sense in terms of financial existence) have to keep their jobs and provide financial existence for themselves and their families.

The certain number of media houses is somehow managing the resist local political influences although they mostly base their work on critics directed towards illegal actions and operations done by local governing authorities. They manage to survive and sustain primarily with the help and aid provided by international financiers”, emphasized Maric. For the time being, there has been no concrete concept of public interests which should be served through various types of financing. Public media in BiH, including three public RTV services, local and cantonal broadcasters and entity – level agencies, are now placed in the specific position of a complete dependability by the local governing authorities. One of the main reasons for such occurrences is incongruously actual forms of their financing.

This text is a part of E-Bulletin– sixth edition of special serial of BHN online bulletin implemented through the “Media and Public Reputation” (origin. “Mediji i javni ugled”) project, also representing a contribution to public debate regarding the transparency of media ownership and upholding and encouraging the passing of set of laws aimed to advance media field and information market in BiH.

AJM advocates against political propaganda in the media

AJM

16/08/2018

SKOPJE, 16.08.2018 – Representatives of the Association of Journalists of Macedonia today and yesterday had meetings with diplomats that have accreditation in Skopje. The President of AJM Naser Selmani and the Executive Director Dragan Sekulovski, had separate meetings with the French Ambassador Christian Thimonier, the Dutch Ambassador in Macedonia, Wouter Plomp, the Deputy Ambassador of the Delegation of the European Union in Skopje, Lukas Holub, US Embassy in Skopje political adviser Paul Graden.

At the meetings, the President of AJM expressed great concern about the recent amendments to the Election Code for the legalization of political propaganda in the media with public money and the indirect regulation of the online media, which could have a negative effect on the freedom of the media.

Selmani explained to the interlocutors that the government and the opposition want to make political propaganda in the media during the election campaign and with that to restore the old corruptive system between politics and media owners like in the regime of Gruevski. He thinks that the money that media will receive from the political parties for publishing political propaganda will make the media financially dependent, and that will affect their editorial policy.
He urged diplomats to put pressure on the government and after the referendum to withdraw the possibility of using public money for political propaganda and also to remove the possibility for the State Election Commission to register and punish online media during the election campaign or referendums.

The representatives of AJM also discussed with the diplomats about the inefficiency of the Public Prosecution and the Court to quickly and efficiently process attacks against journalists. In addition, they believe that the public calls by government officials to the management of Macedonian Radio Television to resign are counterproductive and do not contribute for the reform of the public service.

The case of Juzne vesti – IJAS letter to the PM Brnabic

IJAS

16/08/2018

BELGRADE, 16.04.2018. – On April 11th, Independent journalists association of Serbia sent a letter to the Prime Minister of Serbia, Ani Brnabic, on the occasion of the pressure on the news portal “Juzne vesti” from Nis. We report the letter in full.

We call on you to stand up for defence of journalistic and media freedoms and, in accordance with your role as the highest official of the Government of the Republic, take appropriate steps to stop the administrative pressures that endanger the survival of independent media in Serbia.

The pressure on the news portal “Juzne vesti” from Nis is the latest reason for our address. In the last five months, “Juzne vesti” editorial staff has been exposed to inexplicable tax inspections – the fifth time in the last five years – suggesting that it is actually a kind of pressure on the most read portal in the south of Serbia.

Employees in that media are convinced that frequent controls that hinder their work significantly are motivated by the dissatisfaction of local authorities due to critical reporting of “Juzne vesti”. They believe that inspections are politically motivated controls ordered by people from the very top of the Nis City government.

“Juzne vesti” journalists, who won prestigious awards for investigative journalism, are facing serious problems continuously. They are being threatened and lawsuits are frequent, while its editor-in-chief was followed and secretly filmed. During public competition for co-financing the production of media content of public interest, local self-governments in southern Serbia regularly avoid the “Juzne vesti” while pressure is exerted on the companies that advertise on the portal.

The first time tax inspectors visited “Juzne vesti” was in 2013 – they reviewed the financial documentation for eight months.

During 2014 inspection checked media business twice: the reason for the first inspection was to determine whether the editorial office used legal software, while during the second visit, the media was required to explain its business relationship with some of the clients – companies that are business partners of the Simplicity software company, the owner of the “Juzne vesti”.

In November 2017, a new control took place: two tax inspections arrived to go through the financial documentation of “Juzne vesti” at the same time. While previous inspections had rather specific orders and covered relatively short period, the last one included the period since “Juzne vesti” was established – 2009. The tax inspection is still on-going, after five months.

