Monthly Highlights November: Hate speech, Threats and Sensationalism

During November, the RDN monitoring team identified a range of hateful narratives and discourse driven by hateful and harmful political speech, hate speech against journalists and sensationalistic reporting.

Hateful and harmful speech in Albanian parliament

During the parliamentary session debating the newly adopted Gender Equality Law, opposition leader Sali Berisha made a series of homophobic and derogatory remarks directed at Silvio Gonzato, the European Union Ambassador to Albania. Berisha told Gonzato that “despite respecting everyone’s sexual orientation, your attempts to impose standards of multiple gender identities, beyond the binary, are unacceptable. Even in your status, you are binary, you have had a wife, children, and made your own personal choices. Which EU directive speaks of multiple gender identities? Berisha continued to accuse Gonzato of ‘ordering’ the approval of the Gender Equality Law and calling it “a Sorosian project that destroys the family.” He, furthermore, claimed that the EU Ambassador was pushing “a post-Marxist agenda” that “denies parents the right to educate their children.”

These statements were broadcast live, widely shared online, and triggered immediate condemnation both domestically and internationally. Taulant Balla, head of the Socialist parliamentary group, characterised the incident as “a serious diplomatic offense” and filed a motion to suspend Berisha from Parliament for 30 days. Minister Toni Gogu called the remarks “deeply shameful and discriminatory,” adding that stigmatising ambassador for their personal identities “has no place in a European democracy.” He urged the Parliament to publicly denounce the statements.

Likewise, the LGBTI Anti-Discrimination Alliance condemned the incident in a public statement claiming that “When hate becomes normalised in political and public discourse, democracy shrinks. These words are not just personal insults against a diplomat, but an attack on European values of dignity, equality, and human respect.” They further described Berisha’s and commentator Lindita Pano’s remarks (made in a podcast interview) as: “Examples of stigmatisation and the instrumentalisation of homophobia to sow fear and division in society.” 

Meanwhile, in his defence, Berisha claimed that his comments were “misinterpreted” and that he had merely asked which EU directive supported “multiple gender identities.” He denied any intent to offend, justifying himself by noting that “The word ‘binary’ is not an insult. I only asked for clarification. My remarks were not about personal life but about legislative principles.”

In another case, during a live debate on A2 CNN’s Off the Record, Democratic Party MP Xhelal Mziu directed a discriminatory insult toward Socialist Party advisor Alfred Muharremi, saying: “Je mësuar te Shtëpia e Fëmijës ti!” The phrase used “Children’s Home”, a reference to institutions where children without care providers grow up, as an insult, implying shame and inferiority. Muharremi walked off the set and refused to continue the debate. The National Association of Orphans condemned the remark, calling it offensive, discriminatory, and unacceptable from an elected official. 

Mean whilst during the presentation of the 2026 state budget, opposition MPs staged a symbolic protest by turning their backs to Prime Minister Edi Rama as he began speaking. Instead of responding institutionally, Rama mocked and humiliated the MPs using degrading language, stating: “Më mirë shpina sesa fytyra juaj.” He further thanked them “for making his speech easier,” framing the protest as a joke. Rama continued to ridicule the MPs’ physical posture, turning the gesture into a sexualized insinuation.

The situation escalated when Rama targeted MP Flamur Noka with personalised mockery about loyalty, comparing him to Shefqet Peçi and Lei Feng. The exchange spread widely online, generating polarised public debate and raising concerns about parliamentary ethics, public humiliation, and degrading political discourse. The remarks were amplified by media headlines focusing on the sexualised and humiliating nature of the statements.

All three cases have come to show the level of hateful and harmful speech in parliament as well as between politicians. Regardless of your political position, this should never provide a justification to spread hate against others, to use insults, or to publicly humiliate. Furthermore, in cases like these, the media must uphold their professionality by reporting on these cases without providing a platform for further escalation of hate or amplifying situations through sensationalistic reporting.

Hate speech during the Republika Srpska presidential campaigns in Bosnia and Herzegovina

During the presidential election campaign in Republika Srpska, many political leaders, including Milorad Dodik and other officials, spread hate speech in their public statements. In anticipation, Detektor.ba, Zašto ne, and Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina started monitoring the financing of the campaign, hate speech, and misuse of public resources.

In this context, Dodik and his political allies used rhetoric aimed at mobilising their core electorate by spreading fear, division, and the demonisation of certain groups, Bosniaks, Muslims, migrants, and even critics from the international community. These statements are part of a broader strategy of constructing a sense of threat, in which political survival is tied to the ‘defence of the people,’ the “independence of RS,” or resistance to ‘imposed solutions.’ 

Milorad Dodik, whose mandate as President of Republika Srpska was revoked by the Central Election Commission has repeatedly delivered hate speech at the election rally in East Sarajevo. On one occasion he claimed “We do not form alliances with Muslims. There is no life for us in this country. There is no life here for Serbs. We must build and defend our independence.”

