Author: Ivana Jelača
When Grief Becomes Political: How Tragedy is Weaponized Against a Free Press and Youth in North Macedonia and Serbia
June 12, 2025
Two recent tragedies—one in North Macedonia and one in Serbia—have sparked waves of student-led protests in Skopje and Belgrade, drawing attention to deep-seated political and institutional failures in both countries.
In March, a horrific fire tore through the makeshift Pulse nightclub in Kočani, North Macedonia, killing 61 people and injuring hundreds more. Meanwhile, in Novi Sad, Serbia, the November 2024 collapse of a poorly maintained canopy of the Novi Sad Train Station left 16 dead and shocked the nation.
These events have become symbols of long-standing dysfunction within public systems and governance—marked by regulatory negligence, lack of accountability, and political apathy. In response, young people took to the streets not only to mourn the victims, but to demand real change, transparency, and institutional responsibility.
A Generation Demanding Dignity
In both North Macedonia and Serbia, the protests that followed these tragedies were not just outpourings of grief—they were acts of resistance. They became “a collective cry” from a generation tired of being collateral damage in systems filled with corruption, negligence and impunity.
Students in Skopje and Belgrade did not take to the streets as political pawns. They came as citizens—frustrated, disillusioned, and determined to hold power to account. Their demands were simple yet profound: safety in public spaces, dignity in governance, and justice for lives that should not have been lost.
In a region where youth are often dismissed as apathetic or politically disengaged, these protests offered a striking counter-narrative: a generation that refuses to stay silent in the face of systemic failure.
When the Demand for Justice Turns into a “Threat to the State”
However, not everyone welcomed these calls for justice. In North Macedonia, the portal Alfa.mk published an opinion piece by journalist Branko Geroski criticizing the protests: “The calls were not articulated” and the protests were “attempts to create chaos and undermine institutional stability”.
He argued that the student actions were not sincere, but politically driven: “They were not sincere calls for accountability, but a political agenda to destabilize the country.”
A similar reaction unfolded in Serbia. The tabloid Alo.rs ran the headline: “Students admit protests are political.” However, apart from a vague statement from one student, most commentary came from professors.
“They wanted change, but mostly they joined something that someone else had conceived and designed,” said Dragana Mitrović, professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences in Belgrade. Even though most professors have been supporting students since the faculty blockade started, Mitrović has been criticizing students since the beginning. She was critical of youth-led protests long before the canopy collapsed.
Mickoski and Vučić: Similar Reactions to Criticism
North Macedonia’s Prime Minister Hristijan Mickoski and Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić offered nearly identical narratives in response to student protests. While Mickoski acknowledged public frustration, he cast the protests as politically motivated.
“I cannot justify the political rodents and vultures who do not want a strong VMRO-DPMNE government because it is the buffer zone and the last pillar that will not allow the destruction of Macedonia,” Mickoski said.
In Serbia, Vučić insisted that all student demands had already been addressed, and dismissed the ongoing protests: “We will tolerate this up to a certain point, and then we will behave in accordance with the rules that the state must respect.”
Biljana Georgievska of North Macedonia’s Media Ethics Council criticized the authorities’ post-tragedy communication strategies. She argued that government responses focused too heavily on numbers, arrests, and procedural updates—neglecting deeper accountability.
“This issue will probably disappear from the media and public discourse, pushed aside by PR tactics that distract attention and inflame passions with nationalism or sensationalism. However, no matter how skilled the party PR tools are at ‘sweeping things under the carpet’, the collective memory of the tragedy and the anger over the abuse of power by officials responsible for public safety will not disappear,” says Georgievska.
Media Darkness for Youth Voices
While politicians dominated headlines, the voices of young people were often sidelined. In Serbia, the Instagram page Detektor smeća—which claims to expose extremists—published names and photos of protesting students, painting them as national threats.
photo: screenshot from @detektorsmeca on Instagram
Professor Sead Dzigal, who teaches ethics in communication, said that such intimidation tactics create a climate of fear. “Some may refrain from expressing criticism or dissent altogether. This type of pressure aims to demotivate protests and activism, discouraging further participation in demonstrations or self-organization. As a result, some students may distance themselves from the movement to protect their personal reputation, which can ultimately weaken their cohesion,” says Dzigal.
In North Macedonia, the student-run Instagram page Studentaria was targeted simply for posting videos from a rally where the education minister was present. One student became a target because his father was formerly a government minister—despite no current political involvement.
“Students from families with known oppositional backgrounds can be labeled as political enemies regardless of their personal views or opinions. This encourages broader polarization, where students are drawn into an ‘us versus them’ dynamic based on family ties, rather than individual qualities and positions,” says Dzigal.
What If We Actually Asked the Young People?
Media expert Ilir Gashi observed that young people in Serbia had been largely invisible in media before these protests—leading many to wrongly assume they were disengaged.
“Many believed that young people were apolitical — that they knew nothing, didn’t care, didn’t follow the news, and just stared at their phones. However, it turned out that young people know, follow, and think. Their understanding of politics and political engagement is far ahead of what has been mainstream in Serbia so far. The real problem was a generational misunderstanding: young people simply did not behave the way older generations expected, which led to assumptions that they were passive, uninterested and lacking a sense of community and politics,” says Gashi.
Meanwhile, journalist Angela Petkova from North Macedonia noted a lack of public empathy in her country toward grieving families and students seeking justice.
She also expressed disappointment: students in North Macedonia, she says, have not yet shown the same level of unity or visibility as their peers in Serbia.
“Corruption in Serbia has killed sixteen people, including a Macedonian from Sveti Nikole. Since then, students have been on the streets every day, blocking universities and bringing the country to a standstill because they understand that otherwise, it will continue to kill. Corruption in Macedonia has killed sixty-two young, unspoiled lives. Yet, the students have continued with their daily routines, ignoring the reality that we are all living in a shed waiting to be set on fire,” says Petkova.
She hopes that her generation will not forget the murder of the young people in Kočani and dreams of a day when the streets will be full — until the institutions are emptied and rebuilt from the ground up, with honest and capable people.
The Enduring Fight for Justice in the Balkans
These tragedies in Kočani and Novi Sad have laid bare the ongoing tension between citizens and institutions in the Western Balkans. As students take to the streets to mourn and demand change, their voices are too often dismissed, politicized, or outright silenced. Yet the clarity and courage of this generation suggest that they are not easily deterred—and that their collective memory of injustice may outlast the news cycle.
Author: Despina Kovachevska, Reporting Diversity Network media monitor
Photo: Marija Jovanović
Troll of the Month: Socialist Party (PS) candidate Zegjine Çaushi in Albania
June 6, 2025
The Balkan Troll of the Month is an individual, a group of individuals, or a media outlet that spreads hate based on gender, ethnicity, religion, or other diversity categories. The Balkan Troll is selected based on hate speech incidents identified across the Western Balkan region.
During a Socialist Party (PS) campaign event in Fier, PS candidate Zegjine Çaushi publicly mocked her political opponent Gazment Bardhi, the Democratic Party (DP) candidate, using derogatory language implying effeminacy and same-sex attraction. Her comments, delivered in a mocking tone from the stage and captured in a video, included phrases such as “je i përdredhur shumë, je balerin që vetëm tundesh” (“you’re too twisted, a ballerina who just sways”) and sarcastically referred to him as “Gazi i Zegjinesë”, a feminised moniker implying submissiveness or ridicule.
This incident took place at a high-profile PS campaign rally attended by Prime Minister Edi Rama, who appeared to enjoy the remarks, laughing openly and signalling his approval of the mockery. Furthermore, video was shared widely online and broadcast by several national media outlets, reinforcing the normalisation of mocking rhetoric and raising concerns about discrimination and the ethics of political discourse.
This incident represents a clear case of homophobic insinuation and gender-based derogation during an electoral campaign. By mocking her opponent through feminising language and implying same-sex attraction, the candidate did not simply attack him personally—she reinforced harmful stereotypes about masculinity, sexual orientation, and who is seen as “fit” to lead. Such language stigmatises traits that deviate from traditional norms and sends a message that effeminacy or queerness are political liabilities.
