Media Sustainability Index (MSI) - Europe and Eurasia

MSI Europe & Eurasia 2008

 

Bosnia and Herzegovina

• Introduction
• Objective 1: Free Speech
• Objective 2: Professional Journalism
• Objective 3: Plurality of News Sources
• Objective 4: Business Management
• Objective 5: Supporting Institutions
• Panel Participants

---

Introduction

Overall Country Score: 2.64

During 2007 the politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) were marked by hostility toward the requirements for signing the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA) with the European Union (EU). Nationalist rhetoric, dominant in the postwar period, continued to pervade the political agenda. After months of negotiations these antagonisms ultimately thwarted B&H efforts to come to agreement on reforms required by the European Union, the most important of which was police reform. As a result, the signing of the SAA was postponed.

Despite some incremental movement on individual reforms, the ideology of irreconcilable differences among different ethnic groups were reproduced and reinforced in the media. Several cases are particularly illustrative as they indicate the tendencies of the political structures to engage the media in promoting their political agendas.

One of the most dramatic examples was the January 2007 boycott of public broadcaster BHT1 by the Government of Republika Srpska (RS). Officials refused to speak to BHT1 journalists in retaliation for what they considered the broadcaster’s poor treatment of RS authorities. While the boycott was supported by various public and private entities in the RS, others saw it as extreme, unfounded and illegal, because RS officials had not attempted legitimate methods of protesting editorial policy, such as filing grievances to the Communications Regulatory Agency (CRA). The whole affair ended after the director general of BHRT and an RS government representative signed an agreement on 30 January and declared that, “BHT1 will inform citizens in all of B&H objectively, timely, and impartially.”¹

As in previous years, the MSI panelists agreed that the media sector is still a largely underdeveloped market, characterized primarily by fragmentation along ethnic lines and a large number of outlets continuing to compete in a limited market. Other most commonly cited problems are vulnerability to political pressure and lack of mechanisms to prevent violations of ethical standards and declines in the quality of journalism. The low socio-economic status of journalists was pointed out as the most prominent problem that can lead to low quality of journalism, self-censorship and corruption among journalists.

The overall score for B&H declined noticeably, from 2.90 last year to 2.64 this year. Objectives 1 and 3, free speech and plurality of news sources, essentially held firm to their previous scores and Objective 1 is now the leading scorer, with a 3.04. The other three objectives decreased significantly, however, accounting for the drop in overall score. Professional journalism showed the weakest performance, as Objective 2 fell from 2.65 last year to 2.25 this year.

---

Objective 1: Freedom of Speech

Score: 3.04

Objective 1 received the highest score from this year’s MSI panelists, with a number of strong indicators. In particular, Indicators 8 and 9, media access to international news sources and free entry into the journalism profession, received nearly perfect marks. However, a few indicators still show weaknesses. In particular, Indicators 4 and 5, crimes against journalists and preferential legal treatment for public broadcasters, scored about three-quarters of a point less than the average.

The panel discussion participants mostly asserted that the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s guarantee of free speech is comparable to those in western democratic countries. They agreed that, on paper, the constitutional basis ensuring freedom of speech is satisfactory, but several panelists indicated that legal mechanisms are not adequately used in practice. Media legislation is generally inhibited by insufficient judicial protection and public indifference to freedom of speech. Exercise of free speech is also lessened because information published in B&H media is rarely treated as a significant means of critique, almost never initiating criminal investigation against public officials and rarely sparking public condemnation. As one journalist put it, “Journalists are free to the extent that no one cares what they are saying and writing.”²

Media fragmentation was also mentioned as one of the primary reasons for the professional community’s lack of initiative on expanding the boundaries of free speech. As Boro Kontić, director of Mediacentar Sarajevo, said, “The biggest problem may lie with the media themselves, which in our country and in the general divisions…don’t want to support freedom because it’s hard for someone to speak from a position that’s not acceptable…to the majority, so this is a problem of the media, not a problem of the legislative framework.”

