Who has been evaluating media content in the competitions for project co-financing all these years?

The introduction of a centralized scoring system for candidates and their expertise was intended to further improve this segment and eliminate arbitrariness in the composition of commissions, favoritism, and the formation of commissions contrary to the law.

With the idea of implementing a transparent point allocation system for commission members, the journalism and media community aimed to halt the practice of abuses in this segment of the process; however, despite the efforts made, this did not occur. Moreover, the scoring method established by the new Regulations led to new problems – a large number of commissions with the same or similar composition, as well as the appointment of the same commission members in more than 50 bodies established in this manner.

According to data held by the UNS (August 1, author's note), obtained through insight into the JIS, the Professional Association of Journalists of Serbia (PROUNS) leads in the number of local governments where it has its representatives as members of the media project evaluation commissions.

As of August 1, PROUNS had its representatives in as many as 53 cities/municipalities out of 142 bodies formed for decision-making on projects, which is more than one-third.

The Journalists' Society of Vojvodina (DNV) follows closely behind PROUNS with 45 representatives in local governments where it has its members in commissions.

PROUNS and DNV also lead in the number of members in the commissions for the Ministry of Information and Telecommunications (MIT) competitions. Both associations had members in five out of a total of nine competitions announced by MIT.

Of these, both associations have representatives in the four same MIT competitions – for co-financing projects for the production of media content in minority languages, media content production for radio, for print media and news agency services, and media content realized through electronic media whose publishers are based in the territory of AP Kosovo and Metohija.

It is interesting to note that, for example, candidates Slavoljub Ristić (with 23 commissions in which he is a member) and Miodrag Popov (17) decide in 40 of the aforementioned 53 local governments where PROUNS has commission members, and of which they are representatives.

The Center for Media Culture and Education has 35 members in commissions across Serbia. Of these, candidate Miodrag Miljković has been appointed to 27.

Independent media experts Branimir Grulović and Branislav Sančanin were appointed to a total of 110 out of 87 commissions formed for co-financing media projects by August – Grulović in as many as 64 commissions, Sančanin in 46.

To clarify the picture, it must be emphasized that all other independent media experts who were appointed to commissions this year, totaling fourteen, were distributed among the remaining 40 commissions formed by then. By the way, of the maximum 100 points a candidate can achieve, Grulović has 98, while Sančanin has all 100.

Only three candidates out of 169 registered in the JIS this year, including media expert Branislav Sančanin, candidate from the Professional Association of Journalists of Serbia (PROUNS) Miodrag Popov, and representative of the Journalists' Society of Vojvodina (DNV) Biljana Ratković Njagovan, have the maximum number of points. Following them are Branimir Grulović and DNV representative Jelena Dopuđ with 98 points.

UNS had its representatives in 39 commissions by August 1, the Association of Radio-Television Serbia had 37, RAB had 25, Comnet had 14, The Association of Sports Journalists of Belgrade had 13, The Association of Media and Media Workers had 11, The Media Community of Serbia had 10, and The Journalists' Society of Niš and Local Press each had one.

Regarding the candidates from the associations most represented in the commissions, in addition to those mentioned, a representative from RAB Miloš Rajković was selected in a large number of commissions (in 21 out of 25 commissions where RAB had its representatives), Jelena Dopuđ, a representative from DNV who was appointed to eight commissions, Dragana Stefanović from the Association of Radio-Television Serbia who was a member of 17 out of 37 commissions where this association had representatives, and Aleksandar Simić, the only candidate from the Association of Sports Journalists of Belgrade who was in all 17 commissions where representatives from this association were present.

When it comes to controversial commission compositions, analyzing the formed commissions, UNS noted that in the municipality of Ćićevac, both candidates from journalistic associations were appointed at the suggestion of the Association of Radio Stations "RAB Serbia" (Miloš Rajković and Nevena Azinović), which is not permitted either by the Regulations or technically allowed for journalistic and media associations proposing candidates in the JIS to propose two candidates for one competition.

It has already been noted that candidate Miloš Rajković in the commissions in Obrenovac and Novi Pazar was appointed as a member of the Association of Radio Stations RAB Serbia (RAB), while in the municipality of Babušnica he was chosen as a media expert.

Miloš Rajković, as previously mentioned, also stated in his biography published on the MIT website that he is applying as an independent candidate, while in the final list of candidates published by MIT, he was listed as a "representative of RAB."

The third member of the commission in Ćićevac was independent candidate Saša Kokalj. For him, UNS, NUNS, ANEM, and PU "Local Press" had already written that in the application form, at the point where it indicates whether one is applying to the JIS independently or as a candidate from a journalistic and media association, he marked both, which is not in accordance with ZJIM.

According to ZJIM, in the commission for co-financing media projects, the majority of members must be appointed at the proposal of journalistic and media associations, if such exist. However, UNS determined that the municipalities of Malo Crniće and Petrovac na Mlavi have two media experts, and the explanation for the formation of commissions in these municipalities did not specify whether there were sufficient proposals from journalistic and media associations for participation in the commission.

The municipality of Senta also has two independent media experts in the commission, but the Resolution on the formation of the commission in this municipality stated that only one candidate from journalistic and media associations responded to the call for proposing commission members.

This text is part of the Analysis of the co-financing process of media content production projects in Serbia in 2025, published by ANEM.

The full analysis is available at this link.