This is not an isolated case, but part of a broader pattern of homophobic rhetoric and gender-based derogation that often surfaces during electoral campaigns. Throughout the electoral campaign, candidates have been seen to use derogatory and sensationalistic language to score political points or attract attention. In turn, neither the media nor the public respond in the appropriate manner. Media outlets choose to amplify thse moments without ediorial scrutiny, often presenting them as entertaining, hot topics or viral content. Media coverage overall lacks critical framing with headlines focusing on the spectacle and humour of the incident rather than on challenging the rhetoric and discourse at play. This omission is not neutral— it reinforces problematic narratives in society and normalises them.
Online audiences in turn, replicate and further escalate the discourse, which is reflected in the misogynistic, homophobic comments online.
Moreover, the laughter and encouragement seen from senior political figures including in this case, the Prime Minister himself is concerning. Rather than using his position to challenge and immediately condemn such harmful discourse, his lack of reaction and passivity reflect a deeper acceptance of this rhetoric.
The absence of accountability at every level not only exposes systemic failures but also paves the way for discriminatory language in political communication to become normalised and legitimised. All of this reflects a vicious cycle of hate—perpetuated, reinforced, and sustained. Quite the opposite, all actors involved should use their platforms to stop such narratives from being normalised in society and allowed to persist unchallenged.
RTCG and Reporting on Trans Rights: When Public Broadcaster Allows Religious Leaders to Judge
December 3, 2024
In March 2024, Radio Television of Montenegro (RTCG), through its broadcasts of the programmes “Dnevnik” and “Argumenti”, as well as in an article on its website, contributed to spreading gender disinformation by presenting unbalanced views, dominated by religious figures, on LGBTIQ+ rights. The topic was the Draft Law on Legal Gender Recognition Based on Self-Determination. This important law, which Montenegro is expected to adopt soon, would enable transgender individuals to change their sex designation in official documents without undergoing medical procedures such as surgical interventions or hormone therapy, which is the current practice. This would reduce the stigmatisation of LGBTIQ+ individuals and allow everyone to live by their gender identity.
On March 11, during the Dnevnik prime-time news programme at 7:30 PM, RTCG broadcasted a statement from the Metropolitate of Montenegro and the Littoral regarding the Draft Law: “The Draft Law on Legal Gender Recognition Based on Self-Determination threatens the spirit of traditional and faithful Montenegro and contradicts the existing legal norms of the state, according to the Metropolitanate of Montenegro and the Littoral.” During the announcement, footage of the Cetinje Monastery was shown, and apart from this segment, the topic was not further addressed in the main news programme, according to a warning, which also included concerns about objectivity and balance, issued by the Agency for Electronic Media (AEM) to RTCG.
During the segment, no alternative perspectives were presented, nor was any editorial commentary provided on how the views of the church could impact LGBTIQ+ rights. A similar report was published on RTCG’s portal under the title “The Metropolitanate Opposes Sex Designation Change”. In this statement, the Metropolitanate described the Draft Law as a “disgrace and scandal” that must be excluded from the realm of “serious debate and decision-making”. The Metropolitanate’s statement also appealed to decision-makers who are members of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC) not to support the law.
A few days later, on March 14, during the TV show“Arguments”, religious leaders were invited by the host and editor, Ivana Popović, to comment on the draft law. Four religious leaders from Montenegro participated in the TV show: Metropolitan Joanikije of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Reis of the Islamic Community of Montenegro, Rifat Fejzić, the Catholic Archbishop of Bar, Rrok Gjonlleshaj, and the Chief Rabbi of Montenegro, Luciano Moše Prelević. The programme, which was initially intended to focus on the coexistence of religious communities in the country, turned into a discussion about how religious institutions could strengthen their influence over key political decisions and legislation.
“You recently spoke out from the Metropolitanate regarding the alleged Draft Law, which would also include the possibility of changing one’s sex and identification number. Why were you the first to comment on this matter, and isn’t this interference in state affairs?” Popović asked Joanikije.
Following the program, the Coalition for the Rights of LGBTIQ+ Persons Equality appealed, highlighting that the way the question was posed was highly problematic. They stated that “the editor misrepresented the content and essence of the Draft Law, which addresses the administrative change of sex designation and identification numbers, and doesn’t deal with the issue of gender-affirming surgery, which has been regulated since 2012 under the Health Insurance Law.”
Following an initiative submitted by non-governmental organisations advocating for LGBTIQ+ rights, AEM issued a warning to RTCG for violating numerous media regulations and ethical principles during the broadcast of these programs. AEM’s warning stated that RTCG had “failed to contribute to comprehensive, impartial, and objective public information regarding the Draft Law on Legal Recognition of Gender Identity Based on Self-Determination in a fair and balanced manner”.
By posing questions about the law only to the representatives of religious communities, and not including representatives of secular institutions or organisations, “the views of religious communities regarding participation in the drafting of laws on human rights were presented as relevant in Montenegrin society. This directly violates the principle of a secular society,” the Equality coalition stated.
The Use of Propaganda Rhetoric by Religious Leaders
Answering the journalist’s question, religious leaders expressed a number of problematic views. “There are some people who have this problem and cannot identify… but encouraging a person to such an unnatural dilemma is truly dangerous because we are talking about minors,” stated Joanikije. He further stated, without citing sources, that “it is well known that those who change their sex later have problems and want to return to their original state, and an incurable trauma occurs. Suicides happen. In such cases, the number of suicides is extremely high”.
Fejzić supported Joanikije, commenting that religious communities agree on many issues, including this one. Fejzić stated that the state should deal with sick children, “instead of paying someone to change their sex, only to have them change it back again”. Furthermore, Fejzić linked the passing of this law to Montenegro’s aspiration to join the European Union, presenting the law as “one of the problems” on the European path.
Archbishop Rrok Gjonlleshaj stated that religious representatives cannot remain silent about laws that are “against God’s commandments” because believers are their “spiritual children,” and “a parent cannot remain silent if the life of a child is endangered”.
Chief Rabbi Luciano Moše did not want to comment on the law, but said that the problem is that “Europe imposes certain laws” and called for the inclusion of religious communities in making laws like this one.
Such views are typical examples of anti-transgender propaganda. Transphobic narratives often use arguments about the suicide rate among transgender people to undermine the validity and effectiveness of medical interventions, including hormone therapy and gender-affirming surgeries. These arguments are usually based on the claim that suicidal tendencies do not decrease or may even increase after gender-affirming procedures, which is often misinterpreted or taken out of context. Recently, Elon Musk, one of the most influential billionaires in the world and a proponent of transphobic narratives, wrote on “X” that the suicide rate is higher among individuals who undergo gender-affirming surgery, compared to the general population. While it is true that the transgender community faces mental health challenges, the number of suicides can hardly be perceived solely as a result of the surgery itself, as the general lack of community support and psychological care for transgender individuals can have a significant contribution.
Fejzić’s argument regarding sick children, to whom the state should redirect funds instead of paying for gender-affirming surgeries, is common transphobic discourse to delegitimise healthcare support for the transgender community. This argument typically operates on the assumption that supporting one group must exclude support for another, and that the needs of one are more legitimate than the needs of the other.
Furthermore, the view that LGBTIQ+ human rights are part of “European propaganda” is common in conservative circles, which attempt to undermine human rights and portray them as a negative influence coming from the West.
“The broadcaster failed to contribute to comprehensive, objective, and impartial public reporting, particularly due to the fact that the topic was treated superficially and incidentally in a format that did not meet the requirements for the application of the “other side” rules, allowing the presentation of harmful views, as well as incomplete and false claims, without any appropriate response from the host,” stated the AEM. While the guests “suggested that supporting the right to recognise gender identity based on self-determination is questionable in terms of ‘normalcy’ and ‘naturalness’, and that the law calls into question and undermines religious feelings and heritage,” RTCG “should have highlighted the legally protected right to protection from discrimination based on gender identity,” stated the AEM.