Nevertheless, one of the participants, Borka Rudić, secretary general of the BH Journalists Association, emphasized that from 2006 to 2007 there were several attacks on free speech and that the Free Media Help Line received many complaints from journalists. (This is a service within the BH Journalists Association, which offers legal advice to journalists and places pressure on relevant institutions.) The service reported receiving 43 complaints from May 2006 to May 2007 related to journalists’ rights and freedom of speech violations. “Journalists were seeking protection and support in the following cases: physical attacks and death threats, illegal questioning by the police, attempts to reveal their sources, confiscation of television equipment, withholding of information, boycott of journalists and PBS employees, irregular salaries.”³ According to Rudić, the situation became much more complex after the elections in October 2006; pressure on journalists increased considerably in the months after the establishment of the newly elected government of the Republika Srpska.

While the panelists considered criminal acts committed against journalists to be rare, they could point to several cases of open pressure and verbal attacks on journalists. They also said that subtler, yet just as severe, pressures on journalists still exist and should be met by decisive action from society as a whole.

Ljiljana Zurovac, executive director of the Press Council, cited several examples of the RS prime minister reacting inappropriately to the media: “[RS Prime Minister Milorad] Dodik has uttered so many threats this past year… They are not harmless threats; they are specific threats and pressure, which have silenced the media [including] entire newsrooms… In practice in the past year we have been the ‘dark country…’ In the end we will avoid writing about things where we can place ourselves in a situation of being threatened.”

Borka Rudić and Boro Kontić called the previously mentioned RS Government boycott of BHT1 as a blatant case of media pressure, characterizing it as a testing ground for amplifying divisions in the media along entity and ethnic lines rather than employing legally prescribed procedures to resolve disputes over media content. The response—or lack of it—from the professional community and the general public to cases of media pressuring was crucial in such cases. Borka Rudić said that the police and other social actors sometimes react satisfactorily to cases of media pressuring, but that society very often remains silent. “[T]here are many cases when police forces support pressure on journalists, arresting them and taking their material from them,” he said.

The physical attack by a police officer on journalist Sanjin Bećiragić in November 2007 was mentioned as an example of positive community and official reaction to media pressuring. The incident was publicly condemned and the officer was relieved of his duties until the conclusion of disciplinary actions.

One of the extreme cases mentioned was a threat made in October 2007 to a journalist from the public broadcaster FTV, who was told that, “he and his editor deserve a bullet in the forehead.” This was especially serious given the statement was made by Vitomir Popović, B&H Ombudsman on Human Rights, who alleged that media criticism of his work contributed to his electoral defeat. Borka Rudić pointed out that death threats are criminal acts and should, at the very least, be publicly condemned. But in this case, only the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights reacted, along with a few other NGOs, illustrating society’s continuing acceptance of media intimidation.

While crimes against journalists might be rare, self-censorship is less so, especially if negative reactions from influential political or criminal circles are anticipated. Also, as Amir Zukić, editor-in-chief of RTVSA, indicated, even legitimate public criticism of journalists by national leaders can be interpreted as “a call for lynching” in a country so sharply divided among ethnic and nationalistic lines. The professional community’s lack of capacity and solidarity in confronting this kind of pressure was perceived as the most prominent problem.

However, B&H journalists did express their protest over physical threats made by Prime Minister of the Republika Srpska Milorad Dodik to Bakir Hadžiomerović, editor of the Federal television magazine 60 Minuta. In a press release they stated that “the announcement that ‘you are going to knock down Hadžiomerović if he ever appears in Banja Luka,’ which you publicly stated first in a meeting in Laktaši and later repeated in the Croatian television program ‘Nedeljom u 2’ [On Sunday at 2 pm], represents the most severe demonstration of force and an attack on the physical integrity of the journalist Bakir Hadžiomerović.”⁴

The Communications Regulatory Agency (CRA) is the state agency that licenses and regulates broadcasters and the field of telecommunications generally. According to the panelists, this independent state body has been performing these tasks in a fair manner and with growing integrity. Dunja Mijatović, director of CRA’s broadcasting division, emphasized that CRA decisions have survived several court challenges (there were approximately 60 lawsuits over the past five years), clearly demonstrating that licensing is indeed apolitical and fair. CRA performance was assessed as positive, especially compared to the experience of other countries in the region.

