What does Dnevnik say that he would not say anything

Pa-ram-pa-ram-pam-pa-ram-pa-ram-pam-pam... when rush hour starts RTS's second newscast, for many colleagues who work on it, it's the end of sweating for the day. It was necessary to compile the most important news program in the country in such a way that everything is kept quiet, something is softened, and what suits the authorities, is amplified to the limit.

RTS only broadcasts such diaries, he says Research which was recently published by Demostat. They analyzed the articles from the diary during ten days in January and ten days in May of this year and the results are exactly as it seems - RTS is anemic, scared and keeps its hands on the authorities, but "on a whim".

That's what it's about. our monthly newsletter Redakja said Mirjana Stevanović (bottom picture), previously a long-time Danas journalist, and now a Demostat associate who also worked on this research.

Why Dnevnik 2?

The main reason is that it is the central news show that has the highest ratings and reaches the largest population.

What was most striking?

Complete absence of critical attitude towards any news. We listed a total of 307 contributions in those twenty journals and the column in the table of those who are critical is almost empty. There were only two mild criticisms, but towards the European Union - so by no means against the government. It was related to the problems that drivers have due to the introduction of a new system at the borders to the EU.

You write that almost no time is devoted to the student movement. We remember when a few years ago RTS opened Dnevnik with protests - in France. And there were protesters in front of their windows.

It is (laughs). Students are given remarkably little time. For example, on January 27, when they gathered for Saint Sava, Dnevnik devoted less than thirty seconds to that. About 14 minutes were dedicated to the celebration of St. Sava itself. The impression is that news about student actions sometimes cannot be missed, but they are buried by other news.

That's how the protest of May 23 was presented between two news items, in a sandwich. The news was preceded by the news about the murder in Senjak - just a statement from the prosecutor's office, just enough to make some comment. Then, in three minutes, the reporter from Slavia told something from the scene with a minor part of a student's address. Strikingly, it was repeated several times that there are no incidents so far - as if they were expecting incidents. The sandwich is covered with a report about the fact that there are also rallies in support of the president in Pionirski Park, throughout Serbia or in Kumanovo.

It turns out that the big protest in Slavia was worth as much as the police announcement about the number of participants and the news about the counter-protests. It is also eye-popping that not a word was mentioned that the railway traffic in the entire country was suspended that day, and that is service information that must find its place.

Photo: Demostat

There's a lot of routine news in the Daily - say, I'm caricaturing now, the president receiving his credentials from the Zimbabwean ambassador. However, if RTS does not announce it, who will?

I have understanding for that news. But they are also on the websites of the presidency and embassies, and I don't know how objectively important they are for life in Serbia.

You say that the contributions are mostly reports, without any critical tone. Is it a good choice when you edit Dnevnik, which tends to be watched by "the whole" of Serbia?

To me, it's more like avoiding reality. If we want Serbia to be informed, then we must convey everything that is relevant. And the fact is that we are a deeply divided society. It is necessary to present the views of both sides, so that the governing team adapts to criticism, and the part of society that has objections finds its own channel. But there is no such thing on RTS.

The part of the show that falls under domestic politics mainly consists of what the officials said at a meeting. It is also popular what local officials said at international gatherings or during visits, and you cannot hear what the hosts said. So we only get one visa.

You say that support to the authorities through Dnevnik is "discreet" and "sophisticated". What do you mean?

Most of the articles on internal issues, especially the sections on economics and politics, could easily be promotional material for the ruling party before the elections. The tone is cold and factual, but there is no review, context, pre-history, just a list of facts.

Does factography favor the authorities?

The way and the choice of facts are in favor of the authorities, because they simply keep silent about everything else. There are no social issues, there are no problems of the elderly population, young people, the troubles of businessmen... everything is reduced to the fact that the state was there to help, to solve the problem.

You said that there was little about the student movement, but nothing at all about the work of the opposition?

Nothing. No news. But not even about the work of the ruling party itself - it is represented through officials, ministers, it is best understood through President Vučić. Only one of these twenty diaries did not include Vučić, and nineteen did - if only because he declared that someone was an Ustasa.

Can it be said that RTS runs away from domestic political issues in principle? Because, according to your count, there is more news from the region and the world than from domestic politics.

Exactly. They run away, but also cover the main news with shorter articles. For example, the murder in Senjak was a huge scandal. But you wouldn't understand it like that from Dnevnik - shorter articles, factography, statements of institutions...

You state there that reporting from the world is the most professional because two sides are generally heard. So they can do their job when they want?

They are very good when they want. I don't doubt journalists, it's a matter of editorial policy. Because, not only with news from the world, but in general, when you look at, for example, the report on the fate of NIS, you can see that the journalists know the topic, but this is not reflected in the report at the end.

Have you noticed any changes in the information program since Manja Grcic took the chair of the general director?

I noticed that Dnevnik has more short articles in this May observed period than in January. These contributions are often shorter than a minute, sometimes two minutes. Longer contributions are rarer, with the exception of Vučić's visit to China, which is presented in detail, mostly through his impressions. That sounds like information overload to me, but I can't prove it quantitatively.

You have been in the business for a long time, you certainly know a lot of people from RTS... are they aware that the program is not good for them in principle?

From meeting some of them, I know that they know very well what it is about and that they know very well what they are allowed to convey.

Then why do they work so short?

The media market is such that they probably consider it their model of survival, but it is difficult for me to judge the quality.

When talking informally with colleagues from RTS, they often get annoyed that they are compared to N1, which people at RTS think is too biased. What do you think about that?

Action begets reaction. I think that N1 now provides us with another side of events that we cannot see on RTS. Those two pieces of information complement each other in a way, which is a bit dislocated. I don't know why they are angry at RTS when they themselves know how much effort they put into making a contribution that will be acceptable for broadcasting.

Finally, what is the influence of Dnevnik today? Everyone praises their viewership, but we don't have exact figures.

We don't know exactly. But, as far as television is concerned, relatively few people have access to complete information. Let's say, I'm in the vicinity of Belgrade and I don't have the possibility to watch televisions that are considered oppositional. RTS undoubtedly has a privileged position, but that is part of higher politics and has nothing to do with their viewership and how much people trust them.

Real journalism costs money, and we will not be bought by tycoons and corporations. Support us with a one-time or monthly donation. The time for it is now!