Gordana Novaković: Stories about the Press Council are brought up only when there is money to be distributed to the media

(Source: RTS) In a new edition of the media podcast “Bermuda Triangle,” Gordana Novaković, the Secretary General of the Press Council, discusses the work and funding of the Press Council, criticisms of bias in the decisions of the Complaints Commission, the regulation of the use of artificial intelligence in journalism, how gender equality requirements will change journalistic reporting, and what the right to be forgotten versus malicious reputational harm in the media entails.

“The Press Council exists for everyone who needs to file a complaint, but especially for those who lack other mechanisms, such as those who cannot afford a lawyer or do not wish to go to court,” says Gordana Novaković in the podcast “Bermuda Triangle.” “Politicians generally have many other mechanisms to counter the media when they feel wronged. The increased number of complaints from politicians to the Complaints Commission may be good for the visibility of the Council, which is always the case when high-profile individuals, not necessarily politicians, address us publicly. If we rule the same way on complaints from those in power and those in opposition, it reinforces the belief that we are making fair decisions. It is certainly much better for politicians to complain to us than to sue the media in court. It is undeniably better if they are satisfied with that and do not go beyond it. However, we are aware that this can be abused and can be a form of pressure on the media.”

We discuss with Gordana Novaković the amendments to the Serbian Journalists’ Code, which will soon come into effect, what changes they will bring to the press and the Council’s work, whether local governments have abandoned project co-financing due to the obligation to adhere to the code, how professional ethics regulate the use of artificial intelligence, how journalistic reporting will change due to gender equality demands, and what the right to be forgotten versus malicious reputational harm is.

The podcast guest also answers questions about the work and funding of the Press Council, criticisms of bias in decision-making on complaints, why the number of complaints is disproportionately small compared to the number of violations, whether the Council is ready to include newly established journalists’ associations in its work, and whether the decision of some national media like Informer, Nova, Srpski Telegraf, and Tanjug not to recognize its jurisdiction or the decision of others like Blic and Krik to recognize it but not comply with the Complaints Commission’s decisions is more damaging to the Council’s reputation.

“The fact that someone refuses to publish a decision of the Complaints Commission does not affect the Council’s reputation. It speaks about them. If we agreed to work by certain rules, and you decide that they do not apply to you, that cannot harm the Council’s reputation, only the media that made such a decision. On the other hand, those who do not recognize the Council have the right to do so, they have the right to believe that the Code does not bind them. We cannot force anyone to respect the Code, but as a profession, we must state what it is – that it is not in accordance with professional rules. Whoever wants can read those contents, but the audience should know what they are reading.”

Author: Dragana Pejović