Formal reasons for all inspection visits are alleged anonymous reports to the Tax Authority.

It is important to highlight that, so far, the Tax Authority has never detected any problems in the business of this media. This is an additional reason for doubts about the real motives of frequent, long, exhausting inspections. In addition, the tax inspection did not respond to “Juzne vesti” requests for information about whether the business of other media are being subjected to inspections in the same or similar way.

We remind you that the recent years saw several cases of media that critically reported about the functioning of the authorities subjected to the tax control in such unusual manner. We would also like to highlight that the abuse of tax authorities in order to deal with “unsuitable” media has become a new form of pressure – this was also recognised in the latest report by Freedom House.

You must be aware that the tax authorities controlled “Vranjske” weekly in early September 2017 and that the media was later shut down due to the political and economic pressures by the local authorities. After its closure, it was officially announced that the tax inspection did not determine any irregularities in the business of that weekly.

“Kikindske” weekly also had problems with the tax administration that made a mistake and left the media in the financial blockade for six months in 2015. The weekly couldn’t be published for three months, which was enough to lose some advertisers.

This year’s Freedom House report stated a downward trend of democracy in Serbia – among other reasons, due of attempts to weaken critical journalists by arbitrary tax investigations, denying advertising revenues and direct intimidation.

More information about the case:

Predrag Blagojevic, editor in chief of “Juzne vesti” told IJAS that on 10.04.2018 he received a new inspection warrant prolonging the control until 15.05.2018. The warrant stated two new inspectors. On the same day Blagojevic received information from 4 “Juzne vesti” clients that they received inspection warrant and a day later the same information from 4 more clients. Each was allocated 2 inspectors. Based on documentation he received, Blagojevic identified minimum 14 tax inspectors allocated to “Juzne vesti” case.

On the same day Harlem Desir, OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, met a group of journalists and representatives of media associations, including Predrag Blagojevic who briefed Mr Desir about the situation.

On 11.04.2018 IJAS published the open letter to Ana Brnabic.

Mr Desir held meetings with the Prime Minister Brnabic and President Vucic.

FoNet news agency published information that PM Brnabic cabinet told them that Brnabic had spoken to the director of Tax Authority on Tuesday, 10.04.2018 about the controls in “Juzne vesti”. It was highlighted that the control should end in the shortest period of time to avoid hindering the work of media, unless there are indications that it should be broadened.

Blagojevic states that there is no evidence that Brnabic reaction was initiated by Mr Desir meetings with PM Brnabic and President Vucic.

Shadows from the Past

IJAS

15/08/2018

SKOPJE, 15.08.2018. – Instead of Macedonian ruling and opposition politicians, arriving for a recent meeting meant to come up with an agreement on some very important issues, the photo journalists waiting to take their pictures became the subject of media reports. As it happened, the reporters were not allowed to photograph those entering the MP Club where the meeting was to take place, which until then was a regular practice.

Among those prevented from doing their job was photo journalist Borce Popovski.

“We were told that for security reasons we cannot stand in the place where we stood so many times in the past. When we protested, the police told us to discuss the matter with the Protocol Service, and the Protocol Service told us to discuss the matter with the police,” Popovski says.In protest, the photo journalists put down their cameras and refused to take any pictures.

All media associations in Macedonia reacted to this incident in which their colleagues were not allowed to carry out their duty. They demanded that media professionals be let do their tasks without hindrance.

“We protested, but were in turn insulted by being told that we have been silent for so long, but now dare be loud and protest,” says Tamara Causidis, president of the Independent Trade Union of Journalists of Macedonia.

She referred to the words uttered by Marjan Zabrcanec, public relations adviser of Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev.

Namely, when the photo journalists protested and said they had been using that spot for taking pictures for long and that this sudden ban was unacceptable, Zabrcanec told them: “You have kept quiet for 11 years while being trampled on. And now you are brave enough to speak up!” The adviser alluded to the years while the VMRO-DPMNE party was in power and while the media were exposed to strong pressure and control by the government led by Nikola Gruevski.

“My mention of 11 years of their being trampled on was a reaction to their accusations that we are trampling on journalists. I cannot and will never accept such claims because our attitude is quite different and we are truly in favor of professionalism and free reporting by all news media,” Zabrcanec says.

A day after the ban, the journalists were allowed to take photographs of the leaders coming to a new meeting from their habitual spot – the entrance to the MP Club.

