The Media Council for Self-Regulation strongly condemns the broadcasting of the so-called documentary film "Referendum - the story of invented freedom", a product of the Center for Social Stability in Novi Sad, which was aired in two episodes on Montenegrin televisions with national frequency - TV Prva and TV Adria, on May 20 and 21.
The content that was aired represents one of the grossest violations of the Code of Journalists of Montenegro that we have witnessed in recent years. In this case, the Code, as a fundamental document of professional self-regulation, was rejected in its foundations, starting with the first principle, which obliges journalists to be "at the service of the public interest" and that their credibility is based on "professional honesty, integrity and knowledge".
What is shown to viewers in Montenegro and the region under the genre label of "documentary" is not a document, it is not journalism and it is not an analysis. It is a political pamphlet with a propaganda function, whose rhetoric and iconography are most directly associated with the fascist propaganda of times that are long behind us. It is about the content that declares the Montenegrin nation as fictitious, the Montenegrin state as temporary, and the restoration of independence as treason. In that "documentary" it is announced that "getting back your own" and ominously says that "it has only just begun". The content we are talking about represents a simultaneous attack on several basic principles of the Code:
Principle 1, which requires respect for the truth and persistent search for it, as well as fairness and humanity. The content of the film, on the contrary, relies on the systematic placement of untruths and pseudohistoriographical constructions presented as facts. It is in direct opposition to Guideline 1.1. which prohibits the publication of information known to be false or malicious, as well as unfounded accusations aimed at harming reputation.
Principle 2, according to which the facts are inviolable, and it is the duty of the journalist to put them in the proper context and prevent their abuse. Guideline 2.1. expressly prescribes that "the commentary must not be presented in such a way as to create the impression that it is an established fact" - this is exactly what is systematically done in the "documentary" in question.
Principle 4, which prescribes that race, religion and nationality are mentioned only when it is necessary for complete information in the interest of the public. The most dangerous and unequivocal violation concerns Guideline 4.1. (Hate Speech), which expressly prohibits the publication of "material intended to spread hostility or hatred towards persons because of their race, ethnic origin, nationality, religion... as well as political affiliation", and stipulates that this also applies when there is "a high probability that the publication of some material would cause the aforementioned hostility and hatred". The same guideline obliges the journalist to "do nothing to contribute to the spread of hatred" and to respect other states and nations. In this case, on the contrary, hatred is the central organizing theme of the content.
The content also violates Guideline 4.3., which clearly draws a line between journalistic freedom and an unreasonable personal or collective attack - "offensive speech means an unreasonable personal attack on a person and it cannot be protected by the right to freedom of expression".
Principle 10, which mandates editorial independence and prohibits the media from being used for the interests of "advertisers or other persons who have a business, political or representative interest" (Guideline 10.2). This content is not the product of the editorial work of the television stations that broadcast it, but the product of the political center of power of another country, packaged in the editorial space of Montenegrin national frequencies.
Discriminatory speech and hate speech, in addition to the Code, are expressly prohibited by the Criminal Code of Montenegro, the Law on Media, the Law on Audiovisual Media Services...
The claim that "the biggest demographic explosion in Cetinje after the Second World War" is the result of the fact that "the families of men from Cetinje, while many died on the battlefields, were guarded by the Italian occupiers", along with the narrator's qualification "the beauty of vice" represents one of the most vulgar and heinous attacks on the dignity of a community in the recent media history of the region. The media that showed this content agreed to be a channel for the dehumanization of the citizens of a country, packaged in a genre.
The claim that the restoration of Montenegrin independence is "a story of betrayal", that citizens "no longer wanted to be who they were", that Montenegrins are "a new nation created by a single decision of comrades" is not a historiographic thesis, but a propaganda formula whose goal is to challenge the legitimacy of the state, the constitutional arrangement and the national identity of a people.
The announcement that "the time is ripe for a new review of the will of the citizens, or for the institutional association of territories", followed by the final message "We are coming back for ours! It will continue, because we have only just begun!" - is not a free opinion. It is a public threat to the territorial integrity of a sovereign state, uttered from a national frequency.
The content was offered to the viewers in the form of a documentary film, with a narrator, "witnesses", stagings and data from the "research" of the organization that underwrites the film. This creates an illusion of journalistic processing and factuality for the average viewer, and the target is already fragile media literacy, which was counted on this time.
Broadcasters TV Prva and TV Adria, as holders of national licenses, cannot defend themselves by claiming that they only "transmitted" other people's content. Responsibility for what is aired on frequencies that are a public good is theirs - both before the law and before the Code of Ethics of the Journalists of Montenegro, and it does not divide editorial responsibility into produced and downloaded content.
Media that want to be part of the European media space must clearly reject the role of a channel for the normalization of lies and violence.
Media Council for Self-Regulation