Two days after this statement, he went on to further demonise Muslims by claiming that: “This city must not allow further Islamisation. Don’t give me those stories, we are not the same people. We are not of the same faith. No one lies more or worse than a Turk.” After this statement, the Central Election Commission of Bosnia and Herzegovina decided to initiate proceedings ex officio against Milorad Dodik for hate speech. Members of the Central Election Commission voted, with five votes in favor, to fine the SNSD 30,000 KM because Dodik used hate speech during a speech at the party’s central tribune. 

On another occasion, Dodik spoke against migrants, stating: “Every day Western reports come out saying: this woman was raped, this child was raped. Have you seen what migrants did across England? They brought in thousands of girls, raped them, there is nothing they didn’t do. The British authorities did not dare intervene because they feared the revolt of Muslims, refugees and migrants who live there. And they tell us to accept 50,000 of them. Oh please, take them to your own home, why would I need them. That’s our policy.”

Alongside Dodik, platform Odgovorno.st recorded a statement by Darko Banjac, from the People’s Party of Srpska where he claimed that “On the 23rd, we are electing our president, the Serb people are electing their president, not someone imposed by that weakling, that ‘Schmitić’* who comes from the f****t European Union, and yes, they are f*****t, I’m telling you that now. That’s the EU we should go to? And Siniša Karan represents all other values. The values of tradition, the values of customs, the values of our Orthodox faith, the values of the family, that is the national being of the Serbian people. Long live our Serbian people, long live our RS, long live our Serbia, long live mother Russia.” Siniša Karan was running for President of Republika Srpska as the SNSD candidate.

*When speaking of “Schmitich”, Banjac was referring to the High Representative in BiH, Christian Schmidt, which is a derogatory term for Schmidt.

Hate Speech and Threats on Live TV in Kosovo

During a debate on TV T7 show, Pressing, MP Nezir Kraki and analyst Parim Olluri were invited to participate. The debate was related to the second round of local elections where Nezir Kraki, a member of the Guxo party, in coalition with the Vetëvendosje party got into a heated debate with analyst Parim Olluri. During the heated discussion, hate speech was used, which almost escalated into a physical altercation after Kraki addressed the analyst using the words “Qyp zagarë” (“Get away, you dog”). As a result, the host had to interrupt the show.

Following the incident, there were numerous reactions. One of them was a reaction from Donika Gërvalla (Minister of Foreign Affairs in the technical mandate), who together with Faton Peci (who, after the local elections, became mayor of South Mitrovica) leads the “Guxo” party. Gërvalla called the T7 media outlet “street-like” the host a street thug, and the analyst a paid street thug on her Facebook page. As a result, the Association of Journalists of Kosovo reacted to Donika Gërvalla’s post, emphasising in its statement that the language she uses is unacceptable. 

Often, representatives of the former government, who are currently in a technical mandate, use every opportunity to employ hate speech toward the media and journalists who are critical of them and their policies. However, regardless of political standing and whether you agree with someone’s criticism of your politics and policies, it is never an excuse to use hate speech nor to let it escalate into physical altercations.

Sensationalistic and unethical reporting in Montenegro

Towards the end of October, in the town of Berane, Montenegro, a 22-year-old woman, D.Ć.  was physically assaulted by a man identified as V. R. while working in a café. The brutal attack, captured by security cameras, showed the perpetrator kicking and hitting her in the head. The video was later circulated on social media and published by several news outlets.

Many media reports covered the case in a sensationalist and unethical manner, emphasising the victim’s Serb nationality in headlines and articles. The choice of framing shifted attention from gender-based violence to ethnic identity, fuelling nationalist tensions and deepening existing divisions within Montenegrin society. Rather than focusing on the perpetrator’s horrific actions and crime, the media completely shifted the focus and spotlight as to the ethnicity of the victim’s ethnicity, thereby undermining the importance of the issue a case like this raises as to the safety of women, level of misogyny in society and the prevalence of gender based violence.

The suspect was arrested the same day, and prosecutors charged him with violent behaviour. The incident sparked widespread public outrage and renewed debate about media ethics, gender-based violence, and ethnic polarisation in Montenegro. 

This sensationalistic reporting reflects a broader problem in the Montenegrin media landscape, where gender-based violence is frequently turned into clickbait content, and victims, especially women, are exposed rather than protected. By emphasising the victim’s Serb nationality, some outlets transformed an act of violence against a woman into a story about ethnic identity and intergroup hostility, echoing historical tensions that still shape public discourse in Montenegro.

This kind of framing not only undermines ethical journalism standards, but also perpetuates patriarchal and nationalist narratives, where women’s suffering is used to serve political or ideological purposes rather than to promote justice and solidarity.

Ethnic hatred in North Macedonia

Zhupanoski, a police officer in Struga, caused strong public reactions after he insulted Albanians by calling the Albanian flags placed along the Black Drin River for the 28 November celebration ‘rags with black eagles’. November 28^th marks the Independence Day of Albania, an important public holiday, traditionally marked with public displays of the red flag with the black double-headed eagle.

