Original article (in Montenegrin) was published on 12/01/2022
The decision of the Agency for Electronic Media (AEM) to limit the rebroadcasting of some parts of the Serbian Happy TV’s program content to six months, due to hate speech and discrimination against members of Montenegrin nationality, was used by some media to promote articles in which readers were told that it is completely forbidden to show the program of TV Happy in Montenegro, and also that the work of the Serbian media is banned again.
The website Alo published an article entitled:
“A scandal: Media darkness begins in Montenegro: TV Happy banned for six months”.
This text was also shared by the website called Nova Danas, featuring the following title:
“AN UNSEEN SCANDAL, EVERYONE IS IN SHOCK! Happy TV banned in Montenegro! The media darkness has begun!”
The website Informer published an almost exact text, with a slightly different title:
“Shock after shock, just like in Milo’s time, the new government bans the Serbian media. What is behind it? The betrayal became sweet to Montenegrins”.
AEM’s decision refers to the ban on rebroadcasting four TV Happy shows: “Good morning Serbia”, “Weekend morning”, “Cyrillic”, and “After lunch”. The decision, which was made on January 8, states the following:
“The decision was made because, in the previous period, incitement to hatred, intolerance and discrimination against members of the Montenegrin nationality was frequently provided and enabled in these program contents. The Council had in mind that the mentioned program contents use derogatory, insulting or disturbing language that incites intense negative emotions, expressing hostility or desire for discrimination, and belittling or devaluing members of Montenegrin nationality, denying their national identity and uniqueness. Without questioning the right of all broadcasters to inform the public about issues of public interest, the Council of the Agency assessed that the right to freedom of expression is being abused in the stated contents. Considering that this is a matter of public interest, the protection of which requires implementing measures to suppress the disputed expression, which was found to be continuous, the Council concluded that it is justified to limit the rebroadcasting of these shows for six months”.
The decision came after the leader of the Serbian Radical Party, Vojislav Seselj, expressed new insults against members of the Montenegrin nationality and SDP MP Draginja Vuksanovic.
The website Alo cited excerpts from AEM’s press releases and indicated which shows were restricted, while the sensationalist headline stated that the television program was banned entirely. On the other hand, Informer’s text begins with the statement claiming that “the new government in Montenegro bans the work of Serbian media in the country, just like the former regime of Milo Djukanovic”, after which it cites parts from the AEM’s decision.
AEM has previously restricted the rebroadcasting of certain shows on the same television due to hate speech and discrimination against members of the Montenegrin nationality.
Since the work of Happy TV is not banned, but the broadcasting of four of its shows is limited to six months in Montenegro, we rate the publication of the website Alo as disinformation.
The rating “disinformation” is given to a media report that contains a “mixture” of facts and inaccurate or semi-true content. In such cases, the media does not need to be aware of the inaccurate information published along with accurate information. Also, this rating is given to reports that have false attributions or titles that do not reflect the text in terms of accuracy of information.
Due to untrue claims that the new Montenegrin government continues to do the same as the previous government, by baning the work of the Serbian media, we rate the publication of “Informer” as fake news. This rating is given to the original media report (entirely produced by the media that published it), which contains factually incorrect claims or information. Content that is assessed as fake news could have been created and disseminated to misinform the public, that is, to present a claim that is entirely false as fact.
We also rate the publications by “Alo” and “Informer” as “clickbait”. The rating “clickbait” is given to a media report whose title has no basis in the text that follows. Such texts and articles aim to attract consumers’ attention with sensationalist titles, thus promising content that does not actually exist, and are mostly created out of financial interest, i.e., due to increased readership.
__
Edit: January 14, 2021.
The website Alo published a correction in its original text, clearly using the ethical standard of professional conduct of journalists and denied the original allegations. So, we give them a rating for refuted. The “refuted” rating is given in cases when the media determines that the content falls under one of the negative reviews described above, and then denies it in a clear and visible manner, in accordance with the principles.