Among other things, the AEM assessed that by adopting this approach, RTCG “enabled the tendentious promotion of the interests of one group/side (religious communities),” and further criticised the fact that in subsequent broadcasts, RTCG did not address the draft law in a balanced manner.
“Verdict” of the Agency for Electronic Media
The AEM assessed that RTCG violated several provisions of the Law on Electronic Media (the Law) and the Rulebook on Program Standards in Electronic Media (the Rulebook). According to the Warning Decision sent to RTCG, the public service violated Article 55 of the Law and Article 7 of the Rulebook “by failing to fulfill the media obligation to contribute to free, truthful, comprehensive, impartial, and timely public information about events in the country,” as well as Article 56 of the Law and Article 8 of the Rulebook, which concern the obligation of faithful representation, i.e., that “different approaches and opinions should be appropriately represented, encouraging impartiality and respecting differences in opinions on political or economic issues”. Additionally, Article 8 of the Law and Article 11 of the Rulebook state that “programme content, especially news-political and current affairs programmes, must be fair and balanced, which is achieved by presenting opposing views, either in the same programme or in a series of other programmes that form a whole in addressing a specific topic,” and that “the interests of a political party or any group or individual must not be tendentiously promoted”.
The AEM instructed RTCG to broadcast information regarding the imposed administrative supervisory measure in its programme.
This was not the first time that RTCG has reported on important gender topics in a problematic manner. In May 2022, RTCG aired a programme, also in prime time, titled “Abortion: Women’s, State or Church Issue,” which opened the topic of abortion rights, which were legalised in Montenegro in 1974 and have not been questioned since.
The title of the program was changed after a public outcry. It was retitled to “The Right to Abortion – YES or NO?”, and eventually, the title was adjusted to “Abortion – From Constitutional Right to Taboo Topic?”
The program featured feminist and philosopher Paula Petričević, the then-priest of the Serbian Orthodox Church, Gojko Perović, gynaecologist Vojislav Šimun, and representative of the Ministry of Health, Slađana Ćorić. Perović’s participation, where he defended the stance of the Serbian Orthodox Church, sparked significant discontent and protests. The Ombudsman for Human Rights, Siniša Bjeković, stated in an interview with Radio Free Europe that he did not understand why this issue was being raised at this time, emphasizing that for the Ombudsman, “it is absolutely and unquestionable a woman’s right to decide on this matter”.
Since 2020, the Serbian Orthodox Church an Active Socio-Political Actor
Montenegro has undergone significant socio-political changes since 2020. The end of the three-decade rule of Milo Đukanović and the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) in 2020, which happened with the support of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SPC), marked a turning point. Large protests (liturgies) in 2019 against the Law on Religious Freedom signalled the strengthening of the SPC and Serbian nationalism, and thus the conservative values upheld by the SPC.
The 42nd Government of Montenegro, which replaced the DPS, was closely linked to the SPC. The Church, through its activities and public appearances, increasingly assumed the role of a political actor, while government representatives promoted conservative views. Statements by politicians such as Prime Minister Zdravko Krivokapić and other government members were marked by traditionalism, patriarchal views, and negative stances on gender equality. At the same time, SPC promoted positions against LGBTQ+ rights and women’s freedoms.
Such views began to gain media space, often relativizing discrimination and opposition to laws and international human rights conventions that Montenegro supports. The SPC promoted collectivism and anti-Western sentiment, often using manipulative messages containing gender disinformation that reinforced misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia, which, according to the UN, represents a form of gender-based violence. Through the analysis of the public service RTCG, which opened space for the SPC and other religious institutions to comment on civic laws, it was revealed how media spreads disinformation about women’s and LGBTQ+ rights. This practice further jeopardises minority rights and contributes to the political instrumentalisation of gender issues in Montenegrin society, which remains a key issue for the future reforms.
Author: Djurdja Radulovic
Illustration: Lana Nikolic
Monthly Monitoring Highlights July: Relativisation of obstetric violence, sexism and ethnic tensions
August 20, 2024
Throughout July, the RDN monitoring team has detected a range of hateful narratives and discourse. This month, we have seen the dangerous revitalisation of obstetric violence alongside hatred based on ethnicity and gender as well as hatred against journalists.
Revitalisation of obstetric violence in Serbia
In the morning show on TV Prva the Minister for Family Welfare and Demography of Serbia, Milica Đurđević Stamenkovski, said that the testimonies of women on obstetric violence and poor conditions in maternity hospitals are part of the global agenda against childbirth in Serbia.
Đurđević’s statement received criticism online, for relativising obstetric violence, after which she said that her statement was misinterpreted and that she is “maximally dedicated to solving the problem of obstetric violence”. Later, Prime Minister Miloš Vučević said Đurđević “made her mandate available”, however he stated that there is no reason to dismiss her. Vučević’s lack of interest in addressing Stamenkovski’s statement only served to downplay the serosity of the topic at hand.
The media, meanwhile, began reporting more frequently on obstetric violence and the conditions in maternity hospitals after women started sharing their experiences of abuse during labour, bringing these issues to light.
Regardless, The Minister for Family Welfare and Demography must be condemned for undermining the seriousness and reality of obstetric violence and poor conditions in maternity hospitals. It is her duty, role and responsibility.
Ethnic hatred in Montenegro
During the event of the opening of the monument to Predrag Leovac (a member of the Yugoslav Army who fought against the Kosovo Liberation Army during the war in the 90s), the mayor of the municipality of Pljevlja, Dario Vraneš, gave a speech. In this speech, he made several inflammatory statements targeting both his contemporary political opponents in Montenegro and adversaries from past conflicts, including Albanians from Kosovo. Although he didn’t name these nationalities explicitly, he spoke about “enemies”, “crows”, “unmentionables”, suggesting that friendships with other nationalities are not possible, and he indirectly issued threats by stating that Leovac would serve as a role model for new generations of “Serb knights,” thereby subtly encouraging future conflicts.
Politicians in Montenegro have been giving speeches and statements that can provoke violence and national and religious intolerance. In a multi-ethnic country such as Montenegro, it is extremely important that politicians tread carefully. Rather than issuing statements and making comments that only serve to create a divide between communities, they should be using their platforms to advance the needs of the public and to promote social cohesion.
Sexism in Albania and North Macedonia
In Albania, during a televised debate on the show “360 Gradë,” (translated as 360 degrees) a heated argument erupted between analyst Arben Meçe and lawyer Enida Bozheku regarding a big case of corruption in the health care system in Albania, specifically in the oncologic department. The case has provoked several manifestations and a lot of social media buzz due to the gravity of the situation and those in turn affected by it.
The heated debate on “360 Gradë” began with Meçe arguing that the scandal was just about “abuse of office” and didn’t involve any deaths. Bozheku disagreed, suggesting that the Special Prosecutor’s Office could investigate. The argument escalated when Meçe told Bozheku to “shut up,” to which Bozheku replied that he should say that to his wife, not her. Meçe then insulted Bozheku, saying her actions were like those of a “prostitute.” Bozheku responded by suggesting maybe his wife was a prostitute and warned Meçe about legal consequences for his remarks. The confrontation became so intense that Meçe ended up throwing his microphone and leaving the studio.
This incident showcases the highly unprofessional behaviour of the two guests on the show and the personal attacks and sexist language used on the public platform. The aggressive exchange and offensive language between the two individuals can set a negative example to viewers, promoting a culture of disrespect, intolerance and not to mention, sexism. Additionally, the escalation to threats and physical actions can create a hostile environment that detracts from meaningful discourse and constructive debate on important issues. In such situations, the producers of the show should immediately intervene to de-escalate the conflict and maintain a professional atmosphere. They should establish and enforce clear guidelines for respectful dialogue and ensure that all participants adhere to these rules to ensure that such escalations, hateful language and sexism is not being displayed on their show.
