IREX
International Research & Exchanges Board

Media Sustainability Index (MSI) - Europe and Eurasia

MSI Europe & Eurasia 2009

Bookmark and Share

 

Montenegro

Introduction

Overall Country Score:  2.15

The Montenegrin political environment was mostly stable during 2008, and featured three major political events. In March and April, Montenegro held its first presidential election since regaining its independence on May 21, 2006. Although the opposition had several candidates, Filip Vujanović, the candidate of the ruling coalition, won the elections with relative ease, and thus reinforced the position of the ruling political block. In October, the Montenegrin government officially recognized the neighboring Republic of Kosovo, thus officially embracing the regional policies of the US and the EU. The recognition caused political tension and even street protests by the opposition. At the end of 2008, the Montenegrin government applied to become a candidate for EU accession.

Until the last quarter of 2008, the Montenegrin economy was growing at an encouraging rate of 6 to 8 percent. However, from autumn onward, negative trends became more visible, resulting in the downfall of the capital market and problems in the construction and banking industries. The global financial and economic crisis also had a direct impact.

All these events were in the media spotlight in 2008; however, they were covered differently depending on individual media outlets’ editorial policies. Print media such as Vijesti, Dan, and Monitor were underlining weaknesses in government policy on management of the national economy, as well as publicizing numerous scandals with elements of crime and corruption.

This year was also marked by controversy over Montenegrin Radio and Television (RTCG), the country’s public broadcaster. In certain municipalities, local public service is constantly accused of being an extension of the governing parties. RTCG, which is in financial crisis, was the subject of serious political and social disputes regarding its editorial policy and negative political pressure it faces.

Business operations in the media sector continue to prove difficult, on multiple fronts. Most media are not profitable. The number of media workers is down more than 400 from last year. Republika, one of the four national dailies, went bankrupt this year. Fox TV has left Montenegro altogether, despite having obtained an operational license. Bureaucratic barriers have prevented the new television station Vijesti from expanding and broadcasting nationally. There was a second failed attempt to privatize Pobjeda, the oldest Montenegrin daily, which is burdened by debts and an excessive number of employees.

Despite difficult circumstances, this year saw some promising developments. Television station Vijesti and another station owned by foreign interests, PRO TV, were launched. The first generation of Montenegrin journalists completed their university coursework and received their diplomas. These changes have the potential to positively impact the professional standards and future viability of media in Montenegro.

Montenegro’s overall score dropped from 2.35 to 2.15 thanks mostly to striking decreases in Objective 1, freedom of speech, and Objective 5, supporting institutions. The other objectives remained more or less unchanged.

 

Objective 1: Freedom of Speech 

Score: 2.17

The loss of 0.45 points in this objective compared to last year comes as a result of losses in several indicators. Only Indicators 1 (legal framework), 3 (market entry), and 8 (media access to foreign news sources) did not change significantly compared to last year. Most of the indicators received scores similar to the overall objective score. Indicator 4, crimes against journalists, scored more than a half point lower than the objective score, while Indicator 8 remained well above the objective score.

Six years ago, a set of media laws was adopted in Montenegro. This marked a turning point, promoting media sector reforms and aligning Montenegrin media with international standards. The general assessment of media experts was that the laws represent good a basis for the development of media, protection of free speech, and promotion of professional journalism. These laws regulate all significant media issues, such as licensing of media, rights and obligations of journalists, broadcasting regulations, and the structure of public broadcasting services.

However, practical implementation of the laws has been problematic. “After six years, we don’t have much to cheer about,” said panelist Darko Šuković, editor in chief of private radio station Antena M. “It has turned out that good regulations neither guarantee a good media environment nor enable a quality environment for the journalism business.”

