U report on the monitoring of tabloid texts about critical journalists The Slavko Ćuruvi Foundation observed that there is regularity in the attacks on those who criticize the regime - politicians and pro-regime tabloids use the same vocabulary and narrative when dealing with the media and journalists.
It is obvious that representatives of the authorities and the media sympathetic to them participate in the same way in synchronized campaigns against journalists, writes the text of the Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation.
The recent example of the multi-day campaign against the deputy editor-in-chief of the FoNet agency, associate of Cenzolovka and member of the Complaints Commission of the Press Council, Tamara Skrozza, clearly illustrates the aforementioned conclusion.
The following were unanimously involved in the campaign against Tamara Skrozza: state officials, authorities, television stations with national coverage, pro-regime tabloids and analysts sympathetic to the government.
The Slavko Ćuruvija Foundation made an analysis with the aim of showing how the slander campaign, which is initiated and carried out by the top of the government, with the help of self-interested media and analysts, works.
How it all started
Speaking about the Fifth of October and the overthrow of Slobodan Milošević in the show "If I Were Someone", Skrozza said:
"If that night had been different and we had woken up in a different Serbia, a Serbia without some people, I think this would be a completely different story today, and we are actually living in the nineties.""
National television and tabloids manipulated and misused Skroza's statement, presenting it as if she believed that Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić "should have been killed on the night between October 5 and 6, 2000."
Tamara Skrozza - although representatives of the authorities and pro-regime media and analysts tried to attribute it to her - did not mention Vučić's name or anyone else's name in the aforementioned show, nor did she call for violence or murder.
As she explained to the Cenzolovka portal, Skrozza meant that all the representatives of the then government, who were responsible for the events of the 1990s, should have been brought before the judicial authorities and held accountable for it.
A wave of lies and insults in the tabloids
In just ten minutes, on the portals of Informer, aloa i Evening news texts appear with the identical title "Vučić should have been killed on the night between October 5 and 6, 2000!", as well as with the same subtitle in which Skrozza is called an "opposition journalist" who "indirectly told people from authorities should have been killed during the October 5 coup".
Ten minutes later, in a slightly modified form and with a different title, the text was also published on the newspaper's portal Politics.
In none of these articles was the author signed, and each media outlet cited itself as the source.
The analysis of SĆF tabloid texts for the year 2023 showed that pro-regime portals, in as many as a third of the texts in which they attack critical journalists, publish identical or almost identical content, and all cite their own media as the source.
On Tuesday, the second day of the campaign, almost half of the front page of the daily newspaper Informer was made up of the headline "Tycoon media regrets that there was no civil war", the big headline "Skrozza: Vučić should have been killed back in October 2000", the claim that Skrozza stated that "during the so-called The XNUMXth of October revolution should have been slaughtered and everything would be different today if Aleksandar Vučić and some other people were liquidated then" and a photo of Skrozza and Aleksandar Vučić.
While Vučić's photo is of moderate colors and dominates the front page, Tamara Skrozza's photo is processed with the filter that tabloids use almost as a rule when they write about critics of the regime, and with which they denigrate and dehumanize them.
This news received the status of "breaking news" in the edition of Informer that day, occupying the front pages of the newspaper.
"New morning" on Pink and the continuation of the chase
On Tuesday, the minister without portfolio Đorđe Milićević and lawyer Pavle Stančić were guests in the "Browsing" segment of the program Novo jutro on TV Pink, where host Predrag Sarapa and guests analyze print media topics.
The spread of false and manipulative statements about Tamara Skrozza continued in this show, and the journalist was labeled as someone who "works for the interests of others, and against the interests of Serbia."
Predrag Sarapa quoted Informer's statement that Skrozza stated "that during the revolution of October 2000, political opponents should have been liquidated", and later wondered if it had "the character of invoking something, like 'we didn't then, we could now'". He asked the guests "if they are instigators, those who inspire and those who encourage, incite", concluding that it is a "criminal act".
As part of the same show, in the "(Un)noticed" segment, SNS MP Vladimir Đukanović was a guest.
Host Predrag Sarapa continued to interpret Skroza's statement as a threat to Aleksandar Vučić and attributed to her that she wished for the "liquidation of political opponents". Đukanović said that there is "a part of that so-called false elite", which "advocates that all those who think differently should be killed".
The campaign against Skrozza continued through the national dailies of TV Pink, also in the morning program (around 6 and around 10 am), when a segment from yesterday's central news show about Skrozza's statement was rebroadcast.
For the purposes of that report - in the parts when the journalist TV Pink talks about the threats and hate speech addressed to the president - footage from Tamara Skrozza's guest appearance on TV N1's show "Da sam ja neko" was used as cover.
By editing the report in such a way that alongside the journalist's claims about threats to the president, there are covers from Skrozza's guest appearance, viewers are clearly given the impression that Skrozza is complicit in calling for the lynching of the president, the Foundation's analysis shows.
What did the media do wrong in the Skrozza case
The campaign against the journalist began with the guest appearance of the Minister of the Interior, Ivica Dačić, on TV Pink, who, as he said, had been informed about her controversial statement the night before.
In the following days, other government representatives also participated in the campaign: Ministry of Information and Telecommunications led by Dejan Ristic, Minister for Public Investments Darko Glišić, Minister without Portfolio Đorđe Milićević, Advisor to the Prime Minister Predrag Rajić, MP Vladimir Đukanović and President of the Republic of Serbia Aleksandar Vučić. In this way, state officials and authorities used their positions of power to publicly discredit the multi-awarded journalist.
The discrediting and accusing attitudes of state officials and authorities laid the foundation for pro-regime media and analysts for further attacks on Skrozza.
When dealing with this topic, the presenters did not warn the guests about the possible violation of human rights, nor did they refrain from controversial statements. In this way, the television stations violated the obligations imposed on broadcasters by Article 4 Rulebook on the protection of human rights in the field of providing media services.
Interpreting Skrozza's statement as a murder threat, the television stations also violated paragraph 1 of Article 61 of the Law on Electronic Media, which says that "the media service provider, in relation to its program content, in accordance with its program concept, is obliged to provide free, truthful, objective, complete and timely information".
Despite their professional and legal obligation, the pro-regime media never gave Tamara Skrozza the space to make a statement about the topic in which she is the main participant. T
When it comes to print media, the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications could initiate misdemeanor proceedings against newspapers and portals that spread controversial content, which violates legal obligations. However, in the case of Tamara Skrozza, this ministry chose to participate in a coordinated campaign.
The end of the campaign against Skrozza coincides with the support of a large part of the domestic public and important actors of the international community, although its real impact on the end of the manhunt cannot be determined.