In North Macedonia, an online portal in7.tv posted a video of Adelina Tahiri and her sister mocking the dialect of Tetovo. Adelina Tahiri is a singer from Skopje, North Macedonia of Albanian ethnicity who has recently been in the spotlight and headlines of the news because she married a Macedonian and so did her brother. Furthermore, Tahiri was seen in a rally of VMRO-DPMNE which is considered to be a Macedonian party.
As a result of the compilation of these various factors and recent events, Tahiri has come under fire including various hateful comments targeting her on the basis of her gender but also on the premise that she has “betrayed” Albanians. In no instance is sexism and hate in any form justified. Comments like those targeting Tahiri merely serve to create further divide within the multi-ethnic country of North Macedonia.
Hatred against journalists in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina
The public service Radio Television of Kosovo (RTK) reported, based on an the reporting by the Bosnian media outlet “Slobodna Bosna,” that the Kosovo portals “Periskop” and “Nacionale” are allegedly financed by Serbian structures. This claim, based on anonymous sources, was published as part of a text that explores the signing of an agreement between Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz regarding lithium mining. RTK initially reported these media allegedly received large sums of money from Milan Radoičić and served Vučić’s interests. They did not provide any evidence for such claims. After facing criticism for publishing unverified information, RTK revised their broadcast and among other things, removed the two portals’ names. The RTK Board denied changing the broadcast content, but civil society and the Kosovo Journalists’ Association demanded the Board’s resignation, arguing that such claims endanger journalists. These claims were used by a few of ruling party’s MPs as evidence that the two media are critical of the ruling party due to their funding from Serbian structures. Following the broadcast, the ruling party representatives called for an investigation into the portals. Many RTK journalists distanced themselves from the broadcast, warning against using taxpayer money for political attacks.
Zana Spahiu, acting general director of RTK has resigned whereas Jeton Musliu, editor of the main news edition has publicly declared that he distances himself from the incident and has requested his immediate removal from the position of editor of the main news edition at RTK and his reassignment. The Minister of Justice and a couple of MPs of the government were adding further fuel and legitimacy to this news in RTK. The case is still ongoing, and along with other recent events, it proves evident that there is increasing political pressure on the media in the country.
Since coming to power, Kurti’s government has been trying to control the media and media organisations, as well as journalists who are critical of his government and its decisions. The attempt to shut down the respected TV “Klan Kosova” failed, but the government, thanks to the votes of the deputies who make up the majority in the Kosovo parliament, has initiated a change in the law on Independent Media Commission which civil society criticise to have been drafted in violation of the European Union directives and according to them, it paves the way to a greater control on online news media. This Government does not even respond to the criticism.
Regarding this specific case, the media also broadcast an interview with the founder of the BiH portal “Raskrinkavanje”, Darko Brkan, who said that Slobodna Bosna, a portal that produces disinformation like this one, is linked to two media outlets in Kosovo, and that he would not be surprised if this information was indeed received from the Government of Kosovo. “This is also a common way of posting (compiling) disinformation. Here in the region we often see where political actors from one country, Serbia, Montenegro, BiH, collect information in another country and distribute it in their own countries, and so later claim that the news is authentic. Because when the news comes from another country, it looks more credible than publishing it in your own country”, said Brkan.
Journalists should not come under attack of this kind. The spread of malinformation and disinformation is harmful and can put journalists at political pressure and even endanger their safety, making it harder to continue their work. Even though Slobodna Bosna is responsible for the content they publish, media outlets who share content are responsible for factchecking before publishing. RTK has an even greater responsibility towards their viewers, as a public service.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, on Wednesday, July 3,2024, a well-known meteorologist from Bosnia and Herzegovina Nedim Sladić reported that he received messages with death threats. As he said, he received direct death threats just for doing his job – weather forecasting. He also said that he would report these messages of threats to the police adding that he has been suffering from such violence and threats from the same person for the past three years (since 2021).
Nedim Sladić reported about the death threats on his Instagram account, which many websites in Bosnia and Herzegovina have picked up and reported on. They turned his Instagram post into a news story without verifying it through additional sources, such as statements from the police or directly from him.
In a 2021 interview with Detektor.ba, Sladić expressed his passion for his job but admitted that the threats and insults he receives are beginning to take a toll on him. He noted that the disinformation about climate change and anti-scientific comments flooding his inbox often leaves him at a loss for words. Sladić shared that these challenges are causing him to question his effectiveness in explaining the weather phenomena affecting Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the broader planet.
No individual, journalist, or professional should face threats or receive messages that could harm their mental health or endanger their life. Media organisations and radio stations have a responsibility to protect their staff from such incidents to ensure their safety.
The Paris Olympics, Supreme Sportsmanship, or Hatred and Insults?
August 16, 2024
In a better world, Imane Khelif’s success would be celebrated.
Throughout history, women have had a lot to prove. Today, they are put positions where they must prove that they are physiologically women. Some arenas would go as far as excluding them from public spaces, just as in the early days of the Olympics, when married women were disallowed from entering the competition. Unmarried women were allowed to attend the sports competitions as spectators in honour of the god Zeus, alongside men, but only started participating in the 3000-year-old sporting event in 1900.
If you subscribe to the same opinions as British author J. K. Rowling and her followers, only women who fit into standard body images of what being female, or feminine enough look like, should be allowed to participate in the Olympic Games.
As 25-year-old Algerian boxer Imane Khelif took to the boxing ring and won gold for her country, Rowling posted on X, accusing Khelif of “being a man protected by a misogynist sporting establishment enjoying the distress of a woman he’s just punched in the head”.
Other discriminatory and offensive posts posted by the Harry Potter author highlighted attitudes towards transgender women that Rowling continuously presents to the public. While certainly unjustified, in this case they are all the more devastating because Khelif is a born in the body of a woman. Raised as a woman. Which, unfortunately, she was compelled to clarify when she was subjected to other people’s assumptions regarding her identity.
On this occasion, the Sarajevo Open Centre, a human rights organisation, was quick to point out that neither sex nor gender are binary categories, and that the Algerian boxer’s participation in the Olympic Games triggered a wave of harmful reporting, misinformation and calls for discrimination. This which they claim, showed that lack of understanding about the complexity of the human body and of various identities leads to discrimination and attacks on the dignity of persons who do not fit into the binary divisions of sex and gender.
It’s really about boxing and its female competitors, and not about sex, which I assume the Olympic Committee should be concerned with, despite the ‘society of the spectacle’, a theory founded by French philosopher Guy Debord, where social relations between people are mediated by images.
How “interesting” that in our society, marked by patriarchal principles and toxic masculinity, men were unusually vocal in their condemnation of “man-on-woman” violence during Imane Khelif’s performance at the Olympic Games. Overnight, everyone became experts on the subject of the XY set of sex chromosomes, which journalist Jelena Kalinić writes about it on the Nauka govori portal. Not that anyone is expected to be an expert in a field that is not close to them, but our own lack of capacity to understand certain topics should be the key reason not to partake in commenting on them.
Imagine, for a moment, how humiliating it must feel to put anyone in the position of explaining that they are a woman?
The invisible achievements of women
In a better world, Imane Khelif’s success would be celebrated, especially since she comes from an underprivileged background. Khelif made it to the finals and secured a medal at the Olympics. We would glorify the winning mindset that guided every sporting success. Because, regardless of her physical superiority, Khelif also suffered defeats.
Khelif wasn’t alone in her treatment at this year’s Olympics, Lin Yu-ting, a boxer from Taiwan, went through similar torture as the Algerian boxer.
Regarding the extraordinary public lynching that these two participants of the Olympic Games in Paris underwent, koleKTIRV, an organisation working specifically on the rights of trans, intersex and gender variant persons, released this statement: “We emphasise that every person has the right to practice sports without discrimination, as confirmed by the International Olympic Committee, which clearly supported the attacked participants of the Olympic Games. We also want to reiterate, together with the International Olympic Committee, that all sportsmen and sportswomen have met all the criteria for joining the appropriate categories at the Olympic Games.”
