Self-Regulation as a Solution: What the New Set of Internal Acts Bring to Serbian Media

(Source: Мedia.ba) Media reforms in Serbia have been ongoing for over two decades, practically since the fall of Slobodan Milošević and his malignant regime. In the early 2000s, with a decade-long lag compared to other Eastern European countries, Serbia entered a prolonged and still unfinished transition process—one that has been deeply traumatic, unfair, and has yielded disastrous results.

The 1990s were largely stagnant in this regard. While there was a dynamic redistribution of capital—essentially a euphemism for the massive plundering of public and state resources—this was not accompanied by reform processes. On the contrary, any legislative reform aimed at aligning Serbia’s legal framework with so-called Western, liberal rules and values was actively resisted.

This was particularly evident in the media sphere, which was dominated by state-owned outlets that were financed from national, provincial, and municipal budgets while also enjoying privileged access to other public funds and the advertising market. During the late 1990s, numerous sensationalist media outlets emerged under strict state control, designed to spread lowbrow culture in line with the ruling regime’s values. The long-term impact of Serbia’s kitsch media empire proved to be more damaging than its propaganda and war-mongering efforts, leaving devastating consequences not just for Serbia but for the entire region, while enriching their owners. Both state-run and tabloid media would metaphorically “reach for their revolvers” at the mere mention of ethics.

There were also private, independent media outlets in the 1990s, surviving thanks to Western funding. The only notable legislative move during this time was the adoption of the so-called Šešelj-Vučić Law on Public Information in 1998 (Aleksandar Vučić, now Serbia’s president, was the Minister of Information at the time). This draconian law sought to completely silence critical thought in the media, imposing harsh fines and asset seizures on independent journalists and media organizations through fast-tracked court trials.

2000s Onward: A Cat-and-Mouse Game

Since the early 2000s, the struggle to establish clear media rules and eliminate market discrimination has been akin to a game of cat and mouse. Media professionals and ethical journalism advocates represent the “mouse,” while the “cat” is the government and its extensive media apparatus dedicated to propaganda. Despite multiple attempts at reform, beginning with the first pro-reform Broadcasting Act in 2002, Serbia’s media landscape has remained chaotic, and efforts to align public information with citizens’ interests have largely failed. This failure is not due to poor legislative quality but because these laws have never been implemented in practice.

Two distinct periods must be noted. From 2000 to 2012, despite ongoing political influence over the media, public debate was still present, and hate speech was largely confined to tabloids. However, since the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) came to power 12 years ago, two parallel processes have unfolded: continuous media reforms on paper and the systematic subjugation of the majority of Serbia’s media, which has become a primitive tool for silencing dissent and attacking political opponents, accompanied by an explosion of disinformation, propaganda, and hate speech. The rule of law has been entirely eroded, and even basic journalistic standards have disappeared.

Although Serbia has since adopted two new sets of media laws and a new Media Strategy, developed with international support, the media landscape has in some ways deteriorated compared to the 1990s. Public debate has vanished, and critical journalism is virtually extinct. Even independent media struggle to maintain balanced discourse, as government officials refuse to participate in their programs. Media laws and strategies follow one path, while the media scene veers into lawlessness.

The reform process has exhausted media and journalism organizations, which have spent over a decade advocating for legal frameworks that remain unenforced. In the meantime, the Journalists’ Code of Ethics of Serbia was adopted, and the Press Council was established to oversee its implementation. However, self-regulation has had limited impact. While it has improved reporting standards in ethical media, it has failed to curb widespread violations of journalistic ethics, as documented in the Press Council’s studies.

Serbia’s media abuse is well-documented internationally and frequently referenced in EU and global reports on press freedom. It is an ongoing subject of academic and policy research.

Media Professionals Disillusioned with Reforms

A 2023 study by the organization Lokal Pres, titled “The Strategy for the Development of Serbia’s Media System (2020–2025) and Its Implementation: Findings, Attitudes, and Recommendations of Media Workers,” revealed that Serbian media professionals are largely indifferent to reforms. The study, which surveyed 255 journalists and media workers, found that most believe that without the rule of law, strategic documents and legal changes cannot improve the media landscape. There is also a high level of distrust in both state and media institutions, which received extremely low ratings from survey participants.

Journalists and media professionals view self-regulation mechanisms more favorably, especially those outlined in the Media Strategy, such as the Press Council and internal ethical guidelines. However, this only applies to non-government-aligned media. There is virtually no belief that self-regulation can improve the reporting of pro-government outlets. Many in the industry believe that meaningful change can only occur with a change in political leadership.

Internal Acts: A New Attempt at Self-Regulation

The 2023 Law on Public Information and Media requires Serbian media outlets to adopt internal documents outlining measures for editorial independence, gender equality, the rights of people with disabilities, and journalist safety. These documents must be submitted to the Business Registers Agency (APR) starting in 2025, though no deadline or enforcement mechanisms have been specified. There is justified skepticism that pro-government media will use these documents merely as bureaucratic formalities—or even as tools to further discredit independent outlets.

To assist smaller independent media lacking resources, the Association of Online Media (AOM), in collaboration with media and legal experts, has developed a Set of Internal Acts as part of the “Strengthening Media Capacity for Media Sector Reform in Serbia” project, supported by the European Commission. This set of documents provides a framework that media outlets can adapt to their needs before submitting them to APR.

The Set of Acts aligns with the Journalists’ Code of Ethics of Serbia, the Press Council’s guidelines, and international journalism standards on press freedom and human rights. It is also in accordance with Serbia’s media laws and international conventions regulating public information.

The Set consists of:

1. A general internal ethical act establishing professional standards and editorial independence.
2. A safety policy for journalists and media workers.
3. A gender equality policy for newsroom practices and reporting.
4. A policy to prevent and sanction sexual harassment within media organizations.
5. A policy ensuring equal treatment of people with disabilities in the newsroom and in media coverage.

Crucially, the Set includes a mechanism to guarantee enforcement, as previous ethical guidelines were often adopted under external pressure and remained unused. The AOM concluded that lengthy and complex policies tend to be ignored, and instead, a more concise and practical approach would be more effective.

The general ethical act follows European standards but also introduces internal mechanisms for enforcement, specifying who within a media outlet is responsible for monitoring and implementing ethical guidelines. It also addresses the ethical use of artificial intelligence in journalism, emphasizing transparency, oversight, education, and accountability.

The safety section encourages solidarity among journalists and cooperation with institutions like the Permanent Working Group for Journalist Safety in Serbia.

By adopting these internal policies, ethical media outlets can at least establish a foundation for professionalism and integrity, even as the broader media landscape remains plagued by political influence and systemic dysfunction.

Аuthor: Nedim Sejdinović