Bad Practices, Bad Faith: Soft Censorship in Macedonia
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Bad Practices, Bad Faith: Soft Censorship in Macedonia www.wan-ifra.org Bad Practices, Bad Faith: Soft Censorship in Macedonia PUBLISHER: SEEMO EDITOR: XXXPLEASE MAKE THIS A SMALL TABLE Overview of funds spent in public information campaigns WAN-IFRA Oliver Vujovic 2012 - 6,615,609 EUR World Association of Newspapers 2013 - 7,244,950 EUR and News Publishers OTHER RESEARCH PARTNERS: 2014 – (to 20 June) 3,985,500 EUR 96 bis, Rue Beaubourg International Press Institute (IPI), Vienna Source: Association of Journalists of Macedonia (2015) “Assessment of Media System in Macedonia” 75003 Paris, France International Academy - International Media www.wan-ifra.org Center (IA-IMC), Vienna International Academy (IA), Belgrade WAN-IFRA CEO: Vincent Peyrègne PROJECT PARTNERS: Center for International Media Assistance Soft Censorship in Macedonia: Bad PROJECT MANAGER: National Endowment for Democracy Practices, Bad Faith, is one of a series in the Mariona Sanz Cortell 1025 F Street, N.W., 8th Floor ongoing project on soft censorship around the Washington, DC 20004, USA world. Country reports on Hungary, Malaysia, EDITOR: www.cima.ned.org Mexico, Montenegro and Serbia were issued in Thomas R. Lansner 2013-15, as well as a global overview, Soft Open Society Justice Initiative Censorship, Hard Impact, written by Thomas R PRINCIPAL RESEARCHER: 224 West 57th Street Lansner, who also edited this report and is South East Europe Media Organisation New York, New York 10019, USA general editor for the series. (SEEMO), Vienna www.opensocietyfoundations.org www.seemo.org SUPPORTED BY: SEEMO RESEARCHERS: Open Society Foundations Siobhan Hagan Sladjana Matejevic DESIGN AND PREPRESS: Dragan Sekulovski Snezana Vukmirovic, Ivan Cosic, Plain&Hill Serbia Kristina Stevancevic © 2015 WAN-IFRA 2 XXXPLEASE MAKE THIS A SMALL TABLE Overview of funds spent in public information campaigns 2012 - 6,615,609 EUR 2013 - 7,244,950 EUR 2014 – (to 20 June) 3,985,500 EUR Source: Association of Journalists of Macedonia (2015) “Assessment of Media System in Macedonia” Note on RepoRT ReseaRch and Soft Censorship in Macedonia: Bad Methodology Practices, Bad Faith, is one of a series in the This report on the practice and prevalence ongoing project on soft censorship around the of soft censorship in Macedonia is part of the world. Country reports on Hungary, Malaysia, Soft Censorship Global Review, produced by the Mexico, Montenegro and Serbia were issued in World Association of Newspapers and News 2013-15, as well as a global overview, Soft Publishers (WAN-IFRA) in cooperation with Censorship, Hard Impact, written by Thomas R the Center for International Media Assistance Lansner, who also edited this report and is (CIMA), with the support from the Open general editor for the series. Society Foundations. It was prepared by the South East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO) in cooperation with International Academy- International Media Center and International Academy, based on the methodology developed by WAN-IFRA. Oliver Vujovic edited the report. Contributors were Siobhan Hagan, Sladjana Matejevic, Dragan Sekulovski, and Kristina Stevancevic. 3 Bad Practices, Bad Faith: Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary .................................................................. 5 2. Key Findings ............................................................................. 7 3. Key Recommendations ............................................................. 8 4. Macedonia’s Media Landscape ................................................. 9 5. Soft Censorship and the Erosion of Media Freedom in Macedonia ................................................ 10 6. Advertising, Subsidies and Influence ....................................... 12 7. Media Ownership Structures: Connections to Political Power ............................................... 16 8. Lack of Transparency, Defamation Suits and Surveillance: Reinforcing Soft Censorship ............................... 17 The Law on Media and Audio Visual Services and the Law on Media ......17 Defamation Suits ....................................................................................18 Unauthorized Surveillance .....................................................................19 9. Conclusion ............................................................................. 21 ANNEX ....................................................................................... 22 List of Interviewees .................................................................................22 Endnotes .................................................................................... 