Zabrcanec says that the misunderstanding has been overcome.

“In cooperation with security services a solution was found according to which a group of photo journalists wishing to do so can take pictures both at the entrance and inside the Club, in accordance with the security protocol,” he added.

The dispute ended with a joint photograph being taken of photo journalists and members of the Macedonian Government Protocol Service in front of the Club.

Both the photo journalists and media associations want to believe that it was truly only a misunderstanding and not a result of lack of understanding of the media professionals’ tasks. Association of Journalists of Macedonia representatives have warned that such incidents are a direct attack on freedom of the press and an attempt to criminalize the work of journalists, depicting them in public as dangerous people. They say that if there were indeed security reasons for introducing a new practice in covering public events, the police should have informed the photo journalists and cameramen in advance so that they could find an alternative way to do their job properly, instead of creating confusion and disputes.

“These unnecessary incidents are seriously compromising the attempts of the new authorities led by the Social Democratic Alliance of Macedonia to, as they put it, rule transparently, and are reviving the shadows from the past,” the Association said.

Nine months in prison against journalist attackers

AJK

15/08/2018

PRISTINA, 15.08.2018 – Local court in Vushtrri sentenced two individuals to nine months in prison for the physical assault they committed against a journalist in January 2016.

Basic Court in Mitrovica, branch in Vushtrri brought a verdict on Tuesday sentencing Nexhat Dedia to five month in prison and Labinot Krasniqi to four months for the attack against journalist, Gazmend Morina.

Dedia and Krasniqi were accused of threat and light body injury for the physical attack against Morina that occurred on January 26th, 2018.

Basic Prosecution in Mitrovica filed an indictment on July 20th, 2016 and it was presented by prosecutor Jelena Marinovic.

Journalist Morina was physically attacked and beaten by metal rod by former assembly member of Mitrovica Municipality, Nexhat Dedia together with Labinot Krasniqi, due to the journalist’s story.

Montenegro: 35 portals registered

TUMM

15/08/2018

PODGORICA, 15.08.2018. – A total number of 35 electronic publications, or portals, were registered in Montenegro until July 2018.

In addition to news portals, websites of some non-governmental organizations can also be seen among registered publications on the website of the Agency for Electronic Media (AEM).

Electronic publications, or portals, have been registered since the beginning of 2016, after the Agency for Electronic Media (AEM) passed the Rulebook on Electronic Publications, which, among other things, defines the ways of their establishment.

It is considered that the number of active portals in Montenegro is much higher, but they do not suffer sanctions if they aren’t registered.

The Working Group for the drafting of the Media Law was also dealing with this issue, which envisaged new forms of registration and establishment of the portal.

Media market in BiH: lack of transparency in online sphere

BHJA

15/08/2018

SARAJEVO, 15.08.2018.-According to their experience, Press Council of BiH and online media confirmed that over 60 per cent of media houses to whose reporting general public and citizens usually complain are indeed media houses with no Impressum- we don’t know who the owners are, who the journalists and editors are, there are no addresses or contact phone numbers.

This means that people (viewers) that are offended or insulted by certain posts posted on web pages of these media houses cannot get any satisfaction, nor receive public apologies, as these media house can easily continue to spread false and fake information thus confusing the public audience. Nermina Voloder, a female surveyor, and researcher has an article (text) posted by Sarajevo Media Center proved that a significant number of media houses that, despite the fact that they rely on public budget financial means in the first place, have no Impressum and there are platforms amongst online media that have not even been registered as legal and official businesses, so the question is who is backing them up, who is supporting them and what is the purpose of their activities.

“We live in times loaded with many false and fake news, manipulations, fabricated news, news that have been redesigned, rectified and tailored to favor certain individuals or groups as they all reach viewing audience and all of this false and fake news is followed with enormous amount of comments resulting in the occurrence of vast hate speech and this goes on and on in this bedazzled circle. We witness a great number of online media houses with absolutely no information regarding the contact details of responsible people and these pages often have no contact numbers in case someone decided to reply, respond or deny posted false information, lies or manipulation and this person eventually wouldn’t know whom to address”, explained Ljiljana Zurovac, executive director of the Press Council of BiH.

