change font size

print version

copyright

Other languages:

Montenegrin referendum coverage debated

Podgorica

28 04 2006  BIRN Serbia and Montenegro organised a round-table debate in Podgorica on April 28 to discuss media coverage of the independence referendum campaign.

The debate focused in particular on the role of the media in both Serbia and Montenegro in the build up to the independence poll on May 21, when Montenegrins will vote to decide whether or not to remain in the existing state union with Serbia.

BIRN SaM director Dragana Nikolic-Solomon opened the debate by presenting a Serbian print media monitoring report, which was conducted by the Belgrade-based Social Sciences Institute. The study was based on the results of monitoring four Serbian daily newspapers - Politika, Vecernje Novosti, Blic and Kurir - during the first two weeks of April.

The report stated that most of the news and articles related to the Montenegrin referendum had negative connotations – in keeping with Serbian media’s attitude to the topic.

“The Serbian media is acting the same way as the Serbian government does - we don’t want to interfere but we cannot help ourselves,” said Nikolic-Solomon.

Zlatko Vujovic, executive director of the Monitoring Centre (CEMI), discussed the Montenegrin findings, which showed deep divisions amongst the media, with different media outlets supporting different political factions in the republic.

Other participants in the debate included Vojislav Raonic, director of the Montenegro Media Institute; Dragoljub Zarkovic, editor of the weekly newspaper Vreme; Vladan Micunovic, deputy editor of the daily Vijesti, and Danilo Vukovic, deputy editor of the daily Dan.

The main issue raised by participants was a lack of balance in both Serbian and Montenegrin media coverage in the run up to the referendum.

Representatives of other relevant organisations - such as the Association of Young Journalists, the Independent Journalists Organisation, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe, (OSCE), the Council of Europe, and the Association of Independent Electronic Media (UNEM) - also took part in what was a lively discussion.

“Asking the media to be absolutely neutral is unnatural,” said Raonic.

"You cannot expect them to give up their editorial policy, which is always closer to some political option, and which is also the reason why people read a particular newspaper or watch a TV station,” he added.
And Momcilo Stojanovic from the Broadcasting Agency stressed that people should not insist on an artificial balance.

“We should not find ourselves trapped by numbers and calculations on how much time and space is devoted to each option in Montenegro,” he said. “Daily events dictate the content of informative programmes.”

Vreme editor Dragoljub Zarkovic argued that there is a problem with political bias in the media.
“The Montenegrin media is so divided that even when reporting the same event, one cannot conclude [its members] are talking about the same thing,” he said.

“As for the Serbian media, it must be noticed that the Montenegrin referendum is not the top political issue in Serbia. An unbalanced attitude towards this topic is not necessarily deliberate. It can also be seen as a result of the generally low professional standards of the media,” he added.

Participants agreed that a lack of professional credibility in reporting and manipulation of the truth should be sanctioned, but it is hard to reach a relevant conclusion from quantitative, not qualitative analyses.

“Reports made by CEMI and the Institute for Social Sciences are not indicative in that sense,” said Raonic. “The media should not be judged based on the fact that it is writing more about one or another political party, but based on what and how they are writing.”

Journalists present at the debate also pointed out that it is not always possible to get an opinion from both sides of a debate, and that division in media is a reflection of the political reality.

“Only public service is obliged to be balanced, but other media outlets should also respect professional ethics and credibility - although the question of whom they are supporting is 100 per cent up to their editorial policy," said Ranko Vujovic from UNEM.

Montenegrin media professionals present at the debate said that the referendum is of such importance to Montenegrins that one cannot expect the media not to take a stand.

The overall consensus was that a lack of balanced media coverage was caused not only by elements of the media either opting for union with Serbia or for independence, but also by the lack of a professional code of ethics accepted by all parties, or a strong regulatory body for the media.

Media coverage of this event was excellent, and representatives from Vijesti, Dan, Republika, Pobjeda, Radio CG, TV CG, TV Montena, TV Elmag, Beta News Agency, TV Antena M, and Radio Free Europe were present.

The round table is part of the three-year-long Minority and Training Project, which was launched in 2005 with the support of the British embassy in Belgrade, through the UK Government's Global Opportunities Fund. For further information please contact BIRN SaM Director Dragana Nikolic-Solomon.