In contrast to broadcasters, the print media sector is self-regulated in accordance with Press Code prescriptions. The Press Council, a voluntary self-regulatory body, promotes the implementation of the Code and enhancement of professional standards in B&H print media.

There is no difference between the media and other companies regarding taxation patterns. The Law on VAT prescribes a uniform tax rate of 17 percent. Taxation was in the past challenged by the Press Council and associations of newspaper publishers, which stressed that the media should be exempted from the general taxation pattern due to their role in providing information in democratic society. This argument is still present among journalists, who clam that VAT taxation of media demonstrates the state’s disregard for the role of journalism in democracies. However, Senad Zaimović, general manager of the marketing agency Fabrika, considers it an improvement in comparison to the previous taxation scheme: “We had this problem before, this problem was reflected on the press… The entry tax was so high… VAT has brought stability. This is our experience both in terms of advertising and in working with electronic and print media.”

Participants did not indicate any relevant cases of preferential treatment of public media over private media.

Aspiring politicians and other ambitious public figures who wish to control their portrayals in the media often affect editorial policy in various ways. Editorial independence of public broadcasters is thrown into question because the members of public broadcasters’ governing boards are appointed by state parliaments,⁵ which raises the specter of political interference in editorial decision-making, especially in stories concerning politicians.

Amir Zukić stressed that editorial independence is especially compromised because of the governing board’s questionable authority: “They tie the hands of the director general and program director… The governing board has to have a say in everything.” In April 2007, soon after accusing the RS Prime Minister of interfering in the editorial policy of BHT1 in an interview, Zukić was released from his position as program editor. He interpreted his dismissal as evidence that his claims were true and that governing board members were not apolitical, but rather profoundly influenced by the political establishment.⁶

The panelists indicated that the CRA should be a corrective mechanism in the process of transforming PBS by assessing the competence of public broadcasters’ editorial boards. This, however, does not solve the problem, because candidates with the potential to bring positive change to public broadcasters are discouraged by the politically charged atmosphere and decline to apply for seats on governing boards.

The CRA’s Dunja Mijatović stressed that public broadcasters will not be completely impartial as long as the B&H parliament appoints members of the BHRT governing board on the basis of political, rather than professional, affiliations. The same goes for possible political pressure on CRA officials, which, according to Mijatović, is present and well known.

As Borka Rudić pointed out, journalists’ resistance to political interference is negligible, since editors and journalists almost never resign, thereby initiating public debate regarding the pressure they are exposed to.

Since 2002, libel and defamation in Bosnia and Herzegovina have been fully decriminalized. According to defamation legislation, the burden of proof lies on the offended party, which must prove the existence of falsity and malice. Since the panelists’ overall score for libel and defamation issues was not the maximum one, this indicates that the implementation of defamation legislation can be improved.

The Law on Freedom of Access to Information, which came into force in 2000, is supposed to oblige authorities to provide information of public interest to any citizen, including journalists. However, there have been considerable difficulties implementing the law. As previous MSI reports detailed, the law does not prescribe fines for violations of the right to access public information. Public debate on the implementation of the law, held in November 2007 at Mediacentar Sarajevo, suggests that access to relevant public information is often denied, especially by public firms and educational institutions. In particular, contracts on privatization processes are held in secrecy. The panelists also indicated that prolonging deadlines for providing information is a common way of bypassing legally defined procedures.