She emphasized that freedom of information must be followed by the responsibility of information being posted in public. “During the present, that is, during the election year we are in, the so-called online media emerges and appears out of nowhere and it is certain that political parties or individuals support them (we don’t know who they are), but we could only assume this, according to contents they post, mostly in order to degrade and devalue their political opponents or remove them from political scene thus directing the general public against them. These people are recognized as sleepers that suddenly “wake up” and become active every two years (elections are held every two years in BiH); they are engaged for few months and they vanish once again, while we have no information regarding the owner’s details and so on. It is thus impossible to incorporate and integrate these kinds of media into the Election Law of BiH and put them into the framework of regular and acceptable behavior during the pre-election period, particularly during the pre-election silence period”, reminds Zurovac.

It was because of this specific situation that the Association of BH Journalists, along with their partners: Press Council of BiH, Media Center and JaBiHEU, a local NGO, have altogether been instigating and insisting on passing the law that would advance media space and information market in BiH, through the implementation of the following project “Media and Public Reputation”. This project’s goal is to provide the protection for free expression and speech, to reduce pressures on journalists and to promote free access to information through the media ownership transparency, through transparent media financing from public budget lines and through the implementation of European standards in this particular field.

Currently, the preparation of this law, that would regulate this specific field, is in ongoing stage, including the participation and involvement of international and local experts, various institutions and their representatives, non – government organizations and other interested parties. “Non – transparent cash flows directed to media houses, as a consequence of the unsettled media market in Bosnia and Herzegovina, brings media houses into financial dependency. This dependability necessarily contains requests and demands by political loyalty, including serving to particular political, ethnic, national, economic or other lobbies, interest-based groups; instead of serving the public, which consequently questions the public media reputation and integrity, its authenticity and public trust and confidence in contents and programs that media houses broadcast.

Due to non – transparent spending of budget money directed to media financing at all governing levels in BiH, non – transparent and non-democratic ties and bounds between politicians and media are being established as a result”, explained Arman Fazlic, website, and publications editor and administrator with the Association of BH Journalists. According to available information provided by special marketing agencies, the financial means for marketing in media have, for the period of last 10 years, decreased by 80%, but the means deriving from the official authorities have become more significant, including grants, commercial advertising, death announcements etc.

Sanela Hadzic, a female surveyor, and researcher with Sarajevo Media Center said that there are no international norms bounding any country to ensure and provide media ownership transparency, but this request is implicated in all international documents, with the insisting on guarantees related to freedom of expression, media pluralism and rights to receive and be provided with information.

She emphasized that media ownership transparency is important above all, for the prevention of corruption and money laundry, and that in the world, especially after the affair of Mossack Fonseca or Panama Papers and similar, more and more countries decide to establish public registries with relevant and accurate information, regarding the details about the company owners, including media owners as well. “Best samples of registries shall include information, not only about nominal but also about intermediate and final owners. In some countries, the procedure of licensing of TV and Radio broadcasters include information collecting regarding the political ties by persons having shares in TV and radio broadcasting houses, as is the case in Great Britain. In countries such as Norway, Latvia, and Iceland, there are applications with required information regarding the ownership over electronic, printed and online media. Norway even passed to Law on Transparency of Media Ownership and in Croa- tia, the transparency norms exist as part of the Law on Electronic Media and Law on Media”, explained Hadzic and highlighted that greater scope of information would ensure and provide better opportunity for following of different interest, including those of media ownership, so some countries require information regarding media companies and their interests in other non – media companies or they seek information on what kind of business subjects ties exist and who is having close contact with media owners what do they have in their possession (including assets and properties).

Turcilo warned that the general public, that is, citizens, unfortunately, do not have sufficient developed competencies of identifying and recognizing the handle of power and mechanisms of influence in media. “I am afraid that, even if we manage to establish and define the Registry of Media, with clear list of media owners, it will take some time until citizens learn and get used to checking this kind of information and accordingly, have thorough thinking about certain media houses But, what is also important to outline, is to insist that media should have clear, clearly recognized and easily accessed Impressum with identified information regarding the owners, including also the persons writing for particular media house, editors and directors as well.

This shall enable citizens to have better comprehension and understandings of the program contents in the significantly wider sense, but would also allow them to acquire their legal rights should they complain regarding the contents posted by certain media. Many websites operate with no Impressum, and if you want to file in a complaint to Press Council of BiH for inappropriate contents – the rule defines that a claimer should send a request to the editor to rectify, re-correct or eventually remove the disputable content, before filing in a complaint to the Council. How can this be done if there is no information about the editor?