In today’s society, be it a society of the spectacle or not, women are getting the raw end of the deal. And while the world was preoccupied with the blood of the two Olympians, most ignored a participant named Steven van de Velde, who was competing for the Netherlands in beach volleyball at the Olympics. He was convicted in 2014 of raping a 12-year-old girl from Britain. At that time, it was predicted that this would be the end of his successful Olympic career, but life in the male-centric world clearly had other plans for him.
Mental strength in sports
Even traditional games, such as stone-throwing, involve more than just physical predispositions – Olympic sports even more so – so reducing achieved results to the perception of the bodies of male and female competitors is just another offshoot of those who fight their own ideological battles, while flagrantly bypassing ethics and consideration of the consequences that harmful human action can cause.
It was a true spectacle we had the opportunity to see in the finals of the tennis competition at the Olympic Games in the men’s singles category. Judging by the first comments after the unusual match, Serbian Novak Đoković and Spaniard Carlos Alcaraz played one of the most important finals in the history of Olympic sports.
Having won every title he possibly could until then, 37-year-old Đoković became the oldest gold medal winner in tennis at the Olympic Games in the singles category, while Alcaraz, 21, was the youngest-ever finalist of the competition.
“Novak was playing great. He deserves this. In the tough moments he increased his level. He played unbelievable shots, an unbelievable game. I’m a bit disappointed but honestly I’ll leave the court with my head really, really high. I gave everything I had. Fighting for Spain was everything to me,” said Alcaraz after losing to Đoković.
The tennis final in Paris in 2024 is important on several levels. Besides returning the sport to its historic origins – tennis can be traced back to a 12th–13th-century French handball game called jeu de paume or “game of the palm” — the match was also a symbolic representation of a generational shift. It marked an end of an era, which lasted for two decades and was led by tennis heavy-weights like Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Đoković, and the beginning of an upcoming era, in which the golden pedestal will undoubtedly be occupied by Carlos Alcaraz.
The levelled quality of the game of both tennis players, the physical superiority of Alcaraz, who is 16-years younger, and the fresh knee injury and surgery of Novak Đoković ultimately resulted in the victory of the one who could settle for second place even before the final. The fact that Đoković won, certainly has to do with his physical fitness and the extraordinary medical skills of the team that takes care of his health, but most of all, it has to do with the triumph of mental strength shaped by victories.
The physical superiority of the body of an opponent 16 years his junior, at least in this case, at the crowning moment of a brilliant sports career, could not match that mental strength. The opponent himself said that in difficult moments Đoković plays at a higher level. This is how defeat is handled in the world of top sports and the manners that ought to characterise it. In this way, the Olympic Games keep the would focus on sports and the glory of superior sportsmanship, instead of non-sports-related topics, guesswork and arbitrary interpretations, from the symbolism of the opening ceremony to the participation of individual competitors. Especially female competitors.
Speculations and arbitrary interpretations about the Olympics’ Opening Ceremony
Before we devoted ourselves to online gender profiling while ignoring gender-based violence, the topic on the menu was the Opening Ceremony of the games.
Everyone with a remote control had something to say about the sporting event’s Opening Ceremony on July 26. From enthusiasm for the conceptual breakthrough, to criticism of the paraphrasing of Leonardo da Vinci’s “Last Supper”, which had an inclusive character in the Parisian interpretation. Bosnian writer Miljenko Jergović, redundantly, wrote about why. Seven days after the opening, the Vatican also issued a statement.
One of the dominant scenes from the art of Western Civilization served as a frequent paraphrase in the works of numerous artists, even local ones, so we could not even consider this segment of the ceremony innovative, least of all provocative, because it has already been seen so many times.
Had the art reference included people of the preferred gender persuasion, it would have probably gone unnoticed.
Owing to this example, we can conclude that transphobia is one of the dominant characteristics of today’s life and that it is a problem that we will increasingly often encounter in the future. In the society of the spectacle, removed from humanity. In the society of disinformation and discrediting, where ethics have long since lost their importance. Which doesn’t mean that there weren’t many amateur television lapses that don’t suit a serious culture such as the French.
The criticism of the opening, beyond the Last Supper, can be subsumed under two categories: the departure from tradition and the neglect of the stadium as a key place of the ceremony. Others liked the opening of the Olympic Games in Paris for the same reasons.
Judging by the comments of the numerous online audience and the virality of his performance, many also liked the Turkish sharp-shooter Yusuf Dikeç. His nonchalance during the competition and lack of protective equipment were the inspiration for the numerous memes, while his partner Şevvala İlayda Tarhan, with whom he won the silver medal, is hardly mentioned.
Of sports, as of life, we always have the right to expect more. Life often imposes limits that we do not find agreeable. That is why sports, and the results of sportsmen and women can serve as an excellent compensation, when we allow it to be only that – sporting entertainment.
From the perspective of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the amount of analysis of XY chromosomes, it would be useful to suggest that we pay attention to the fact that our Olympic team, with just five competitors, is smaller than the number of some of the other participating countries’ physiotherapists. This is not to disparage the results of our Olympians – it’s remarkable that they are there at all – I’m talking about the circumstances in which they prepare for the most prestigious of world competitions.
Often, to explain the overall context in which we live, it is best to turn to short forms and the conclusion offered to us on the Facebook page Relevantna Razina Duhovitosti (Relevant Level of Wit), which reads – for a country that has never won a medal in the Olympic Games, we seem to focus a lot on who is a man, and who is a woman.
Author: Kristina Ljevak Bajramović
Photo: ProPhoto1234 / Shutterstock
This article was financed by the European Union and the regional project “SMART Balkans – Civil Society for a Connected Western Balkans”, implemented by the Centre for the Promotion of Civil Society (CPCD), the Centre for Research and Policy Making (CRPM) and the Institute for Democracy and Mediation (IDM), which is financially supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The contents of the article are the sole responsibility of the project implementers and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Centre for the Promotion of Civil Society (CPCD), the Centre for Research and Policy Making (CRPM), or the Institute for Democracy and Mediation (IDM).
Monthly Monitoring Highlights February: sexism, gender-based violence, anti-migrant rhetoric, ethnic discrimination, and hatred towards journalists
March 20, 2024
Throughout February, the RDN monitoring team has detected a range of hateful narratives and discourse. This month, we have seen hatred based on gender, ethnicity as well as the spread of anti-migrant rhetoric and hatred towards journalists.
Sexism in Serbia
In Serbia, on Insajder TV, actress Ljubinka Klarić was a guest on the show Treća smena (Third shift), where she talked about her various professional acting roles, but where she also touched upon the topic of gender equality and feminism. She shared her beliefs, including some common stereotypes and misconceptions surrounding gender and feminism, claiming women have already fully established their rights and that there is no inequality in Serbia or Europe today. However, this is far from the reality. Klarić spoke from a privileged standpoint, demonstrating a profound lack of awareness regarding the challenges faced by women who do not share her social, economic, or geographical circumstances. The assertion that women universally do not face struggles is not only ignorant but also dismissive of the diverse experiences and systemic marginalisation faced by countless women across the globe.
Furthermore, when discussing gender-based violence, Klarić shifted the responsibility to the victim, claiming that it is up to the victim to come out and speak up about the violence they endure. She claimed that “it’s your choice whether you’re going to suffer silently or speak up and say, hey stop, this man is beating me”. Whilst it is important for women to speak up about the violence they endured or are still going through, it is a much more complex issue than simply “deciding to speak up”. Advocating for women to simply speak up about the violence they endure overlooks the complex dynamics of gender-based violence, which often acts as a barrier and challenge for victims to come forward.
