Photo: Printscreen
January 2025.
As part of the program Regional Initiative for combating disinformation “Western Balkans Combatting disinformation Center: Exposing malicious influences through fact-checking and Analytical Journalism“, we present you a new analysis of fake news and disinformation narratives.
COORDINATING “STUDENT” PROTESTS FROM TIRANA: A Color revolution following the recipe of Western NGOs
Since the beginning of student protests and blockades in Belgrade and cities across Serbia, regime media outlets such as Informer, Večernje Novosti, Alo, and B92 have been reporting news linking these student blockades and initiatives with Western intelligence agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and opposition groups.
An illustrative headline from the Alo portal compared student protests to color revolutions. In the same article, Alo publicly targeted student Mila Pajić, an activist with the non-governmental organization Youth Initiative for Human Rights (YIHR). Without any evidence, they accused her of being a “supporter of the Croatian criminal operation ‘Oluja’” and a promoter of the thesis that genocide occurred in Srebrenica. It seems that these accusations are used to incite hatred and regional tensions.
Pajić attended the seventh Youth Summit in Tirana, an event organized annually to strengthen regional cooperation, promote democracy, and build peace. In this context, the claim made by the Alo portal that student protests were planned during this event is completely unfounded and serves solely to damage the reputation of NGOs and spread disinformation about the student protests.
It is important to note that the group of students participating in the blockade has repeatedly distanced itself from political parties, activist groups, and NGOs. Their statements, which they publish daily on social media, confirm that their only goal is to fight for the rights and freedom of students. Despite these clear stances, regime media persistently link the student blockades to a political agenda, further polarizing the public and diverting attention from the core issues of the protests.
In addition to students, the Alo portal continued targeting human rights defenders, including Aida Ćorović, one of the most prominent activists in Serbia. In their articles, Alo presented her as a “passionate participant in all actions with an anti-Serbian undertone, aimed at destabilizing our society and state.” Such accusations are part of a broader strategy by regime media, which automatically label anyone supporting civil initiatives, activists, protests, or regional cooperation as someone who “supports genocide in Srebrenica” or carries out Western interests.
These oversimplified narratives are solely aimed at stigmatizing and intimidating those who advocate for human rights and democratic values. The absurdity of these claims becomes evident when considering that the student protests have absolutely no connection to issues such as the genocide in Srebrenica, further highlighting the manipulative nature of such reporting.
Although it is clear that regime media have been violating basic principles of professional and ethical journalism for years, the latest cases reveal a certain degree of repetition and a lack of creativity in their narratives. This type of reporting not only violates journalistic codes but has also become predictable.
The Vaseljenska.net portal reported in a similar manner – “Majić’s ‘Proclamation for the Day After’ wants to turn Serbia into a colony: WESTERN AGENCIES, sponsors of the Proglas and NGOs should take control of the Serbian state!” Although this portal claims that the measures of the Proglas are “a scenario for Serbia’s complete surrender to Western financiers,” the truth is that the initiators of the Proglas are Serbian academics and representatives of the intellectual elite of the Republic of Serbia who have compiled a set of recommendations aimed at restoring society’s trust in institutions.
These measures cover areas such as justice, security, media, economic policy, and others. The media measures include reviewing decisions on the allocation of national frequencies, as well as the financing of media from public funds, including local and national competitions, public enterprises, and PR campaigns of state bodies. Radio and television channels with national frequencies are required to provide at least 20% content in the areas of science and education, cultural and artistic programs, documentaries, as well as programs for children and minors. The responsibility of media owners and editors-in-chief for violating citizens’ constitutional right to be truthfully, fully, and timely informed about matters of public importance is also foreseen.
It is clear that many media in Serbia are opposed to the proposals of the Proclamation, which imply ethical and transparent reporting. In any case, this document does not propose the abolition of state sovereignty as reported by Vaseljenska.net, nor is this document merely “Majić’s initiative.” Such a campaign is not surprising, given that judge Majić is one of the few prominent legal experts in Serbia who has publicly raised his voice against systemic corruption, abuse of power, and the erosion of the rule of law. Instead of focusing on the substance of the issues presented by the Proglas, some media outlets strive to stigmatize those advocating for change, further polarizing the public and manipulating information.
Author: Nataša Stanojević