The panelists felt that poor and distorted implementation of the legislative framework impacts negatively on the freedom of media and professional status of journalists. Several key issues have arisen in implementation of the media laws. The government regulator ignores media monitoring. Government funding is given equally to media that broadcast entertainment or music programming and those that produce news programs. Media pay excessive fees to the broadcasting regulator. The government is obstructing the transformation of the state-run television station into a public service station. Intentional bureaucratic obstacles are being imposed on private electronic media applying for licenses. Poor judicial practices are resulting in heavy fines for journalists charged with libel. Journalists are not being protected by the judicial process in cases in which the journalist is the damaged party.

Given the political and social atmosphere in Montenegro and the attitude toward independent journalism, the media sector can hardly be considered progressing. All of the panelists said that critical journalism is weakening; professionalism is institutionally endangered; and if conditions remain this way, the future of Montenegrin media is bleak, and this in turn will discourage freedom of speech in Montenegro. As in previous years, panelists said that conditions are too poor politically, economically, and socially for the development of free press and promotion of independent and professional journalism. The general assessment was that freedom of speech has regressed in Montenegro, and that paradoxically, Montenegro is applying for EU and NATO membership at a time when freedom of press has worsened.

The business end of the media sector is also troubling. This year witnessed the bankruptcy and withdrawal of some media (for example, the closure of Republika and Fox TV leaving Montenegro); and cases of violence against journalists remaining unresolved, being processed slowly, or producing few visible results. (Example cases include the attacks on Vijesti director Željko Ivanović, Republika journalist Tufik Softić, and publicist/writer Jevrem Brković, as well as the murder of Dan editor in chief Duško Jovanović.)

Panelists pointed to huge problems in the work of the police and judiciary in Montenegro, which is particularly negatively impacting the media community. Their conclusion was that journalists are poorly protected in Montenegro, and this favors informal centers of power and irresponsible public officials.

Illustrating weak rule of law and democracy, politicians and influential businesspersons are bringing more and more court cases against journalists. The majority of the cases are resulting in inappropriately heavy fines against the media and journalists. For the criminal offense of slander, Montenegrin Criminal Code mandates a fine of €5,000 to €14,000 or imprisonment if the convicted person does not pay the fine. In this indirect way, freedom of speech is being suppressed and unprofessional self-censorship of journalists encouraged, bringing Montenegro back to the era of a one-party system and little freedom.

“It is very difficult to promote free speech in Montenegro, because the majority of media is fostering idolatry regarding authorities. Government is very skillfully creating the media environment, combining fear and privileges,” said panelist Nedjeljko Rudović, journalist for Vijesti. “A great many journalists would rather remain silent because they don’t want to put their status in jeopardy.”

The environment for the development of independent journalism and freedom of press is significantly limiting. Government and public institutions frequently violate the Freedom of Information Act and ignore requests to access the information in their possession, making it even harder to check their operations, and preventing journalists from informing citizens about public institutions. “We are witnessing a policy aiming to limit the reach of independent media,” Rudović said.

 

Objective 2: Professional Journalism

Score: 1.91

The score for this objective is essentially the same as last year, although one indicator did suffer a noticeable drop: Indicator 2, journalism ethics. However, all indicators scored close to the overall objective score.

The panelists’ general assessment was that media have not achieved an acceptable level of professionalism, and that the majority of journalists are still not performing in line with international standards. Journalists concentrate on reporting from political and social events, and routine briefings and comments on the political environment and public figures. Journalists are not dedicated to tackling serious social issues. Panelists said that Montenegrin media have witnessed a devolution in professional standards, and that a focus on the recovery of the media sector is needed in order to avoid discrediting the profession and media companies.

“Professionalism requires thorough investigation of certain cases and not just interviewing interested parties,” Rudović said. “The key problem of Montenegrin journalism is that journalists are just scratching the surface, without deeper insight into the problems, which is the only way to present the true picture of certain events to the public.”

Independent journalist Petar Komnenić spoke up in defense of journalists, pointing out that often their hands are tied by the government’s efforts to obstruct information. “It is true that media sometimes report unverified information, but there is also irresponsibility on the side of government institutions. Quality contacts within government institutions are often impossible to achieve, and this is directly producing problems for professional journalists,” he said.

In 2002 a code of ethics for Montenegrin journalists was developed, outlining 12 basic principles of professional journalism. The code was adopted by representatives of many leading journalist associations, but application of the code has been unsatisfactory. The Journalists’ Self-Regulatory Body was established in order to enforce the code. However, panelists said that the body’s credibility has been undermined by not functioning at the level required and because the findings of the body are often ignored by the media. As a result, journalists are violating the ethics code with little or no repercussion.

The media sector is under more and more pressure from political parties. Political structures are aiming to keep control over the most influential Montenegrin media, either through government financing or, the preferred method, selecting board members. Such efforts greatly undermine professional journalism, a problem the media community is well aware of.

The quality of editorial policies is also compromised by the commercial interests of media companies, which, out of the need to survive economically, are pushing aside the rules of the profession and independent journalism. Owners meddle in editorial policy, which hurts pluralism and overall press freedom. In the elections, public media were supportive of ruling coalition platforms, while private media had conflicting positions depending on the character of political events.

Widespread self-censorship and opportunistic editorial policies are also detracting from development of professional journalism and undermining the reputation of media.

Dragan Klarić, editor for the radio station Budva, provided a specific instance of interference with journalists’ work — a case in which the Montenegrin Football Federation banned Dan’s journalists from reporting on its sports events. “This is a classic example of where freedom of press is violated,” Klarić said. “It is not just that we have problems with poor professionalism in journalism; [we have] an environment preventing journalists from doing their job.”

Journalists’ salaries are still relatively low, averaging not more than €500 monthly.

Sports, entertainment, and commercial programs were favored this year over news, educational, and cultural stories. In this way, media outlets avoid dealing with hot topics, even though these topics are of crucial importance to citizens and to the progress of society as a whole. Electronic media especially are to blame, given that they are more influential but are favoring “easy” issues. Increasing production of programs that are of no significant societal or political value is unacceptable, because this diminishes professional journalism, free speech, productive criticism, and quest for truth, which leads to loss of values inherent to a democratic and open society.

The panelists expressed specific concern with the lack of specialized and investigative journalism. Electronic media are insufficiently dedicated to investigative journalism. Some national private media (TV Vijesti, Antena M, TV-IN) focus occasionally on certain social and political issues using investigative journalism. In addition, print media are widely recognized as critical of government policies, dedicated to investigating issues, and providing deeper insights for their readers. However, bad editorial policies, poor staff capacities, and constant financial troubles limit media outlets in their ability to conduct such reporting. In order to develop investigative journalism in all social areas, media companies must promote willingness among journalists and build capacity through education and training.

 

Objective 3: Plurality of News

Score: 2.41

The score for Objective 3 did not change much this year, and, after a decrease in Objective 1, is now the highest scoring objective for Montenegro. However, there was a fair amount of movement within the indicator scores. Indicators 2 (citizen access to media), 4 (news agencies), and 7 (media reflect a broad spectrum of social interests) decreased moderately, while on the other hand notable increases were given to Indicators 5 (independent media produce their own news) and 6 (transparency of ownership). Almost all indicators scored close to the objective score, except for Indicator 3, public media reflect are non-partisan, which received a score slightly more than a half-point lower.

Montenegro has a healthy plurality of media outlets — more than 150 local and national level print and electronic media. Although that equals a very high ratio of media to resident, the volume does not translate to satisfactory professional results or free and impartial journalism. So many media are in operation because it is possible, with relatively little money, to sustain radio and television stations with no social importance whatsoever. The number of media outlets reporting on issues of public interest or working to promote freedom of speech is relatively small.

The main issue under this objective is how to establish a sufficient number of quality media that will comply with professional standards, thus providing fundamental support to democracy, development of civil society, and rule of law. In this respect, Montenegrin media is only in its beginning stages, and poised for a struggle to create the desired media community.

