There is no Code provision we haven't had a complaint about": Under what conditions does the Press Council operate

(Source: Cenzolovka) The Press Council will remain a key pillar of professional journalism through self-regulation, especially in times of digital challenges, while the state’s attempts to invalidate its decisions and work represent, as FoNet’s interlocutors assessed, a serious threat to freedom of expression.

The General Secretary of the Press Council, Gordana Novaković, explained that with self-regulation, journalists themselves set the rules and determine the body that will oversee their implementation, adding that this principle is essentially voluntary and based on respect for ethical standards, not laws, which is the main difference compared to state regulation.

“This is a principle that is essentially gentle towards the media, more based on educating the media on how they should not operate, pointing out their shortcomings so they can correct them in the future, rather than on sanctioning with some kind of monetary or similar penalties,” stated Gordana Novaković.

She emphasized that the most important difference between a self-regulatory and a regulatory body is the absolute independence of self-regulation from the state and political and economic influence.

Comparing the work of the Press Council in and outside Serbia, she said the similarities are resolving complaints and working according to a code, while everything else is somewhat adapted to that media space and country.

“What I can say, truly without any desire to boast, is that we are among the first in Europe to introduce rules concerning, for example, the online sphere, the use of artificial intelligence, and I think that a number of press councils from Western Europe even lag behind us in that part,” said Novaković.

Regarding complaints, she said it is much harder for our Council, which is also a member of the European Association of Independent Councils, than for others, due to a more complicated media scene, as well as the cases encountered by the Complaints Commission.

Other councils deal with complaints related to privacy violations or discrimination, while she stated that for the Council in Serbia, there is practically no provision of the code on which they haven’t had a complaint.

Novaković also points out that in Scandinavian countries, like Sweden and Norway, there are no media that are not members of the press council and that do not publish its decisions, assessing that this is a consensus that was reached long ago and endures.

As a problem, she highlights that our Council does not have a permanent source of funding, as it is still financed exclusively through projects, so it has happened that it functioned without money for several months.

“That problem exists in the entire region, not only in Serbia, with the difference that some other councils have some part from membership fees – we don’t even have that,” explained Novaković, also noting that unlike ours, some councils have stable funding sources and large budgets.

She stated that the German press council has an annual budget of millions of euros, of which 500,000 is received from the state without any conditions, while the Finnish council receives 25 percent of its funds from the Ministry of Justice because they believe it reduces the number of lawsuits and relieves the courts.

Code Changes

Speaking about code changes, Novaković stated that the added chapter concerning respect for dignity, and the point that prohibits running campaigns against people, proved to be very connected to protests, as 70 percent of recent complaints related to it.

Olivera Milošević, a member of the Press Council’s Complaints Commission, speaking about the implemented changes to the Code, said the changes also stemmed from the significant presence of social networks as a source of information, noting that there were previously many dilemmas, problems, and even complaints regarding the republishing of content and photos from networks.

Speaking about code compliance, she stated that everything depends on the media, emphasizing that the essence is that there is no major shift among those who traditionally violate the Journalists’ Code of Serbia.

“For example, when it comes to tabloids, which are the biggest violators of the code, actually from the amendments until today we haven’t noticed any change in behavior, and generally that wasn’t even expected,” explained Milošević, who is also the vice president of the Journalists’ Association of Serbia.

She added that too little time has passed since the amendments to draw any major conclusions, but she believes that in the field of digital changes, there will indeed be some progress in respecting the Code.

Asked about the obstacles the Press Council faces, Olivera Milošević cited attempts to invalidate the work of this body, assessing that this is nothing new, that it continues, and that it is being resisted for now.

“On the other hand, we see that today we live in a time when parallel worlds, institutions, and among other things, parallel media organizations and associations are being created. So we couldn’t even be surprised if tomorrow someone gets the idea for some kind of parallel Press Council,” said Milošević.

She expressed hope that this would not happen, as it would mean a “death sentence” for self-regulation, the Journalists’ Code of Serbia, any kind of responsibility in journalism, and ultimately independence.

Council Decisions Significant for Court Proceedings

Lawyer Milena Vasić from JUKOM, also a member of the Complaints Commission, stated that the Press Council’s decisions are very significant in court proceedings because, although they are not binding and do not represent a source of law as such, they carry the weight of their argumentation and reasoning.

“In that sense, many citizens also contact us, who have already initiated court proceedings wanting to strengthen their argumentation with a Press Council decision, which I think is good. And I think the court pays attention to the Council’s opinion,” she said.

Milena Vasić conveyed that it is in the interest of freedom of expression for the media to regulate themselves, because the moment the state begins to regulate the media, not only is free speech stifled, but journalists are also endangered.