23 4 Soft Censorship in Macedonia 1. Executive Summary In Macedonia today, official financial distinct disadvantage, and even threatening their incentives and pointedly partisan influence survival, in the country’s small media market. have resulted in “media capture” by the state, Soft censorship provides politicians and diminishing the industry’s professionalism and high-ranking officials simple but relatively subtle credibility, and curtailing its rightful role in tools to pressure journalists in often less than fostering democratic development by providing obvious ways. In Macedonia, this affects both impartial information and a venue for public the content and tone of much media reporting. discussion and debate. There is a dearth of unbiased reporting A principal challenge to independent on activities of the government and state journalism is the symbiotic relationship between institutions, corruption, issues of civic interest, the ruling party and many media outlets and and alleged ties between politics, business and their owners. Examples on both the national media. There is also little coverage given to and local level are described in this report. the fact that laws modeled on EU standards Government-friendly outlets are bolstered by are often quickly adopted, but remain largely various means, particularly non-transparent unimplemented. allocation of advertising and other official funds, Soft censorship is also practiced through generating an environment where partisan ownership structures. There are clear political and business interests set media connections between politicians and owners of agendas and directly shape reporting. many media outlets. Some have strong links to Many respondents among the journalists a particular political party that plainly informs and media experts in Macedonia interviewed editorial policies and everyday reporting. This for this report raised similar issues that make nexus between politics and media is especially clear the strong grip soft censorship exerts on visible in the output of the state-owned public the country’s media. A variety of soft censorship broadcaster, which has been reduced to little mechanisms used to silence or pressure more than a mouthpiece for the ruling party. journalists are described, and actions to counter Further challenges rise from low wages them suggested. and a chaotic labour market for media Soft censorship is facilitated through practitioners. Many journalists cannot survive opaque and poorly regulated allocation of on their monthly salary, and must seek other state advertising, self-censorship, repressive employment or sources of compensation. Some and misused legislation, lack of transparency in media houses operate at least partially in the media ownership, and ownership connected to “black” economy. Journalists are sometimes political parties and factions. paid only part of their salary on the books— The financial realities of Macedonia’s media with taxes and social security paid—with further market force many media outlets to depend compensation not officially recorded. on state advertising to remain financially viable. Macedonian journalists also face verbal The absence of transparency in state advertising threats13 and physical assaults,14 which have raises serious concerns. Media outlets critical of increased along with political and inter-ethnic government policies are denied access to most violence in the first months of 2015. Unsolved state advertising or support, putting them at a cases of physical attacks remain highly 5 Bad Practices, Bad Faith: problematic for media freedom. While not a gains in developing some of its democratic form of soft censorship, such intimidation has a institutions.16 The country’s media, however, are chilling effect on media freedom that engenders headed in the wrong direction. The country’s self-censorship and makes soft censorship easier democratic future will not be sustainable to effect. More details of such attacks and absent the bedrock of a free and independent threats may be found on the SEEMO website.15 media that offers citizens unbiased information In addition, many journalists have had about—and a voice in—their country’s affairs. criminal or civil cases filed against them, while Many problems facing Macedonia’s media others have been accused by media close to are structural. This deeply rooted situation government of having served as intelligence requires systemic change that can be realized services informants. The long-running only through the genuine commitment of unauthorized surveillance of journalists by the government, business, and media practitioners. secret police, revealed by opposition leader The Macedonian Government must now Zoran Zaev, has caused both a political crisis work in good faith to allow and facilitate the and media controversy in the country. All growth of diverse and vibrant media—and this contributes to a