The majority of broadcast media are simply reporting information they obtain from the daily press, various government bodies and public institutions, or the news agency sector. (Montenegro has one local news agency: MINA.) Few media have a proper correspondent network, so the capacities of the media sector are rather limited and in obvious discrepancy with number of media in Montenegro. The sector has a clear need for quality media materials and for horizontal development of media companies that would maintain a presence in all segments of society and contribute to faster, better quality distribution of free information.

Panelists identified another problem: They said that current economic trends indicate hard days to come for the 3000-plus members of the media community, so it is realistic to expect that plurality of media will diminish. Current global and local crises have hit the private media sector, leading to two national media terminating their operations and some other announced investments into media sector slowing down, indicating future economic hardship.

According to the panelists, public media are becoming less public and more governmental, which has a negative impact on the independence of journalists and the principles of free press. “Public media, both at the local and national levels, do not contribute to quality of the media scene, and at the moment, represent an obstacle for faster development of professional and politically impartial journalism,” said panelist Vladan Mićunović, editor in chief of Vijesti. As the largest media outlet in Montenegro, with 700 employees, RTCG has the capacity to reform into an independent and competent public service.

Media outlets in Montenegro are in fierce market competition, but in reality, few media companies are fighting in a productive and socially desirable way. In the national print media market, the main competitors are dailies Vijesti and Dan; and in the national broadcast market, the key competitors are TV IN and RTCG-TV. Private media are at a financial disadvantage compared to the public media, which have support from local and national state budgets. Although some private media are owned by powerful individuals and strong financial groups, in practice their position is systemically unequal.

Internet journalism is still in its infancy in Montenegro, and panelists had mixed opinions on whether it can bolster Montenegrin media in the years to come. Slavko Mandić, editor in chief of Radio Skala, pointed out that few users in Montenegro have a fast or reliable connection, which “seriously limits the importance and potential of internet for the development of journalism.”

But media advisor Duško Vuković said that he sees good possibilities, with blog journalism now being discovered in Montenegro and given the unbounded nature of the Internet. “There are no limitations,” he said. “This media enables democratization of the media scene, providing long-term opportunity for development of uncontrolled and independent journalism.”

The panelists pointed out that the transparency of ownership of media companies is better than it used to be, but there are still suspicions regarding the true ownership structures of some media. Ownership is not concentrated. Some foreign ownership is present, but seems to be on the decline. As mentioned above, Fox TV left Montenegro. European media concern WAZ was interested in buying the only state-run daily in Montenegro, Pobjeda, but pulled out of the running in March 2009. This is the second time an attempt to privatize Pobjeda has failed since 2007.

 

Objective 4: Business Management 

Score: 2.22

Objective 4 received a score exactly the same as last year. All indicators remained more or less unchanged, except for Indicator 4, balance of advertising revenue to other revenue, which showed a modest increase. All the indicators scored close to the objective score, except for Indicator 6, market research, which lagged behind by about a half-point.

Again this year, panelists agreed that media business in Montenegro is unprofitable and hardly sustainable. Panelists described the competitive environment as not equitable. Public services are surviving mainly due to the financial support of local and national budgets. The numerous private media are oriented toward the limited advertising market and the financial support of their owners; they face huge problems and are barely surviving.

According to panelist Draško Đjuranović, an independent media analyst, the advertising market in Montenegro is functioning as well as in more developed economies, and for some media outlets, advertising accounts for up to 40 percent of total revenue.

Advertising revenues cannot cover all the expenses of media companies, however. Private media such as Vijesti, Dan, TV IN, and Radio Antena M are viable, but most media are dependent on constant financial support from their founders. Foreign donations have either dried up or amount to symbolic figures, so the future is questionable for many media that have financed their programming in this way.

Financial problems trickle down to staffing as well. “Media companies are constantly forced to reduce costs, thus directly affecting the quality and professionalism of Montenegrin journalism,” Mandić said. Journalists’ salaries are low, averaging around €500, while appurtenant staff receives even less. This situation often results in corruptive reporting and weak staff development.

Panelist Radojica Bulatović, director of the Media Institute, said that the low wages keep away most professionals to begin with. “Journalism is not an attractive profession, and one can hardly expect big salaries in this line of work,” he said.