In response to Klarić’s claims, one of the hosts, Una Senić, reacted accordingly by pointing out that the views of Klarić need to include insights from women from diverse backgrounds and circumstances including the various factors and circumstances which have led to their marginalised position within society. This was a great example of how journalists should recognise and challenge harmful narratives coming from the people they are interviewing, even during live shows. Nevertheless, it is still important to highlight the problem behind Klarić’s rhetoric; as an individual who has a large platform and audience, Klarić should refrain from disseminating harmful rhetoric regarding victims of gender-based violence as well as recognise that the experiences of women globally are diverse and are not all universally shared.
Gender based violence in Albania and Kosovo
In Albania, footage emerged of a 34-year-old man who kept his wife isolated inside their house with surveillance cameras and was seen pushing his wife in front of their children. The footage and images were shared by popular media outlets such as TV Klan and Top Channel and subsequently spread by other media outlets, including Vizion Plus and Ora News, which also drew attention on social media. While the footage and images, even in their blurred state, were intended to highlight domestic violence, their dissemination crosses the boundary into sensationalism and significantly deviates from the principles of responsible journalism. Airing such sensitive material without considering its psychological impact on the children, the woman involved, and the audience at large constitutes a profound ethical lapse. It is crucial to recognise that this content, once circulated on social media, becomes permanently etched in the digital realm, perpetually exposing the women and minors involved to re-traumatization and emotional distress.
Media outlets, including TV Klan and Top Channel, should adhere to professional ethics and moral obligations, eschewing the publication of content that graphically showcases aggression and physical violence against women and children. This type of journalism not only normalises domestic violence but also perpetuates harmful stereotypes, reducing a serious issue to a viral phenomenon driven by clicks and shares and undermining efforts to address gender-based violence. Media platforms must exercise ethical responsibility and refrain from sensationalising such acts, prioritising the protection and respect of individuals’ rights and well-being.
Responsible journalism should seek to inform and educate the public, maintaining a commitment to uphold the dignity and privacy of individuals, especially victims of gender-based violence. By doing so, journalists and media outlets can contribute positively to societal awareness and understanding, fostering an environment that respects and protects those affected by such reporting.
In Kosovo a case of gender-based violence was sensationalised by the media. Drenusha Latifi, former Miss Kosovo, divorced her husband because he was allegedly violent towards her. In the show, Kosova Today (which has just started broadcasting on Klan Kosova TV), she gave details of the violence and showed photos as proof of the violence she endured. She resided with her then husband in Sweden, where due to the violence allegations, her now ex-husband is prohibited from approaching her. She has since relocated to Kosovo, where her ex-husband has also moved. There, he allegedly persisted in pressuring her by publicly sharing telephone conversations on his social media profiles, leading to his detention by the Kosovo Police.
Following Latifi’s appearance on the show, the same media outlet gave the alleged suspect space to present his version of the violence, which he denied. Furthermore, he claimed that he has also engaged a lawyer.
The journalists on the other hand, were very ‘kind’ when interviewing the ex-husband. It must be noted that by inviting a man accused of violence towards his ex-wife to present his version of events risks perpetuating a harmful narrative that undermines the seriousness of domestic violence.
In general, such actions by the media can inadvertently provide a platform for abusers to further manipulate the narrative and discredit their victims, contributing to a culture of victim-blaming and impunity.
Anti-migrant rhetoric in Bosnia and Herzegovina
At the end of February, the most read portal in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Klix.ba, published a biased and one-sided report about migrants crossing the border from Bosnia and Herzegovina to the EU. Referring to the migrants crossing the border, they commented how “migrants came up with a new illegal and violent way to enter the EU from Bosnia and Herzegovina”. The incident referred to a group of migrants who crossed at a small border crossing in a van at high-speed moving from Bosnia and Herzegovina towards the Republic of Croatia.
The online portal reported on this incident without considering the humanitarian context and current situation surrounding migration flows within the country. In the text, the announcements of the border police of BiH and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Croatia were mentioned, however, there was no description or discussion regarding the crossings themselves as was stated in the headline.
Furthermore, a few days after this article, the same portal, Klix.ba, published an article with a misinformative headline that stated migrants broke through the border of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia with a van. However, the article clearly states that the border was crossed by a citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Since the migrant crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 2018, the media have been reporting in an unprofessional manner, with some of them spreading hatred towards migrants themselves. The media often accuses migrants of uncivilised behaviour, drug abuse, traumatising the local population, constant fights and robbing citizens. This is a means of fearmongering and fuelling hate towards migrants through panic and accusations. As demonstrated in the headline on Klix.ba, the deliberate choice of words such as ‘illegal’ and ‘violent’ serves to instil fear among the public and depict migrants as inherently dangerous.
Ethnic discrimination in Montenegro
In Montenegro, the Bosniak Party proposed to Parliament to officially recognize the 1924 massacre in the village of Šahovići (now known as Tomaševo) as genocide. The massacre is considered to be the biggest crime against the Muslim population in Montenegro with an estimated 600 Muslims killed, tortured, and raped.
Montenegrin pro-Serbian politician Vladislav Dajković reacted to this proposition in an extremely hateful manner. In a video, which also appeared on his social channels, he characterised the Bosniak Party’s proposal as an intention to label Serbs as a ‘genocidal nation’. In the same video, he went on to deny the Srebrenica genocide. He continued to pose the question whether crimes towards Serbs should be labelled as genocide.
The term “genocide” carries immense weight and should never be misused or trivialized, as doing so diminishes the gravity of the atrocities committed and undermines efforts to prevent such acts from occurring again. Furthermore, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have both ruled that the massacre in Srebrenica during the Bosnian War constitutes genocide. Thereby, trivialising this in any shape or form is extremely harmful and constitutes genocide denial. Moreover, the concept of genocide should not be misused for political purposes. It is deeply flawed and morally irresponsible to extrapolate historical events to label an entire nation as genocidal. Such actions oversimplify complex historical contexts and ignore contemporary realities, hindering prospects for reconciliation and peace. Furthermore, using such sentiments to gain political support is both manipulative and harmful. Indeed, there is no such thing as ‘genocidal nation’.
The Balkan region has faced many conflicts throughout history, however, it is crucial to prioritise reconciliation over perpetuating division. An individual and politician such as Vladislav Dajković should be promoting peacebuilding and cooperation rather than division in society.
Hate speech against journalists in North Macedonia
In North Macedonia there was a case of hate speech spread by individual Milenko Nedelkovski towards staff of Vistinomer (a fact-checking initiative of the Metamorphosis Foundation). Nedelkovski, in his video post on YouTube titled “fact checkers or f*** checkers”, used his platform to spread harmful labels, hate speech and insults towards the staff of Metamorphosis. In addition to inappropriate comments and insults, he also shared photos and names of the journalists and fact-checkers. Such aggressive narratives put Metamorphosis employees at risk, as clearly shown by inappropriate comments on the post.
Journalists and fact-checkers involved in the fact-checking programme have endured prolonged threats and hate speech, often accompanied by the dissemination of personal information and derogatory remarks. Nedelkovski himself is also a journalist who is well known for spreading hate speech. His recent post appears to be part of a concerted assault on organizations like Metamorphosis, persistently targeting both current and former staff on social media platforms for allegedly removing content from Facebook. These attacks emanate from individuals whose content has been fact-checked on Facebook, as well as from allies of the former government who hold traditional values and promote anti-vaccination and anti-LGBTIQ+ narratives.
The deliberate act of sharing individuals’ names and personal information on social media, especially in the context of an attack, is not only reprehensible but also potentially dangerous, exposing them to harassment and harm. Such behaviour not only violates privacy rights but also creates a hostile environment that undermines the safety and well-being of the journalists and fact-checkers at Metamorphosis.
LOOK ON THE RIGHT: “ANTI-GENDER” POLITICS AND HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE IN THE WESTERN BALKANS
March 19, 2024
In 2015, a report by the Mediacenter Foundation found that ‘anti-gender’ politics was very much alive in Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, lobbying, organising mass protests or public referendums. Nine years on, it is still a major concern. ‘Anti-gender’ politics is one of the most powerful political options, mobilising citizens from different social and economic backgrounds, around different issues: from the protection of the environment, to the protection of human rights and the “natural” family.