Therefore, it is clear and obvious that particular media houses deliberately and intentionally avoid being transparent in order to avert responsibility. This trend should be changed”, explained Turcilo. Zurovac also reckons that an insignificant number of citizens decide to check Impressum of certain media. “Significant number of people, randomly, non – selectively and based on ad – hoc belief, accept all information they encounter on the internet, including information posted on social media, considering this information to be true and correct; regardless to the fact that this can be quite opposite, since the information posted on the internet could lead them to make wrong decisions.

It is, therefore, necessary to create solid law on media ownership transparency, as soon as possible, and this law should have the guideline that would legally oblige every single media house to have Impressum, including the information about the owners, editing office with precise details regarding the people being engaged there, contact phone numbers, addresses and thus additionally send a clear message to those willing to start this particular business, that they shall be legally obliged to share all of the above-mentioned information”, said Zurovac. The ownership transparency issue in media sector has been treated as one of the most crucial question in reports provided by the European Commission, regarding the progress of BiH society, as they announced that this specific issue shall be subject to detailed discussion during the releasing of opinion by the European Commission, as far as the BiH application for joining the European Union is concerned.

“Media are socially responsible organizations ensuring that citizens, as users of their services, receive fair, objective, duly and checked information from unbiased sources and through unbiased channels, and it is through media ownership, that ties between owners with political, economic and other powerful figures, can be “noted”, as all of this would allow citizens to recognize and identify mechanisms of selectivity, interpretations, and contextualization of news and information in particular media houses. Therefore, ownership transparency enables citizens to note purchases of power, that may be bound to media, and thus affect and influence their contents”, explained Lejla Turcilo, a professor at the Faculty of Political Studies in Sarajevo.

Communication Regulatory Agency in BiH defined relationships in electronic media, because if someone decided to broadcast the program, she/ he must be provided with the license to use frequency (which is legally treated as national property), and in order to obtain this license, she/he must submit the company registry certificate issued by a local court. License holders for using frequency must report every change in ownership structure and cannot sell their license/s to themselves or transfer them/it from one owner to another; instead this must be approved every time by the CRA officials – explained CRA officials and admitted that even they cannot be certain whether the company court registry (submitted by new applicants) always contained true and correct information, as far as the information about media owners is concerned, or whether there was a third party standing and backing them up. Hodzic thus reminded that there were CRA registries for license users for audio and visual broadcasting, but the information on intermediate and tied (linked) owners was not listed within these registries. Apart from the program content being broadcasted, ownership over media houses is also important as far as the labor rights are concerned, including all staff be- ing employed and engaged with certain media house, since these rights are often violated, although no one ever releases these kinds of problems.

“Female and male journalists in BiH are mostly deprived of labor rights in the media industry – there is a very limited number of media houses that defer all legal duties defined and prescribed by the labor laws, as far as media employees are concerned. Unsettled media market in BiH, the unclear ownership structure of television, newspapers, radio station and websites, political influences and pressures on journalists, turned, to some extent, media professionals into a state of a complete dependability. How many female and male journalists are on the market, how much do they earn and what are the monthly wages (salaries) they receive, how many of them are engaged in more than a single project, how much do freelancers make, who, among these receive untaxed honorary amounts based on cash – in –hands method, who works by the author’s contract rules; altogether represent issues and questions that any democratic society (system) should reply and answer to, by the implementation of legislative, in terms of ownership over media houses, including financing system and commercial advertising in media houses”, appealed Fazlic.

Jasminka Dzumhur, Ombudsman/Ombudsmen for Human Rights in BiH, reminded that journalists have often been recognized as victims in relation with fundamental violations of human rights, but they, in most cases did not openly talk about their problems. “They are afraid that they might lose the status they already have, although their status is not labor – legal status, in terms of legislative; it is rather considered as receiving of minimum honorary, mostly in cash, without having paid legal contribution for health, social and other types of security and the owner must be held responsible for labor – legal status of all employees and eventually show, in most appropriate and transparent way, the details of persons she/he, as the owner, employs, so the general public and citizens could be aware of the credibility these employees have, as far as the labor rights of employees are concerned”, explained Dzumhur.

Turcilo further added that, when it comes to legal rights of employees in the media field, transparent ownership allows clear setting of the principles, regarding the negotiations with employers, if required details about the owner were clear and transparent as well. “It conduced to greater responsibility of the owner towards the employees, because it would then be possible to make clear distinction how the owners, individuals or companies increased their incomes over their employees shoulders, because they mostly made their extra profit based on the principle of the initial accumulation of their capital”, claims Turcilo. Hodzic concluded that in BiH, at this particular moment, the regulation of media ownership and me- dia financing in BiH has been on a minimum level, because hidden ownership has in no way been disallowed and disapproved, including the instrumentalization of public funds for personal promotion, instead of promoting journalism and advancing the public need for communications.

