Dragan Šolak napravio je mehanizam za uništavanje svih nepodobnih medijskih subjekata i pokušava da monopolskim delovanjem spreči javnost da čuje mišljenje suprotno onom koje zastupaju njegovi politički i poslovni saradnici
Dragan Šolak has created a mechanism for destroying all unsuitable media actors and is now using his monopoly to try and prevent the general public from hearing opinions different from that advocated by his political and business associates
Billionaire Dragan Šolak, who owns over 100 media outlets, of which no fewer than 25 are news media, has created a mechanism for destroying all unsuitable media actors and is now using his monopoly to try and prevent the general public from hearing opinions different from that advocated by his political and business associates. Such a monopoly over the truth, which Šolak is trying to establish, poses a serious threat to democracy, experts interviewed by Kurir warn.
Danger
As Kurir reports, publicly available data indicate that through its affiliates, Dragan Šolak's United Group is the biggest single media owner in Serbia and the countries in the region. Given that United Group openly supports a political party and that, if the political party in question were to win in an election, a monopoly would effectively be established in the media market, the following question poses itself: Are media freedoms and pluralism under threat in Serbia? Will the domestic media market manage to preserve the free flow of information and unbiased reporting?
The Executive Director of the Centre for Responsible Media Marko Matić warned that, in light of all of the above, there is a serious threat of a media monopoly.
"Dragan Šolak owns over 100 media outlets, of which no fewer than 25 are news media. This means that they have included political parties such as Dragan Đilas's party in the mechanism. Why are they doing this? We have media outlets controlled by Šolak and media outlets owned by other parties, but which support the same side. If the political party Šolak supports were to take power, then they would be able to drag the remaining media into the mechanism, and we would have a media monopoly. Political groupthink would be in place, which, incidentally, the government is constantly being accused of. People must know how dangerous that is," Matić urged.
The routine procedure according to which the mechanism for destroying competition operates is evident, Matić added.
"You can see that certain media outlets act in a uniform manner. It's evident who gets invited, as well as who launches news and who picks it up. You can see it's all run from a single centre, from planning to effect control. The end goal exists, and it's money. They filed an arbitration action in Washington, seeking a couple hundred million US dollars from Serbia. All their television channels operating in Serbia are in the red, which probably isn't a problem for them as long as there is a political interest and a long-term financial interest," Matić said.
He added that a monopoly over news media poses the greatest danger.
"What's especially dangerous is concentrated ownership in the news media. There is a danger of someone having a monopoly over the truth. We have an effective duopoly in place. You don't have two truths. That's where the problem is," Matić concluded.
Interest of the empire
Media expert Dragiša Kovačević also thinks that Šolak's media outlets are evidently aiming for monopolizing the media market in order to promote Šolak's interests.
"Above all, they use the media that they own to defend their empire. It's plain to see that as soon as anyone points a finger at them, they – primarily N1 and Nova S – claim it's an attack against the free media, but they're neither free nor independent. On the contrary, they serve to protect a huge monopoly and illegally gained capital," Kovačević said.
He added that those who allowed them to act in this way are to blame.
"Above all, I mean the REM, who have for years been working for Šolak and allowing these channels, registered abroad, to broadcast programming in Serbia. That's how hundreds of millions of euros ended up across the border," Kovačević pointed out.
Sociologist and analyst Vladimir Vuletić said that, unfortunately, media consolidation is a global trend.
"Of course it affects objectivity, if by objectivity we mean everyone presenting their point of view. Monopolization narrows down the number of viewpoints and this is why we have antitrust laws," Vuletić noted, concluding that it was also a threat to democracy.
Economist Miladin Kovačević said that this area should be monitored and observed with the aim of assessing dominant influences in the media sphere.
"There are institutions of the state that must react if an institutional framework is threatened, such as the REM and other bodies. They should monitor the trends in the media market as well as breaches of relevant laws and regulations, whether it's a monopoly or violating other regulatory norms," Kovačević said.
Long-time Reuters reporter Jakša Šćekić said that quantity does not entail quality.
"The government certainly has to stay alert and restrict media concentration," Šćekić said briefly.
The Kurir Editorial Staff
Bonus video: