Written by: Dražen Đurašković

What the audience perceives as the final product in the form of a media report or an article is usually the result of dedicated work on collecting information and putting it into the right context so that readers/viewers can get a sense about the social circumstances in which they live.

What the audience does not see is that the same media report or an article is a direct result of the integrity of individuals, i.e. everything that makes authors resistant to external influences, either in the form of primary, for example, pressures and attacks, or secondary ones such as working conditions, the atmosphere in the newsroom and stance in society.

But how to establish integrity if all these invisible influences do prevail and lead to the detriment of journalism?

It is not an easy setting for employees in the media: public officials and politicians do not hesitate to openly target some journalists,they are exposed to attacks, court proceedings, and working in not-so-great economic conditions.

 Furthermore, journalists do not have the right to vote even about the decisions that directly impact them, such as changing the job description, the need for training, or the introduction of certain internal procedures, not to mention the fact that the-editor-in-chief and responsible editors are chosen solely at the whim of the owner or management.

Nevertheless, a distinctive way of working is also possible. Our colleagues, from neighboring Croatia, for instance, actively participate in the selection of the editor-in-chief.

However, there are some mechanisms to strengthen integrity, which at the initiative of the Media Union of Montenegro,introduced legal solutions. As of 2020, journalists and other media professionals have the right to refuse to publish a text or contribution if they consider that it conflicts with ethical principles, as well as to withdraw their signature from the content whose meaning has been converted.

“A journalist or an author who is not a journalist has the right to refuse to prepare, write or participate in shaping media content that is against the law and the Code, with a written explanation to the editor-in-chief”.

“Media content whose meaning has been changed in the process of editorial processing may not be published under the name of a journalist or author who is not a journalist without his consent”.I am afraid that there has been an insignificant number of times when this mechanism has been applied so far.

 During a conversation with a colleague, who has been in the profession for many years, she complained to me that her text had been drastically changed by editors before issuing and that the title did not reflect the facts of the text. When asked why she did not use that mechanism, she just answered “One more matter to deal with.” It is certainly not the only case and unfortunately a helpful instrument remains quite unused for now.

Those mechanisms are additionally strengthened in the blueprint of the Law on Media, which is still in the drafting phase, so that once the law enters into force, those will be at disposal to all media employees who create media content.

Likewise, all media professionals will be provided with a new type of protection: they must not be called to account for publicly expressed views, or face with a decrease of their earnings, change of the status in the editorial office, or establish responsible for an attitude or opinion that is expressed by professional standards and program rules”, all of these are foreseen by the draft of the Law, which is expected to be endorsed.

Interestingly, this protection is currently only available to employees of Radio Television of Montenegro (the provision exists in the current Law on the National Public Broadcaster – Radio Television of Montenegro), although there were attempts to significantly limit this right by adopting the new RTCG Code of Ethics. That document is brimming with controversial provisions whose task is to silence any employee who says something in a public sphere that can be considered  as a”threat to the reputation of the house”.

Fortunately, this law has primacy over internal documents, so it will be very challenging for the administration to implement this, at the very least, questionable document.

In the draft of the abovementioned Law there is the possibility for media owners to include employees in the process of selecting editors-in-chief and responsible editors , although during the public discussion, remarks could be heard that this provision represents a “business barrier”. If it becomes legitimate, it will be interesting to observe which media and to what extent have engaged employee representatives in the procedures for selecting editors.

Finally, citizens’ trust in the media is closely interfaced with the stance and importance of journalists in newsrooms. If journalists have the autonomy and support to do their job professionally and ethically, the audience  will know how to honour it. It is high time that media employees are given the spot they deserve in the newsrooms, a spot that implies both rights and obligations. The right to be active participants and creators of their work environment, but also the obligation to constantly work on strengthening the integrity of the profession.

This text was prepared with the financial support of the National Endowment for Democracy.The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and publishers of the Media Institute of Montenegro and does not necessarily reflect the views of the donors.