Serbian students protest at pro-government media ‘propaganda’

Serbian students and other protesters block a main bridge in Belgrade leading to the city center as part of a wave of protests after the roof of a train station in the city of Novi Sad collapsed last November killing several people, in Belgrade, Mar. 26, 2025. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 29 March 2025
Follow

Serbian students protest at pro-government media ‘propaganda’

  • “Informer has been spreading numerous lies and falsehoods for a long time,” said Bogdan Vucic, a student at the Belgrade Faculty of Political Science
  • The nationwide wave of student-led protests against state corruption has raised pressure on the nationalist government of President Aleksandar Vucic

BELGRADE: Serbian demonstrators gathered for a rally outside a pro-government television channel on Saturday, branding it a “propaganda tool,” in the latest of nearly five months of mass protests.
Holding banners “Manipulator, not a journalist,” waving Serbian and university flags, and blowing whistles, student organizers called on citizens to join the demo in front of the offices of Informer, a television station with a tabloid newspaper of the same name.
“Informer has been spreading numerous lies and falsehoods for a long time,” said Bogdan Vucic, a student at the Belgrade Faculty of Political Science.
The nationwide wave of student-led protests against state corruption has raised pressure on the nationalist government of President Aleksandar Vucic.
It was sparked by the deadly collapse of a roof at a newly-renovated train station in Novi Sad, Serbia’s second city, in November.
Since the beginning of the protests, pro-government media have portrayed student demonstrators as “foreign agents,” alleging they are funded by the opposition and plotting a “coup d’etat.”
Bogdan Vucic said one of his student peers had become a target of both the Informer TV station and the tabloid.
“They have published information about his family that goes against the most basic standards of decency, not to mention journalistic ethics,” he said.
According to the Press Council — the regulatory body that monitors newspapers — Informer violated the Serbian journalists’ code of ethics 647 times in 2024.
Many newspapers and channels in Serbia are owned by people with close ties to the government and regularly echo its talking points.
Tabloid Kurir said students “terrorize Belgrade.” Informer alleged they are paid by US aid agency USAID and billionaire George Soros — a regular target of right-wing conspiracy theories.
Another pro-government broadcaster, Pink TV, branded the protest movement an uprising supported by Kosovo, which broke away from Serbia in 2008.
“Such narratives contribute to making students enemies of the state — it creates a violent atmosphere and divisions,” said Bogdan Vucic.
“That’s why we want to put an end to what we could call propaganda — very dirty propaganda.”
Informer is among the most widely-read newspapers in Serbia, with 57,028 copies printed daily. It is cheaper than its competitors at just 40 Serbian dinars ($0.36) a copy.
The group claims its TV channel is the “most watched among cable networks” in the country.
Like other pro-government outlets, Informer benefits from public funding — through advertising purchased by state operator Telekom Serbia — and exclusive interviews with the country’s leaders.
Meanwhile, “the situation for independent media in Serbia is increasingly dire,” to the point where they risk disappearing, said Slobodan Georgiev, news director of television channel NOVA S.
According to the media watchdog Reporters Without Borders, the majority of Serbian media derive their income from advertising and opaque public subsidies — both sources largely controlled by the ruling elite and dependent on the media groups’ political alignment.
“Advertisers close to the government, as well as state-owned companies, completely bypass independent media,” said Dragoljub Petrovic, editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Danas.
Critical media and journalists are subjected to various forms of pressure, including vindictive lawsuits, public insults, and being labelled traitors.
“Independent journalists face relentless pressure, including direct attacks from the head of state and leading figures of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party,” Georgiev said.
In early March, the president called a journalist who had covered the protests “an imbecile colluding with the demonstrators,” prompting dozens of reporters from southern Serbia to refuse to cover the president’s activities in protest.
On Wednesday, a television campaign aired on national television labelling journalists from two opposition-aligned networks — TV N1 and Georgiev’s TV Nova — “enemies of the state.”
“Unless there are real political changes in the coming years, it is likely that no media outlet will remain safe from the influence or control of President Aleksandar Vucic’s cabinet,” Georgiev told AFP.
Earlier this month students blocked the headquarters of Serbian national television (RTS) in Belgrade for a day, after one of its journalists referred to them as a “mob.”
To reach people in smaller towns across Serbia — where residents often rely on state-backed media that echo Vucic’s ruling party line — protesters have spent weeks criss-crossing the country on foot.
Contacted by AFP for comment, Informer’s editor-in-chief did not respond.


Australia demands social media giants report progress on account bans for children under 16

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

Australia demands social media giants report progress on account bans for children under 16

MELBOURNE: Australian authorities on Thursday demanded some of the world’s biggest social media platforms report how many accounts they have deactivated since a ban on accounts for children younger than 16 became law.

Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, X, YouTube and Twitch all said they would abide by Australia’s world-first law that took effect on Wednesday, Communications Minister Anika Wells said.

But the tech companies’ responses to eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant’s first demand for data will likely indicate their commitment to ridding their platforms of young children.

“Today the eSafety Commissioner will write to all 10 platforms who are considered age-restricted social media platforms and she will ask them … what were your numbers of under 16 accounts on Dec. 9; what are your numbers today on Dec. 11?” Wells said.

The commissioner would reveal the platforms’ responses within two weeks. The platforms would be required to provide monthly updates for six months.

The companies face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars ($32.9 million) from Wednesday if they fail to take reasonable steps to remove the accounts of Australian children younger than 16.

Wells said the European Commission, France, Denmark, Greece, Romania, Indonesia, Malaysia and New Zealand were considering following Australia’s lead in restricting children’s access to social media.

“There’s been a huge amount of global interest and we welcome it, and we welcome all of the allies who are joining Australia to take action in this space to draw a line to say enough’s enough,” Wells said.

Sydney-based rights group Digital Freedom Project plans to challenge the law on constitutional grounds in the Australian High Court early next year.

Inman Grant said some platforms had consulted lawyers and might be waiting to receive their first so-called compulsory information notice Thursday or their first fine for noncompliance before mounting a legal challenge.

Inman Grant said her staff were ready for the possibility that platforms would deliberately fail to exclude young children through age verification and age estimation technologies.

“That could be a strategy that they have in and of themselves: we’ll say we’re complying but then we’ll do a crappy job using these technologies and we’ll let people get through and have people claim it’s a failure,” Inman Grant told Australian Broadcasting Corp.

Inman Grant said her research had found that 84 percent of children in Australia aged 8-12 had accessed a social media account. Of those with social media access, 90 percent did so with the help of parents.

Inman Grant said the main reason parents helped was because “they didn’t want their children to be excluded.”

“What this legislation does … is it takes away that fear of exclusion,” Inman Grant said.