The right to follow international news is not restricted in any way. Also, there are no restrictions on becoming a journalist as no licensing is required. The panelists agreed that entering the journalism profession is free and without governmental pressure.

---

Objective 2: Professional Journalism

Score: 2.25

This was generally perceived as an objective that requires much improvement. Quality of journalism and compliance with accepted ethical standards have been compromised in the past several years. Compared to MSI scores from previous years, the score this year is somewhat lower, especially when it comes to journalist salaries and quality of media programming. Only a few television shows, all produced by public television stations, were mentioned in a positive light (Global, BHT1; Globus, TVSA; and Paralele, FTV), in contrast to most of the media content that was evaluated as being of rather low quality. Most of the indicators scored more or less equally, although panelists gave a score of more than a half point below the average for Indicator 5, pay levels for journalists. Indicator 6, news and entertainment balance in media, was the leading indicator, with a score more than a half point higher than the average.

The panelists often cited the incompetence of young journalists and the lack of time and resources for professional development. Professional standards in journalism are extensively neglected, despite a relatively large number of journalism faculties and short-term educational programs. This suggests that educational programs have serious limitations and do not produce journalists who are able to perform their tasks to professional standards. The dynamics of media operation and the work overload often do not allow journalists to take a serious investigative approach to their tasks. For the same reason, journalists who are appreciated within the professional and broader community generally do not engage in training programs for young professionals. TVSA’s Amir Zukić, for example, stated that, “Most of the good old staff are employed with good salaries… There is no one to teach these children. They do not teach them at the university, and when they come to a media outlet for internship, it’s not possible to put someone in charge of working with them.”

The balance between entertainment and informational programming is evaluated more positively. However, private broadcasters are skewing more toward entertainment, increasingly leaving informational content on the margins.

The panelists said that ethical standards are violated on a daily basis. An especially common practice, they said, is the selective use of sources without presenting opposing views. Reporting is often not only badly sourced, but, according to Boro Kontić, also takes the form of personal communication between journalists and their favored sources, without needed information and clarification to help the general public comprehend the issue in question.

Self-censorship, as discussed above, is evident in the differing forms of pressure on journalists. A 2007 study on “Labor Relations and Media” showed that 18 percent of respondents considered that stories on labor relations within the media sector actually demand a certain censorship, or self-censorship, while 40 percent argued that there are occasional cases of censorship or self-censorship.⁷ Poor socio-economic status leads to migration of some journalists into other, more profitable sectors, and presumably increases the likelihood of self-censorship.

The research results show that labor rights in media outlets are frequently violated, which is partly due to complexities of postwar transition and privatization, coupled with state building efforts. For example, 43 percent of respondents reported violations related to salary payments.⁸ The problem with salaries included low wages, irregular payment, and minimum salaries reported to the state to reduce benefit payments for employers. Frequently violated rights also include the length of the workday and overall working conditions, while other violations occur less frequently. The research results also suggest that the practices of censorship and self-censorship are governed not only by political connections and interests but also by the commercial interests of media owners and advertisers.

Additionally, panelists indicated that resources for replacing outdated equipment are insufficient and need to be increased. Most panelists voiced concerns over the slow process of digitalization at public broadcasters. Although some steps towards digitalization have been undertaken, they are limited to a few commercial media, while in other segments the media generally linger behind professional standards in democratic western countries. This is particularly the case with commercial television and radio stations that have small market shares. An example that was mentioned related to problems with the video link from BHRT to the Eurovision Song Contest, which occurred because of the incompatibility of BHRT’s equipment. Smaller commercial broadcasters are in a better position because they can invest continuously in developing their technical capacities, while the terrestrial broadcasting systems at state public media require considerable resources for maintenance, impeding digitalization.

Although digitalization of the broadcasting sector in B&H is one of the preconditions for meeting European standards, it is not recognized as a priority by governments and political parties. The strategy for transitioning from analog to digital broadcasting is still not developed (it is planned to be completed by the end of 2008 or the beginning of 2009) and action plans are still not defined, which leaves B&H far behind other European countries.

