Dangerous Liasons

The opposition has finally collected it wits about it, agreed and resolved to cooperate and scheduled a rally of support to the independent media. They say that they will no longer suffer repression and the restoration of totalitarianism. As a short news item this would sound good, honorable and promising, so that it would be best not to explain anything, least of all spread the story around. But, it was always possible to find good news here, and someone knew how to shorten the stories, so that only the nicest parts reached one. Like all those signed cease-fires, for example. Therefore, without wishing to be spoilsports, let's take a closer look at the opposition; what have they agreed on; who are the independent media here and what do the two have in common.

In their wish to oust the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and take its place, opposition parties have up till now, tripped each other along more than they have cooperated. Let us assume that they have finally matured and learned something, and that the pressure on the press has surpassed all measure of patience. But, there are reasons to doubt these benignant assumptions.

First, it is obvious that the three parties: the Democratic Party (DS), the SRS and the Democratic Party of Serbia DSS) have reached a greater degree of agreement, and that there is some problem with the Serbian Renewal Movement (SPO). When talking of the media, SPO leader Vuk Draskovic cannot be criticized of caring about their independence less than Seselj. Vuk headed demonstrations against state television, while Seselj drew up lists of undesirable journalists. If we consider that all the leaders are equally ambitious and intolerant, all that remains is to seek an explanation among political differences.

Seselj, DS leader Zoran Djindjic and DSS leader Vojislav Kostunica do not accept Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic's wish to pull out of the war at the price of a conflict with Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, but they find it easy to bear the clash with the rest of the world, isolation and sanctions. And what are we going to do if the rally shows that the independent media are just a small and convenient cause to pressure Milosevic into returning to where he started from? What if the speeches start with Studio B and end with the Serb brethren in Bosnia? Is it possible that Serbian Radical Party (SRS) leader Vojislav Seselj, who is most agile in bringing together the scattered opposition, has read Jefferson in jail, so that the ideal of a free press has completely overshadowed his vision of an Enormous Serbia?

There have been plenty of occasions so far for the national opposition to be concerned, to get together and decide on an action against dealers of hallucinogenic media narcotics. There was reason for them to try and protect Studio B from its director when he sacked his best people. The overall media situation in Serbia today is both better and worse than it was two or three years ago. The state still finds ways of making life miserable for those who are independent now, but the big television and press are no longer involved in insane war propaganda and world conspiracies as during the time when the program was to Seselj's liking. Now they just produce good news or no news, sedatives, tranquilizers and sleeping pills.

Milosevic has no choice but to try and persuade the world that he has changed and seen reason, and is waiting for the moment when some expert commission will close his dossier and let him off. His press and television must follow all this with the right mood music, which will play in the background while we are told that the world has changed for the better and realized its mistake and is calling on Serbia to forgive them for their injustices. Bearing in mind the delicacy of this operation, anyone who cares about independence should not keep quiet or fail to explain what the whole thing is about, just as Milosevic's war should have been described and explained. And now the independent media, regardless of what they may think of the socialists and the opposition, the war, peace, states and borders - they should have acted in opposition if only by refusing to keep quiet and by not accepting official versions and reasons.

But, this didn't bother the regime so much earlier, because war was more popular than peace, and it was easier to get into war than out of it. Just as it is easier to spill than clean up. This is the reason for the increased pressure on independent media, this is the reason for newsprint shortages, the avid checking of old numbers of the Official Gazette and concern for socially-owned property.

If a state such as this one, is in a particular frame of mind, it has many ways of limiting freedom of speech. It can annul registrations and ownership transformation, cut out frequencies, decrease the production of newsprint and introduce enormous customs tariffs. It can corrupt, threaten and place all sorts of obstacles in the long and complicated process of information production. If a newspaper wishes to be completely independent it means that the owners must have their wood, saw mill, trucks to transport the wood to their paper factory and then to its printing works where loyal workers work, and not those who might refuse to print treacherous rubbish. And even then you are not sure that the regime will not ban you by decree, in the name of some higher interest.

This problem with a state which has not decided very firmly that it will tolerate independence, is a very serious one and can be lethal. It is a little less dangerous, but probably worse, when the state uses subtle methods to induce editorial staffs and journalists to agree to a partial independence and freedom, by calling for closer cooperation, consultations and briefings. In this way mutual sympathy and respect are established between the authorities and the press, even when there are serious differences. This is what better and more intelligent states do.

Our problem is old fashioned and boring, just like this state. Everything is familiar and has been repeated many times over. The relationship between the independent media and the opposition which is taking their side is much more interesting. This is a natural alliance due to force of circumstances, which suits the opposition, but puts the media in an awkward position. It is easy to say what you like about Milosevic because he is the one making all the decisions and taking on the responsibility, and on top of everything he will consider you a personal enemy. The opposition is, by definition, less guilty, and if it takes your side now, well, it's hard to be so ungrateful and tell them that they are making stupid mistakes, even if they have given you ample reason to do so. It is difficult to behave in a normal manner here, where very little is normal and in its place. And this debate would be a much easier one in peacetime - if only the problem would wait a little. This way, with all these problems, I'd say that all the independent media can do is play dumb, i.e. stick to their professional criteria and be honest towards those who wish to strangle them and those defending them. I know this sounds inhuman, but everything else strikes me as being infinitely worse.

Independence is not a guarantee, but it is the pre-requisite condition of reliable information, and this is what determines a correct understanding of the world, ingenuity, and in the final run, the living standard of one's readers, public and nation. If there is not sufficient demand by the public, the production of reliable information and objective stands is not profitable, and this is an additional problem here. Then again, there is always some clever soul who will tell you that there is no real objectivity in this business. This is true, but that does not mean that all standards of quality in carrying out this job should be disregarded. Objectivity has never been synonymous with neutrality, disinterestedness and the absence of a stand in these parts. It also doesn't mean that the truth is always to be found somewhere in the middle, and that all arguments are equally valid, nor that some are always right and others always wrong. In approaching this ideal a lack of personal interests is of great help, or a readiness to put them aside for the moment, which again doesn't mean that that which is to your detriment is always more truthful and more correct.

The independent media should nurture and check their own understanding of public interests all the time, the way that political parties locked in a battle for power never do. The fundamental difference between the two can be seen in the fact that no single party has managed to come up with a good party newspaper. They can be liberal or conservative, and at best sympathetic to a party, but never tied to it. All in all, the independent media here can thank the opposition if it saves their lives, and then continue on their way. This means that if opposition parties do not deserve it, the favor should not be returned.