How did this policy and its actors become so prominent?
There has been a great deal of very insightful academic analysis of this issue, and I strongly recommend that anyone who wants to write about it or learn more take a look at it. I would like to add a few observations that seem to me particularly important for understanding these politics outside the usual victimhood framework of “us” – the “progressives” – and “them” – the exclusionary camp. In reality, this division is much more blurred than it appears.
Most “anti-gender” organizations are part of what we call, “civil society”. They are legal entities, financed from international or local donors; professionally organized and capable of managing both high-level advocacy with institutions, or grass root mobilization with citizens.
“Anti-gender” politics and its actors are not some kind of crusaders against neoliberal hegemony; although they like to present themselves in that way. As Eva Fodor (2022) brilliantly presents in her book on anti-gender politics in Hungary, once these are incorporated into the official social policy agenda, “anti-gender” ideas became one of the pillars for implementing the neoliberal idea of reducing the social welfare state, whose mechanisms are transferred to the family, i.e. women.
Thus, social policies are focused on strengthening the “natural”, heterosexual family with “proper” national, religious background, so that it can take over the care that was once in the realm of the state. At the same time, “anti-gender” politics do not insist on the “housewife” and “breadwinner” family model. In free market states, everyone has to be employed; the difference is that women have double the burden. They have to work, and also take care of home, children, elderly, etc. with insufficient and conditional financial support from the state.
Finally, “anti-gender” politics do not undermine or negate human rights. On the contrary, their argumentation is quite often based on this idea, only their understanding of the term is more conservative and thus closer to their historical source.[1]
Freedom of expression and “anti-gender” politics
One of the most popular rights that “anti-gender” politics are eager to protect is freedom of expression. In that regard, we have interesting, current case of Mrs. Kristie Higgs in the UK. In 2018, Higgs posted on her social media profile a negative comment about sexual education programmes that included issues such as same sex relationships, and gender fluidity. Upon being reported by parents, the school worker was fired from her job. Nevertheless, she filed a complaint, claiming she was discriminated against based on her religious beliefs. The case is ongoing.
If Mrs. Higgs wins it, this would be a major victory for conservative, “anti-gender” politics, since their claim is that sanctioning “hate speech” only serves to the limiting of freedom of speech; that all those who disagree with the promotion of “LGBTQ ideology” are doomed to spend their lives in courts. As a member of the LGBTQ community, I would strongly disagree on the notion of “LGBTQ ideology”. But, I also disagree with the “progressive” insistence on politically correct speech, so that someone doesn’t get offended.
This case brings us back to the starting point: how do we define this very thin line between “hate speech” and “freedom of speech”? When do my rights become in conflict with the rights of others? Who determines these lines, borders to be crossed or not? Law and legal procedures are not always a good ally in these processes. And I am afraid that we are losing the importance of dialogue from our sights, especially with the ones who we perceive as “enemies”.
Thus, if we continue on solving the disputes through punishing people by firing them; publicly shaming or suing; this will only shut out the possibilities for people to understand diversity. And, it will certainly fuel the rise of anti-gender politics.
Author: Slobodanka Dekić, PhD in Sociology, Faculty of Philosophy, University in Belgrade
Editor in chief, www.diskriminacija.ba
Photo: Bum Realnost, Shutterstock
- For better understanding of the origins of human rights, history and what they fail to include, look at: David Harvey, A Brief History of Neoliberalism, Oxford University Press, 2005. Also, Barbara J. Keys, Reclaiming Americ
an Virtues. The Human Rights Revolution of the 1970s. Harvard University Press, 2014. ↩︎
TROLL OF THE MONTH: Magazine Stav
July 4, 2023
The Balkan Troll of the Month is an individual, group of individuals, or a media outlet that spread hate based on gender, ethnicity, religion, or other diversity categories. The Balkan Troll is selected based on hate speech incidents identified across the Western Balkans region.
The month of June is typically dedicated to LGBTQ+ Pride Month with celebrations and festivities organised throughout the month. In the Western Balkans, several countries hosted their annual Pride parades, including Bosnia and Herzegovina and North Macedonia who celebrated their fourth pride in Sarajevo and Skopje, and Kosovo who organised their Pride parade in Pristina. For those celebrating, Pride is an important time and reminder towards the promotion of human rights and equality for all individuals, and unfortunately, many have taken this occasion as an opportunity to spread hateful and harmful narratives towards the LGBTQ+ community, including various media reporting and the negative public comment section of articles and online media.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the annual pride was held for the fourth time in Sarajevo on the 24th of June. A day later, political magazine ‘Stav’ published a text in which it gave a ‘warning to parents to protect their children from the ‘paedophiles’ on social media channels for meeting LGBTQ+ individuals. The text, whose headline read ‘paedophilia on LGBT profiles in Bosnia and Herzegovina’ also had a smaller heading, highlighted in red reading ‘children are in danger.’ Attached to the text, was an upsetting image of a young child with their mouth covered by the hands of an obviously older individual. Violent imagery used in media reports on potential violence can be damaging and retraumatising for victims and others affected by that type of violence – in this case, sexual violence towards children. The media should refrain from using images that simulate or show direct violence.
The article discusses several Instagram profiles aimed towards meeting LGBTQ+ individuals. In these profiles there are screenshots of messages seeking for individuals to date and send ‘hot photos’ whose ages range from 13 years and above. The article includes numerous screenshots from these profiles, including directly quoting some of the messages, in an attempt to highlight the dangerous behaviour and rhetoric on these profiles. Although the article makes a point to not generalise such behaviour, it still suggests that groups named LGBTQ+ on social media include paedophile predators.
The text continues to note that this is ‘not the first time that paedophilia in these areas is closely linked to the LGBTIQ population’ using certain examples and cases as evidence in support of such a statement. The author continues to promote the idea that there are numerous examples of when the LGBTQ+ population has justified their connection with paedophilia. The article even goes as far as to claim that there are claims that paedophilia is slowly moving towards being portrayed as a ‘sexual orientation’. Furthermore, the article criticises the LGBTQ+ community for, according to the text, ‘using children for their own promotion’ as the author claims that many more children are turning up to Pride parades and LGBTQ+ activities since they are attracted to the colours and fun.
The narrative this text uses is clearly aimed against the LGBTQ+ community, even though it is presented as just a concern for children’s safety and protection from sexual abuse on the internet. The author’s examples are concerning, and must be investigated by relevant authorities; however, such examples exist in many similar online channels and groups that are not made for the LGBTQ+ community which the author fails to mention. Instagram profiles where an online user can anonymously look for a relationship are common in the Western Balkans, where many children with profiles can be at risk. The groups the author mentions can also be a threat for LGBTQ+ teens, which is also overlooked in this text. When tackling topics as serious as sexual abuse of children, journalists must focus on ethical reporting of children’s safety. This can be done by providing space in the media for experts whose knowledge can help the broader public to better understand online and sexual violence towards children and learn about preventative methods and online safety. Using this topic to target the LGBTQ+ community breaches professional journalistic standards.
Magazine Stav is a publication which has written about the LGBTQ+ community and the Pride parade in an insulting manner in the past. A magazine like Stav has a large audience reach and should be responsible as well as held accountable for what they publish and share. Linking paedophilia with the LGBTQ+ community is not only extremely harmful, it is incorrect and misleading. Most importantly, using examples from a social media account on Instagram is not a basis or justification to make such serious claims and accusations. Publishing a text like this one which spreads fear and misinformation surrounding members of the LGBTQ+ community can promote homophobia and division in society.
GOVERNMENT AND MEDIA FAILURES IN REPORTING MASS SHOOTINGS IN SERBIA
July 1, 2023
Why did the media and officials get it so wrong when it came to reporting the mass shooting that occurred on May 3rd at the “Vladislav Ribnikar” Elementary School in Belgrade and have they learned any lessons?