---

Objective 3: Plurality of News Sources

Score: 2.84

The score in this objective experienced a minor decrease compared to last year: 2.95 to 2.84. All indicators received scores close to the objective average, with Indicator 2, citizen access to news, the highest and Indicator 6, transparency of media ownership, the lowest.

Overall, Bosnia and Herzegovina is characterized by an excessive number of media outlets. There are more than 180 broadcasters in the B&H media market—145 radio stations and 43 television stations. This number is considered excessive for such a small market with a relatively low average income. There are three national public broadcasters (state-wide BHRT and entity-wide RTVFBiH and RTRS), several local public broadcasters and many commercial broadcasters (the major ones are OBN, Pink BH, and Mreža Plus, which is a network of television stations).

However, this large number of outlets does not mean that the market is pluralistic in terms of offering diverse voices and opinions. Media owners are not immune to ethnic and political polarization in the country, and many outlets are still clearly oriented towards certain political parties.⁹

Panelists indicated that the poor socio-economic status of the vast majority of B&H citizens prevents them from using many media resources. This, combined with the habits and prevailing culture of media consumers, makes television the most available and preferred information source.

Only a relatively small portion of the population has Internet access. However, the Internet penetration rate is continually increasing. According to CRA data, there were 237,660 Internet subscribers in 2006, although the number of actual users was estimated at 950,000. CRA assessed the Internet penetration rate in 2006 at 24.5 percent. ¹⁰

The participants said that public media do not completely fulfill their role of presenting diverse political viewpoints, due in part to political pressure on public media, which has been discussed above. In addition, the existence of a huge number of broadcasters without any apparent commercial viability raises the question of their financial resources. According to Senada Ćumurović, editor-in-chief of BH Radio 1, the fact that a large number of outlets survives in a small market leads to the conclusion that undisclosed financial sources over and above advertising income must be present, presumably from the political and private sectors.

Even when outlets are financially sustainable and independent, media often promote certain political options. However, it was repeatedly mentioned by a few panelists that the editorial independence of the entity-wide public broadcaster of the Republika Srpska, RTRS, declined last year. Amir Zukić, for instance, stated that “RTRS was full of investigative stories…‘tearing apart’ the SDS [political party] during their four-year rule, but with the arrival of [RS Prime Minister] Dodik to power, that edge became completely blunt… Moreover, we have complete siding of the RTRS with Dodik’s state-creating project.”

BHRT’s role in serving public interests is also compromised because, according to the panelists, members of the governing board who have excessive influence on editorial and programming policy are appointed by the state parliament. This is problematic considering that the state parliament operates along ethnic lines while professional criteria in decision-making are negligent. In other words, reflecting political views is limited to what is compatible with the political and financial interests of media owners or state institutions. However, there are no restrictions in terms of access to domestic or international media, so alternative opinions can be obtained from other media sources. All independent broadcast media produce their own news programs, but they are often marginalized in favor of other media content.

There are two major entity-based public news agencies: FENA (B&H) and SRNA (Republika Srpska). Independent news agencies also operate in B&H, gathering and distributing news. ONASA is the major one. Independent news agency services were scored highly by the panelists.

Data on court registration of every company and media outlet are accessible in principle. But in practice, transparency of media ownership is not absolute, since public insight is limited to whatever has been registered. Actual ownership and financial arrangements might differ significantly from what is declared publicly. The CRA’s Dunja Mijatović stressed that “[w]ho the real owners are, we as an agency can’t and needn’t know. This is also a matter for the tax administration and financial police. What is a relevant document and what should be accepted is the court registration because it’s transparent.”

