Abstract
In 1999 and 2000, after being banned for the fourth time by Milosevic’s regime, B92 continued to broadcast online and via transmitters throughout Serbia. I was arrested, but after my release I was given 24-hour police protection, so the police were familiar with every step I took.
Some ten years after democratic change in Serbia, at least four journalists live under 24-hour police protection due to continued death threats from organised criminal groups. My colleague Brankica Stankovic was given 24-hour police protection, and a year ago, it happened to me too. The police believe our lives are in danger, but their protection now has the same effect as it did in the late 1990s and early 2000s – that of intimidation.
Colleagues from other media outlets are also under surveillance, but B92 faces specific threats against the way we work, against our determination to serve the public interest without compromise, to not give in to criminals, drug dealers, business tycoons and politicians. The threats are an obvious and direct attempt to silence investigative journalism in Serbia.
Following B92 broadcasts exposing organised crime and illegal activity, people were sent to jail and some big businesses had moratoriums placed on them or went under. But we never imagined that we would at any point need protection. We still don’t understand it. We have lost our privacy; our ability to move about freely is hampered. We live with the psychological effect of not being able to make a move without a bodyguard – a feeling of agitation rather than one of being comforted. But it’s very important that we don’t let it depress us.
We at B92 were given a clear choice: to withdraw and wait for those who threaten us to be arrested, or to keep fighting. We decided to fight more fiercely, increasing the number of people working in investigative journalism and training new journalists. This refusal to withdraw has not helped ward off those who threaten our lives – but we must show our dedication to the standards of our profession and keep working.
Because we have worked through several wars and under bans, we recognise the signs of danger. We check out information about threats, even if it comes from friends, so that we don’t become paranoid and make bad judgments. This takes up time and energy, but it is certainly necessary in order to keep a grip on reality.
For years now, the profession has been compromised. There is a clear erosion of ethics. Newspapers are more expensive, not because of improved quality but because the cost of paper has increased. Media is measured by profit, not by the number of quality investigative stories published. Advertising agencies are more important than editors, who are judged by the number of papers sold and on their ability to bring in advertising.
I am unable to do anything except practise ethical journalism linked to the romantic values of public interest. At B92 we take corporate social responsibility seriously. In 2011 alone, we raised more than €2 million, providing vital equipment to children’s and maternity hospitals, food to Serbs living in Kosovan enclaves and paying for the construction of safe houses for victims of domestic violence. Almost a fourth of our advertising revenues were spent on social responsibility. Some have argued that this is not our job. But I don’t think it is enough to expose the problems.
Independent investigative journalism cannot survive if we do not find new models that will allow us to work without relying on the country’s most powerful networks. These changes must take place not only in the financial sphere, but also in education, culture, social relations and value systems. The role of the media is crucial, from a political perspective, but also as a moral issue on which the development and prosperity of the whole community depends. An environment that lacks media credibility cannot cherish democracy and human rights. We must restore the reputation of the journalism profession. B92’s efforts have been significant, but we also need the support of international institutions that recognise that the welfare of the world’s people can only be realised through socially responsible media. ❒