The media debacle started a few hours after a student shot and killed nine of his classmates and a school guard. Minister of Education, Branko Ruzic, held a press conference, without providing any real insight into the circumstances that led to the horrific tragedy, presenting the event as a result of “embracing Western values” and naming the internet and video games as culprits. Later in the day, the police chief of Belgrade, Veselin Milic, took an equally dangerous step further. Milic explained in detail the steps taken by the shooter, showing a hand-drawn plan and a list of the names of children the shooter had planned to target. These two moves made by state officials opened Pandora’s box.
Sensationalist headlines followed, along with misinformation about the victims and the suspected shooter. The media also shared details that should not have been made public, including a full name, photographs, and a medical report. Certain media outlets glorified the background of the murderer’s family. They went to the building where he lived, interviewed residents, intercepted neighbours, and wrote about how the suspected murderer was a well-behaved boy. Some even allegedly received information that in a psychiatric hospital the suspected shooter showed no remorse for the crime. Media outlets reported that the only question he repeatedly asked was when he would be released because he knew that as a minor, he could not be held accountable and punished for the crime. Some media outlets said the minor practiced shooting with his father and they shared pictures of the father and son in camouflage uniforms with weapons.
Mother’s attempt to raise social awareness
The shooting was a shocking event for Serbians and it was not easy to navigate or understand. It is logical then to apply the experiences of others in similar situations. After a mass shooting in New Zealand, the country’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern did not mentioned the name of the shooter, reveal anything about him, or give him attention. The media did the same and should act as an example Serbia could follow. Like the media in New Zealand, Serbian media should have focused on the victims not the perpetrator..
One mother bravely tried and succeeded, for a short period of time, to change the initial discourse on the tragedy. Only a few days after the death of her daughter, a mother spoke to Nedeljnik and tabloid Kurir about why it is important to change the narrative of violence prevalent in Serbian society. She spoke about the need to reconsider the school system in the country, which does not teach empathy and solidarity. She initiated the discussion in an effort to stop misinforming the public and instead focus on the surviving children. She attempted to unite Serbian society in solving the problems it has to face. Unfortunately, she did not succeed. Narratives directed from the top of the government divided parents into two groups: those who support the normal continuation of education and those who believe that “Ribnikar” can no longer be a school.
And while some media, to a large extent, reported responsibly on the tragedy with respect for the victims and their families, pro-regime media, pro-regime media were following the government narratives. They included sending guidelines to resume classes five days after the shooting. However, this was a trigger for dissatisfaction among parents of surviving children, many media reported on the parents disatisfaction.and all decent media stood on their side.
Unfortunately, this did not include the national television station RTS, which is one of the few channels available throughout the whole territory of Serbia. For parents of surviving children, RTS did not provide opportunities for them to discuss “live” what is important for the families of the deceased and surviving children. The parents were offered to take part in a recording of the show, which would be broadcast later, but they refused. They had no better luck with the private television Pink, which has a national frequency. When the parents requested an appointment to discuss their demands and grief, TV Pink responded that it was no longer a topic for them.
Culture of pain censorship
It was slightly worse, but in a different way – through suppression by silence – for the victims of the mass murder in two villages near Belgrade, which occurred a day after the shooting in Belgrade. This mass murder, the president of Serbia, very wrongly and tendentiously, wanted to present as a terrorist act. His statement was echoed by all pro-government media, although it was not a terrorist act. The shooting in which eight people were killed and 14 injured was covered by the media very briefly. Unfortunately, the families of the victims had no media contacts so they were unable to inform the media of what was happening with the survivors and the families of those who suffered in Mladenovac.
Dr. Ivana Basic, an emotion anthropology researcher, has an interesting thesis about the two shootings and the role of the state and the media. She believes that the shooting in Mladenovac could have been prevented if May 4th had been declared a day of mourning after the shooting in “Ribnikar” on May 3rd. If a decision had been made on May 3rd to end the school year, it would have prevented the media circus with police departments sending letters to schools and the “creating lists of unruly students” scandal, as well as the false dilemma of whether we need psychologists or police more.
Clickbait competition
Instead of romanticizing the perpetrator of the crime and creating an image that portrays him as a hero, victim, or tormented soul by providing statements from witnesses claiming the perpetrator behaved “abnormally” or “irrationally,” speculating or allowing sources to speculate about the mental state or motive of the suspected perpetrator, the state and media should present facts about the perpetrator while characterizing their behavior as illegal and harmful. And certainly, both in person and on social media, speculation, conjecture, commentary, spreading rumors, and misinformation should be reduced.
To prevent the Werther effect – imitation of previous crimes – the Department of Psychology at the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade issued “Psychological Guidelines for Media Reporting After Crisis Events”. It states that publishing the perpetrators’ photos, their photos next to the victims, or graphic photos/videos from the crime scene should not be done. By doing so the survivors, their families, and the local community can be retraumatized. Instead, the focus should be on showing respect for the victims and survivors, sharing their personal stories with respect for their privacy. Describing the victims and those affected by the tragedy evokes empathy and encourages the public to understand and adopt their perspective.
In Serbia, unfortunately, this did not happen. As the state presented false questions and dilemmas to the public, there was a domino effect of wrong answers and diversion from the facts about the tragedy and the way forward. Following the tragedy, in an unbearable domino effect of false information, it was reported that the history teacher that had been wounded died and that the injured boy who was in the hospital was in critical condition, when in fact he was in a stable condition and preparing for treatment in America. A claim that TV N1 called for the release of the suspect was also false, while social media spread the news that blood donors who are unvaccinated were being sought. The decision of the Press Council regarding the violation of the code of journalism ethic were in vain.
It is interesting, for example, that in the days following the shooting, very few journalists remembered to bring any positive stories from schools. Journalist Ana Kalaba from the portal Nova.rs did so by publishing a story from a Serbian school where students returned from a competition with many awards, and their schoolmates welcomed them outside the school with thunderous applause.
From the perspective of a surviving child’s mother
Dr Aleksandra Bulatovic, senior research associate at the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory at the University of Belgrade, and a member of the Laboratory for Philanthropy, Solidarity, and Care Studies, who has obtained a doctorate in the field of criminology from the Faculty of Law, shared her experience from the perspective of a mother of a seven-year-old who survived the massacre.
“It is not unexpected in Serbia for the media to disregard the rules of journalistic ethics and focus on clickbait content. However, it was unexpected that they would not know how to do their job. Instead of doing what is elementary for information-gathering – determining which institutions to communicate with to obtain accurate information and thus immediately detect the problem in the institutional response to the crisis (which continued in its management afterward), the media acted on inertia. They published whatever anyone said, whether with real or false authority,“
Bulatovic told MDI.
She pointed out that: “The problem of verifying the authority to speak on anything related to May 3rd has continued to this day. Fake institutions and experts who are not actually experts, representatives who are not actually representatives, and solutions that are not actually solutions. The media did not make an effort to thoroughly and responsibly inform themselves about everything important regarding the case, including any comparative practices. They did not show that they knew who was who or who could competently speak on which matter. The media coverage was almost completely based on reporting the feelings and impressions of anyone who wanted to say anything about the horrific tragedy that happened on May 3rd. Simply put, the media showed irresponsibility comparable to the irresponsibility of the institutions. In this way, they only confirmed the deep crisis of Serbian society.”
In the end, as the primary impression of media reporting on the tragedy of May 3rd, it remains that non-regime media represented the families of the victims and the surviving children, while state media constantly propagated a culture of pain censorship. And it is precisely this false makeup of reality, Serbian society, and its media that leads to ruin. This phenomenon is excellently defined with a rhetorical question by Dr Ivana Basic: “Do we need a culture of emotional suppression, a culture of fear and pain censorship, a culture from which love and empathy will be expelled? Hasn’t nurturing such a culture led to these terrible crimes?”
Author: Snežana Miletić
Photo: Chaikom/ Shutterstock