Panelists noted the tendency towards increasing the number, strength, and share of several media conglomerates. Two conglomerates control the biggest national dailies, Dnevni Avaz and Oslobođenje. The print media were the most cited for ethical violations. Preferences towards certain political agendas were especially evident in election campaign coverage.

Representing the interests of minorities does not appear to be a priority in Bosnia and Herzegovina; there is little programming targeted to minority groups. According to Dunja Mijatović, there were no cases of complaints that ethnic minorities were not represented in the media. The presence of the languages of the three dominant ethnic groups in B&H in the public media is the most contested issue. “If we have complaints, they mostly refer to the absence of media that use the Croatian, Serbian, or Bosnian languages,” said Dunja Mijatović.

---

Objective 4: Business Management

Score: 2.50

The score for this objective fell noticeably from 2.74 last year to 2.50 this year; all indicators received scores very close to the objective average. Panelists cited a highly competitive market that includes encroachment from neighboring countries as a key reason for this. Mehmed Halilović, B&H assistant ombudsman on media, stated that the media market is still insecure and that the independent media’s struggle to survive is ongoing: “Independent media are barely surviving in the market. The market is fragmented and under a lot of political influence, and it doesn’t guarantee a secure future to all media.”

Among television broadcasters, public broadcasters previously held the leading position in the market. Their market share has declined significantly over the past years. While three public media operators suffered a significant audience decrease during the past several years (23.7 percent in 2006), the share of foreign (neighboring) television channels increased (33.3 percent in 2006) and the share of local and regional stations decreased in comparison to 2004 (40.3 percent in 2006).¹¹

The increase in market share of commercial networks is related primarily to the flourishing of the three major commercial networks in B&H, while smaller commercial broadcasters face many challenges to their survival in the limited B&H market. There are also several smaller municipal broadcasters, which are not privatized and are still receiving financial support from the government.

The most important source of revenue for all three public broadcasters is the broadcast license fee (6 KM, approximately 3 EUR per month). The second important source of revenue for public outlets—and the leading source for commercial outlets—is advertising. According to Miklos Haraszti,¹² the public broadcasting service’s budget derives 85 percent of its funds from license fees and 15 percent from advertisement revenues. It is estimated that the rate of collection is much lower than what public broadcasters require. According to the available data, the percentage of collected license fees is around 65 percent, while an estimated 85 percent collection rate would secure their financial sustainability.¹³ Public broadcasters attracted 43 percent of advertising revenues, while the three strongest private broadcasters drew 32 percent.¹⁴

The largest share of advertising revenues was received by several highly positioned networks: PBS, Mreža Plus, Pink BH, and OBN, while other local television stations faced difficulties in attracting advertising revenues.

According to the CRA, the revenues of B&H television broadcasters in the 2004 financial year totaled around KM 102 million (approximately €52 million), and remained at the same level in 2005.¹⁵ As estimated by a panelist from last year, 2006 revenue was seven to eight percent higher than in 2005. However, the same panelist, Senad Zaimović stated this time that the B&H media market is actually stagnating: “I can say that our market is stagnating and won’t grow next year… while Serbia had 35 percent growth this year.”

When it comes to support of advertising agencies and related industries to the advertising market, Zaimović pointed out that the market is uncertain because of inconsistent advertisement offers made by different media outlets. He said that, either out of ignorance or poor finances, media outlets are often forced to lower advertising rates. This of course makes the process of planning, analyzing, and purchasing by marketing agencies very difficult to implement. Media outlets competing for better positioning in the market are lowering their rates. Zaimović indicated that offers for advertisers for 2008 have not yet been made in Bosnia and Herzegovina, unlike other countries in the region. Commercial stations are waiting for public media outlets to make their offers so that they can list lower rates.

It can be presumed that the panelists’ ratings of independence and reliability of broadcasting ratings and circulation figures are somewhat low because print media circulation statistics have not yet been released.