It is realistic to expect that the number of media outlets will shrink in future, thus worsening the status of employees in media sector. However, a reduction in the number of media companies can have a productive effect. Those media that manage to develop proper resources, reduce external costs, implement rational management policies, and persist in an editorial orientation that brings high ratings among viewers, listeners, and/or readers can prosper in the future.

Media companies are benefiting from the work of NGOs that conduct market surveys, which help media outlets shape programming to audience preferences and thus attract advertisers.

 

Objective 5: Supporting Institutions

Score: 2.04

The lower score in Objective 5 resulted from panelists awarding lower scores to every indicator, except for Indicators 4 (academic journalism programs) and 5 (short-term training programs), which remained unchanged. The only indicator to score notably differently than the objective score was Indicator 2, professional associations, which fell about a point short of the objective score.

The media community has not shown solidarity regarding business promotion of the media sector or protection of the journalism profession. Professional organizations and trade unions are still poorly developed within the media sector, and this has quite a negative impact.

Some professional organizations are actively supporting the interests of certain media, such as the electronic sector, but overall, associations continue to lack significant influence. The general opinion of the panelists was that the absence of quality organizing leaves Montenegrin journalists without social recognition for their work or help in advocating for their interests.

The situation is particularly worrisome with the country’s two journalism associations (The Journalists’ Association of Montenegro and the Association of Professional Journalists of Montenegro). These organizations do not have basic financial or staffing resources for serious work, and the majority of journalists do not trust their professional organizations, so indifference is the rule and key issues are not tackled. Dino Ramović, editor in chief of TV Teuta, commented that the passivity is reflective of disassociation among journalists themselves. “I see no improvements within the media community regarding its professional cohesion and solidarity,” he said.

The panelists agreed that a major unresolved issue is Montenegro’s lack of competent journalist unions. “The problem of protecting the integrity of journalists in their media companies, preventing abuse of journalists, and preventing direct influence of media owners on how journalists write represents the biggest problem affecting today’s journalism in Montenegro,” Đjuranović said.

In an atmosphere where journalists and apprentices face significant problems as employees, they have nowhere to turn for support and protection of their labor interests. “[Unions are a] totally unexplored area, and this facts enables media tycoons in Montenegro to have uncontrolled power in their respective companies,” Đjuranović said.

Panelists praised the good cooperation between the media and NGOs dedicated to promoting interest and awareness of the issues faced by media companies. Radojica Bulatović, director of the Media Institute, praised its work: “I would like to give one positive example regarding external support to journalists and journalists’ profession. This is eight long years of operating the Media Institute, which gave a strong contribution, through numerous educational programs, to development and promotion of journalists’ profession.”

Recent years have seen improvement in formal journalists’ education. Due to decade-long efforts, the Media Institute and the School of Political Sciences’ Journalism Department have produced the first generation of Montenegrin journalism graduates. But panelists said that there is a need to harmonize formal education with practical experience and principles of professional journalism.


Panel Participants

Dusko Vukovic, editor-in-chief, PCNEN, Podgorica
Petar Komnenic, independent journalist, Podgorica
Nedjeljko Rudović, journalist, Vijesti newspaper, Podgorica
Vladan Micunovic, editor-in-chief, Vijesti TV, Podgorica
Darko Sukovic, editor-in-chief, Radio Antena M, Podgorica
Dino Ramovic, editor-in-chief, TV Teuta, Ulcinj
Drasko Djuranovic, independent media analyst, Podgorica
Radojica Bulatovic, director, Media Institute of Montenegro, Podgorica
Dragan Klaric, editor-in-chief, Radio Budva, Budva
Slavko Mandic, editor-in-chief, Radio Skala, Kotor

Moderator and Author:

Rade Bojovic, executive director, Media Ltd., Podgorica

The Montenegro study was coordinated by, and conducted in partnership with, Media Ltd., Podgorica. The panel discussion was convened on November 28, 2008.