Senke iz prošlosti

IJAS

15/08/2018

Na poslednjem liderskom sastanku, na kojem su se okupili makedonski političari vlasti i opozicije u nastojanju da postignu dogovor o važnim pitanjima, umesto političara vest su postali fotoreporteri. Desilo se to da fotoreporterima nije bilo dozvoljeno da fotografišu lidere poltičkih partija pred ulazom u Klub poslanika, u kojem se održavao liderski susret.

Nešto što je na brojnim prethodnim liderskim sastancima bilo sasvim normalno, na mestu na kojem su prethodno radili neometano. Medju njima je bio i fotoreporter Borče Popovski.

“Rečeno nam je da iz bezbednosnih razloga ne smemo da stojimo tu gde smo prethodno snimali lidere i radili. Policija nam je rekla da se dogovorimo sa protokolom, a protokol da je policija tako rekla i sve vreme su prebacivali loptu”, kaže fotoreporter Borče Popovski.

Tada su u znak protesta fotoreporteri spustili fotoaparate na zemlju i nisu pravili fotografije sa liderskog sastanka .

Na onemogućavanje fotoreporterima da rade reagovala su sva novinarska udruženja u Makedoniji. Zatražili su da se medijskim radnicima dozovoli da nesmetano rade.

“Reagovali smo na komentare i na pokušaj da fotoreporterima iz bezbednosnih razloga ne bude dozvoljeno da stoje na ulazu objekta u kojem se održavao liderski sastanak, uz nedolične komentare tipa: ćutali ste do sada, pa ste sada našli da pričate”, kaže Tamara Čausidis, predsednik Samostalnog sindikata novinara Makedonije.

Taj komentar o kojem govori Čausidis su u stvari reči Marjana Zabrčaneca, savetnika premijera Makedonije Zorana Zaeva za odnose sa javnošću.

Kada su se fotoreporteri požalili da su do sada fotografisali sa tog mesta i da je ovakav odnos neprihvatljiv, Zabračanec im je poručio:

“Ćutali ste 11 godina dok su vas gazili. Sada ste našli da govоrite!”.

Tim rečima je aludirao na godine vladavine VMRO-DPMNE, tokom koje su mediji bili pod snažnim pritiskom i kontrolom vlasti Nikole Gruevskog.

“Reakcija u vezi 11 godina gaženja bila je reakcija na verbalne napade da gazimo novinare. Ne mogu da se složim i nikada se neću saglasiti sa tim, jer mi delujemo suprotno takvom načinu ponašanja i zalažemo se za profesionalnost i slobodno izveštavanje u svim medijima”, kaže Zabrčanec.

Dan nakon zabrane, na novom liderskom sastanku fotoreporterima je dozvoljeno da fotografišu sa stare lokacije, na ulazu u Klub poslanika.

Zabrčanec kaže da je taj nesporazum već prevazidjen.

“U koordinaciji sa bezbednosnim službama pronadjeno je rešenje da deo medija, koji žele, mogu da fotografišu i na ulazu i unutra, u skladu sa bezbednosnim protokolom”, kaže Zabrčanec.

Celi spor je završen i sa zajedničkom fotografijom fotoreportera i protokola Vlade Makedonija, pred Klubom poslanika.

I snimatelji I novinarska udruženja žele da veruju da se radi samo o nesporazumu, a ne o neshvatanju rada medijskih radnika.

Iz Udruženja novinara Makedonije (ZNM) upozorili su da ovi incidenti predstavljaju direktan napad na slobodu medija i pokušaj da se kriminalizuje rad medijskih radnika, koji u javnosti treba da se predstave kao opasni ljudi. Ako je i bilo bezbednosnih razloga za uvodjenje nove prakse za pracenje javnih dogadjaja, tada je policija na vreme trebalo da izvesti fotoreportere I snimatelje da bi se obezbedio alternativni način za pokrivanje dogadjaja, bez pravljena zabune I nervoze.

“Ovakvi nepotrebni incidenti, ozbiljno kompromituju i zalaganje nove vlasti Socijaldemokratskog saveza Makedonije (SDSM) za transparentno I odogovrno vladanje I vraćaju senke iz prošlosti”, smatra Udruzenje (ZNM).

1...306307308...469 Page 307 of 469

Safejournalists.net