Panel participants indicated that advertising revenue is the primary revenue source for commercial media and that key media outlets have advertising revenue balanced with their market potential. Senad Zaimović interpreted low revenue from advertisements as a reason for low production quality of broadcasters in B&H. This leaves room for foreign media, which are stronger in terms of production quality, to gain a considerable share in the B&H market.

Panel participants agreed that independent media do not receive government subsidies, but they mentioned that there are some positive developments when it comes to financing of television programs by cantonal governments. While in previous years the criteria for selecting broadcasters for this kind of cooperation were unknown, last year several cantonal governments published tenders for production of certain programs inviting all broadcasters to participate. One example was a tender for producing a television show for the deaf.

Introducing electronic measurements in market analysis was mentioned as an important step towards strengthening the media market, placing B&H ahead of other southeast European countries. However, as indicated by the panelists, market research is used only by a small portion of television stations, including PBS and two commercial stations (Pink and NTV Hayat), while other broadcasters mostly fail to make use of available market data as a basis for adjusting their programming to the needs of the audience. Kenan Ćerimagić, news editor of NTV Hayat, stressed that his outlet is using market analysis, but he also questioned its validity since systematic factors, such as occupational habits or habits related to housework, are not considered. However, he does believe that adequacy of investments in certain programs can be evaluated to some extent on the basis of program ratings.

Alenko Zornija, a journalist at the Internet portal Pincom.info, pointed out that precise registration of website visits and visits to specific website content are not used by advertisers in their full capacity.

The panelists listed several agencies for analysis of program ratings (MARECO, Global Network with its subsidiary in B&H, GFK, and an agency for measuring newspaper circulation), which could be useful in media operation. Zoran Pejičić, editor at RTRS, expressed his belief that pressure on media by advertising agencies can be an intermediary for economic lobbies. However, the marketing general manager Senad Zaimović stated that he has no knowledge of such cases: “I don’t know of a single case of an agency conditioning advertising on any kind of program-related concession. The agency channel is very suitable for putting pressure on editorial policy and, as far as I know, there are such cases in Croatia, but there are none here, at least not with these professional agencies. Of course, a difference should be made between conditioning and lobbying; lobbying is a legitimate process.”

While there is a code for advertisers, which came into force in January 2007, two panelists indicated that the code is not precise when it comes to print media and billboard advertising. Due to the regulatory void, a clear distinction in the print media between commercial and regular content is often missing.

---

5: Supporting Institutions

Score: 2.55

Panelists agree that some supporting institutions do not function adequately, that professional associations are fragmented and inefficient, and that institutions fail to give substantial support to independent media. According to Senada Ćumurović, editor of BH Radio 1, “Supporting institutions directly support certain media and there are certain media they don’t support.” Frustration over this situation accounts for the large drop in score, from 3.05 last year to 2.55 this year. All indicators scored along the same lines as the objective average, with only Indicator 3, NGO support for the media, being somewhat behind the others.

Opportunities for professional training of journalists, as well as educational programs in general, are often regarded as unsatisfactory. However, panelists mentioned several training programs that allowed journalists to develop their professional skills further. One of them is the Sarajevo-based Media Plan High College of Journalism (HCJ), which provides specialized studies in press, radio, television and web journalism for students from southeast Europe. The school was founded in 1998 within the framework of Media Plan Institute, an organization for communication projects and media development in B&H and southeast Europe. Since December 2005, HCJ has operated within the framework of Media Initiatives, a NGO in Sarajevo. The panelists also pointed out training programs organized by Mediacentar Sarajevo, namely training for media managers and short training programs for journalists in investigative journalism. Mediacentar also started a regional project called the Online Journalism Resource Center,¹⁶ in cooperation with Belgrade Media Center and the Investigative Journalism Center from Zagreb.