The tension around Zhupanoski’s remark stems from the deep symbolic significance of the Albanian flag in North Macedonia, especially in regions like Struga where there is a large Albanian community.  In this context, any derogatory reference to the flag is widely perceived not merely as a personal opinion but as an attack on a community’s identity and dignity. Such incidents quickly gain public attention due to the country’s sensitive interethnic dynamics, the historical struggle for equal rights for Albanians, and the broader expectations that public officials, particularly police officers, maintain impartiality and respect toward all communities.

In another incident during the same month, the League of Fighters of the National Liberation and Anti-Fascist Alliance sharply criticized Tetovo Mayor Biljal Kasami for appointing Albi Qamili as Deputy Mayor, calling the move an “ethnic majoritarian gesture” that undermines the idea of an inclusive, multiethnic city. In their reaction, they questioned why a Macedonian was not considered for the position and accused Kasami of abandoning the balanced representation he previously promoted. The organisation also objected to the municipality’s November holiday program, claiming that official announcements ignore the Macedonian language and focus solely on Albanian national holidays. The appointment has triggered negative reactions primarily from Macedonian nationalist circles, who frame it as another example of ethnic favouritism.

The reaction circulated online was based on misleading and selectively framed information. Despite the claims that the appointment of Albi Qamili as Deputy Mayor was an “ethnic majoritarian move,” the Municipality of Tetovo never announced that the position must rotate by ethnicity, nor is there any legal or political rule requiring a Macedonian to be appointed. The narrative also falsely suggested that all November municipal activities were exclusively in Albanian, even though the municipality regularly publishes content in both languages. Several portals amplified the statement from the League of Fighters without verification, presenting it as a widespread public reaction rather than the position of a small ideological group. This framing fed into the long-standing disinformation narrative that Albanians in local government intentionally marginalize Macedonians, even though Tetovo has a long multiethnic administrative structure and coalition-based decision-making. The story was shared in a way that fuelled ethnic polarisation rather than reflecting the factual administrative process behind the appointment.

North Macedonia has a delicate multi-ethnic balance, and tensions between the Albanian and Macedonian communities remain present. In situations like this, irresponsible or sensationalist media coverage, along with inflammatory remarks from prominent public figures, only deepens those tensions. The media should and must do better to report in a professional manner that does not serve to further fuel ethnic polarisation. 

Subtle Misogyny and Manipulation in Serbia

1^st of November in Serbia marked one year after the canopy collapse at the Novi Sad train station that left 16 dead. Over 100.000 people, including thousands of students who marched from Belgrade, Novi Pazar, Subotica and other cities across the country, gathered in Novi Sad to commemorate the 16 victims in 16 minutes of silence. 

After the commemoration, Dijana Hrka, mother of Stefan Hrka, who died under the canopy, announced she will be starting a hunger strike in front of the Parliament in Belgrade. And so she did, for the next 16 days. Hrka said she demands a full and impartial investigation into the canopy collapse and the release and clearing of charges for all students, she says were unlawfully detained during protests. She also called for parliamentary elections, insisting that institutions must “do their job and determine who killed her child and the other 15 people.”

Those days were marked by a series of articles about her in pro-regime outlets. Instead of dealing with facts, these outlets turned to manipulation, portraying her as a passive actor being used by others and forced to go on a hunger strike, claiming this was not her decision.

Tabloids called Hrka “a victim the opposition is using for its goals” and “a woman humiliated and manipulated by the blockaders”, while her strike was shown as “an excuse for unrest in front of Parliament”. Since the moment she began her hunger strike, a counter-rally was organized in the so-called Ćacilend, a blocked part of the street in front of the Parliament with tents where government supporters gather. Loud music was played from there non-stop for days, including a Baja Mali Knindža song featuring the line “a mother went to look for her son”.

President Aleksandar Vučić, among other things, said he “understands political performances,” while calling on Hrka to end her strike. Although he expressed concern for her health, by framing her fight for justice as a “performance” he relativised the motives behind her decision.

The attempts to undermine the fight of Dijana Hrka, who seeks justice for her son and 15 others who died in the canopy collapse, relies on harmful, outdated narratives.

From subtle misogynistic messages about her “emotional instability” in pro-regime outlets to claims that someone manipulated, persuaded, or exploited her, coverage has escalated to outright dismissal of her hunger strike. The editor of Informer, Dragan J. Vučićević, during a live programme, also accused citizens supporting her of “wishing for her death.”

The Regulatory Authority for Electronic Media (REM) is the body responsible for responding to such content. However, REM has effectively been nonfunctional for a year. Although a new composition was recently selected, four newly appointed members, Rodoljub Šabić, Dubravka Valić Nedeljković, Ira Prodanov Krajišnik, and Mileva Malešić, resigned shortly after.

In their statement, they emphasised their participation in REM “would make sense only if the Council were elected in full and if there was a possibility to work independently, professionally, and in the public interest. This is not giving up on the fight, on the contrary, this situation shows why the fight was and remains necessary.”

Despite efforts to form an independent and responsible REM, the second attempt to elect the Council has also failed. Serbian media continue to operate without meaningful oversight, and unprofessional and unethical reporting faces no consequences. As ongoing manipulation, disinformation, and hateful and harmful messaging go unpunished, we are witnessing their escalation. Messages that normalise violence and dehumanisation are becoming increasingly common.