There is a push in the U.S. Congress to pass S.4741 Western Balkans Democracy Act, authored by Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), as part of this year’s National Defense Authorization Act. The legislation comes at a critical time for democracy and governance in the Balkans, which, with U.S. support, must improve throughout the region for the countries to finally join the European Union (EU), thereby permanently stabilizing Europe’s Southeastern flank.
Accompanying this Congressional focus on the Western Balkans and the policies enshrined in the Western Balkans Democracy Act is a growing narrative that freedom of the press in Serbia is in drastic decline. Freedom House and a number of other international non-governmental organizations have for years described a worsening environment for media freedom and investigative journalism in Serbia. They point to the “threat of lawsuits or criminal charges against journalists for other offenses” as a means to silence the media, “lack of transparency in media ownership,” and “editorial pressure from politicians and politically connected media owners” that results in “self-censorship.”
While these are real challenges that the Serbian government, political opposition, media, and civil society must address, a closer examination of the Serbian media space reveals that, contrary to the “media in decline” narrative, these problems have actually persisted – not worsened – for decades, with unacknowledged signs of progress.
Since the fall of Slobodan Milosevic’s regime in 2000, Serbia has grappled with an array of problems affecting media freedom in the country. There is a lack of professionalism among Serbian journalists, coupled with government hostility towards the profession from both the present ruling coalition and past governments that were led by those parties currently in the opposition; extreme political polarization; and state support for friendly media outlets. Although these problems have received increasing attention from international NGOs in recent years, they are not new.
For the last two and a half decades, Serbian governments of all stripes have used state resources to bolster friendly media outlets – both broadcast and print – to their political advantage in order to project an image of success and mobilize their base of support within the electorate. The actors have varied from government to government, but the methods are virtually the same, from dangling access to officials in exchange for positive coverage to providing preferential bank loans and state grants. Those currently in the opposition, who now decry the present authorities for these practices, made use of the same mechanisms while they were in government.
But there are signs that the situation is improving, in no small part due to technology’s effect on the media environment, which has increased access to an array of views on cable, the Internet, and in print. For example, the influence of five national television channels, which critics often point out are granted national status by the government and indicative of government favoritism, has been diluted by the proliferation of both cable television and the growing dominance of digital platforms, especially among younger Serbians. These cable providers, which carry both pro-government and anti-government outlets, offer Serbians access to channels that display a wide range of viewpoints.
However, demographics play a role in choice, and it is indisputable that older Serbians still rely on traditional print media, which has historically aligned itself with whomever is in power. Since the older population generally hews more conservative – they are more skeptical of European integration and NATO, and more amenable to relations with Russia – the content of print media also tends to reflect this perspective. Still, the diversity of viewpoints available, even within print media, suggests a more complex landscape than commonly portrayed. Pro-government outlets may outnumber anti-government ones, but their audience sizes are comparable. This is not just a testament to the diversity of opinions within Serbian society, but to freedom of the press broadly.
The challenge in Serbia, like in the United States and many other democracies, is that the media is intensely polarized due to the fact that most consumers only want to read and watch what is consistent with their preexisting views. Commercial and advertising interests then cause media in Serbia to conform to these demands with their editorial policies. As a result, much like Fox News and MSNBC exist in the United States, media outlets like Informer and Nova exist in Serbia to provide news with narratives that appeal to specific segments of Serbian society. This desire to only hear and see the news that conforms to preexisting perspectives, rather than receiving equal exposure to different views, is more and more a global phenomenon that is certainly not limited to Serbian society.
However, the increasing use of digital platforms generates hope for the future of the Serbian media environment. Roughly 90 percent of Serbians 44 and younger now get their news from digital platforms, which make a wide array of media outlets available online. Since digital platforms are universally accessible, they have democratized access to independent information, eroding reliance on both television and print media. Another sign of progress is the intensifying dialogue between the Serbian government and local NGOs about how to maximize freedom of the press, especially in the context of the National Convention on the EU, which is a civil society platform stood up by the European Union and composed of independent leaders from Serbian NGOs, academia, trade unions and professional associations.
The Convention ensures the participation of and oversight by Serbian civil society in the government’s activities to fulfill EU membership reform requirements. In the area of media freedom, the Convention advocated for changes to Serbia’s media laws and their alignment with European standards to protect freedom of speech, pluralism in media, and the safety of journalists. The Serbian government accepted many of the changes to Serbia’s media laws that were proposed by the Convention, as well as those recommended by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE.) As a result, on October 31, 2023, while on a visit to Belgrade, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, “On media freedom, you just finalized important reforms. Congratulations on that one.”
To be sure, steep challenges remain and further action is necessary to enhance the media environment in Serbia and ensure that bad media practices are not simply passed on from one government to the next. At the same time, U.S. policymakers and international NGOs would be remiss to overlook the implications of the rise of digital media and vital dialogue between the Serbian government and civil society to reshape the media space in Serbia, and to lend their support to these efforts on Serbia’s path to full membership in the EU.
Natasa Dragoljovic was the first Coordinator of Serbia's National Convention on the EU (NCEU) from 2014 until 2023. NCEU was established with the support of the European Commission to provide local civil society oversight of the Serbian government's fulfillment of EU membership criteria. It brings together over 850 Serbian civil society leaders.