Panelists indicated that the education system overproduces journalists, which does not match the real needs of the market in terms of both quality and quantity. Journalism is taught at five faculties in Bosnia and Herzegovina—two in Banja Luka and one each in Sarajevo, Tuzla, and Mostar. In practice, the media market in B&H does not require the large number of journalists that are produced by the current educational system. The panelists did not think highly of the system and they expressed highly unfavorable opinions on the general knowledge and professional competence of the graduated journalists. Professional criteria in employment policies of media outlets have declined in the past years, compromising quality of journalism in the country.

Panelists indicated that media outlets and editors should enhance professional criteria and develop better mechanisms for professional development of young journalists. Options for giving journalists practical experience do exist but are limited, and can offer opportunities to few young journalists.

The Association of Electronic Media and the Association of Newspaper and Magazine Publishers have been operating for several years and promoting the interests of their member broadcasters and print media publishers, but the overall score for operation of associations suggests that their services should be enhanced.

The right to organize independent unions in B&H is defined by labor laws in all three jurisdictions (Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska and Brčko District) and is also guaranteed by the entity constitutions. Currently, there are three trade unions in B&H, one for each state jurisdiction. An additional level of trade union organizing in B&H is a confederation of these three trade unions that operates at the state level and is made up of branch unions of graphic, publishing, and media employees.¹⁷ At present, trade unions have a poor image and are often considered only as formal organizations that do not achieve substantial results in promoting the labor rights of journalists.

It is assumed that most journalists in B&H are members of one of the four journalist associations.¹⁸ According to membership data issued by the associations, 1,758 journalists are members of these organizations.¹⁹ These associations’ initiatives are separate and independent, and their potential strength is diminished by the fragmentation of journalists along ethnic and regional lines. The B&H journalist association encompasses three separate organizations—the Independent Union of Professional Journalists from Sarajevo, the Association of Journalists from Mostar, and the Independent Association of RS Journalists in Banja Luka—but this did not mean complete unification in promoting journalists’ interests. For example, a common stand of the union regarding relations between the RS Government and PBS was not published.

NGOs active in promoting free speech did not vigorously press their mission over the political pressure on journalists that characterized the past year. One that did play an active role was the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights. Other relevant organizations in this area are Transparency International B&H, Mediacentar Sarajevo, Centers for Civic Initiatives, and Open Society Fund B&H among others.

Sources of newsprint and printing facilities were not evaluated as politically influenced, but rather as underdeveloped. Journalist Alenko Zornija said, “I don’t think that providers of supporting services, such as printing plants and distribution companies, impose political restrictions, but this industry in itself is relatively underdeveloped, which in my opinion is a problem.”

---

Panel participants

Dunja Mijatović, director of the broadcasting division, Communications Regulatory Agency, Sarajevo
Boro Kontić, director, Mediacentar Sarajevo, Sarajevo
Borka Rudić, secretary general, BH Journalists Association, Sarajevo
Zoran Pejičić, editor, Radio Television of Republika Srpska, Banja Luka
Ljiljana Zurovac, executive director, BH Press Council, Sarajevo
Amir Zukić, editor-in-chief, Municipality Public Broadcaster RTVSA, Sarajevo
Kenan Ćerimagić, news editor, Independent Television Hayat, Sarajevo
Senad Zaimović, general manager, Marketing Agency Fabrika, Sarajevo
Nevenko Erić, editor, News Agency SRNA, Bijeljina

The opinions of the following research participants, who did not take part in the panel discussion, were used in preparing this report:

Alenko Zornija, journalist, Web Portal Pincom.info B&H, Mostar
Mehmed Halilović, assistant ombudsman on media, Sarajevo
Senada Ćumurović, editor-in-chief, Public Service Broadcaster BH Radio 1, Sarajevo
Leila Bičakčić, director, Center for Investigative Reporting, Sarajevo

Moderator and Author

Amer Džihana, research coordinator, Mediacentar Sarajevo, Sarajevo

Disclaimer: The views and opinions presented in the chapter on Bosnia & Herzegovina are those of the panel participants and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Mediacentar Sarajevo.

---