National televisions in the service of Vučić's list: Why does REM not respond to systematic violations of the law?

BIRODI conducted a 24-hour monitoring of the programming of five national television channels (RTS1, Pink, Prva, B92, and Happy) from September 9 to October 15, 2026. The monitoring results indicate that out of a total of 12,878 minutes dedicated to the list led by Aleksandar Vučić, as much as 12,330 minutes, or 96%, were positively toned. At the same time, the Students' List was represented in 10,024 minutes of programming, of which 9,514 minutes, or 95%, were negatively toned.

It is unacceptable that, instead of professional, impartial, and balanced reporting and equitable representation of all political actors, to which national television channels are legally obligated, their programs are used as instruments for the political promotion of one electoral actor and the delegitimization of another. It is particularly concerning that such an imbalance in the representation of electoral actors has been established even on the public media service RTS 1, which has an additional obligation and responsibility to ensure impartial, fair, and balanced representation of political entities during the electoral campaign. RTS dedicated 93% of the time to the ruling SNS

The monitoring by the CRTA Observation Mission conducted from September 21 to September 27 covered informative and political content from commercial television channels with national coverage and the First Program of RTS.

The results showed an unequal representation of the government and opposition, predominantly negative reporting about the Students' List, and an absence of negative tone in reporting about the ruling majority. Vučić, who was still the president of the country during the observed period, received 60% of the time allocated to all political actors on national frequency television. He received more time than the entire opposition (25%) and four times more than all other government representatives combined (15%). He was portrayed either in a neutral (66%) or positive tone (34%), and directly addressed the audience 68% of the time.

Among other political actors, the most time was given to the “Students' List - Students Win,” accounting for 39% of the total time allocated to the opposition. In as much as 86% of the time, the Students' List was presented negatively, and it directly addressed the audience only 15% of the time.

The authentic right received 15% of the time dedicated to the opposition. Reporting on it was predominantly neutral (84%), and it directly addressed the audience 86% of the time. All other parties and candidates were represented for a maximum of 5% of the time.

On Radio-Television Serbia, the imbalance is even more pronounced. On RTS1, representatives of the government received 93% of the time, while the opposition received only 7%. RTS1 reported on the government in a neutral (72%) or positive (28%) manner. The opposition was mostly presented positively (64%) in the time it received, neutral in 34% of the time, and negatively in 2%. Government representatives directly addressed the audience 79% of the time, while opposition representatives did so 73% of the time.

What do the regulations mandate, and what is REM (not) doing?

The Rulebook on the Implementation of Obligations of Media Service Providers During the Electoral Campaign stipulates that when reporting on the activities of state bodies and public officials, the media must pay special attention to professionalism, objectivity, and journalistic ethics, and that reporting must not serve open or covert promotion of electoral lists, candidates, their activities, ideas, or political views. At the same time, reporting that gives representatives of the government and holders of public functions a privileged position compared to other participants in the electoral process is prohibited.

The Law on Public Media Services prescribes impartial processing of political issues while enabling equal confrontation of different viewpoints, as well as the obligation of the public media service to act according to the principles of impartial, fair, and balanced representation of political entities, electoral lists, and candidates in regular informative programs and special broadcasts dedicated to the electoral campaign.

The Law on Electronic Media stipulates that REM ex officio initiates an investigative procedure when it reasonably assumes, based on monitoring, complaints, or other available data, that a media service provider has violated the law or other regulations. Regarding probable violations of regulations governing media conduct related to the electoral campaign, a conclusion to initiate proceedings must be made within 48 hours of becoming aware of facts and circumstances indicating a violation, while the proceedings must be concluded within 72 hours of their initiation.

For possible violations not related to the electoral campaign, the deadline for making a conclusion to initiate an investigative procedure is no later than eight days from becoming aware of facts and circumstances indicating a violation.

REM has been continuously monitoring the electoral campaign since September 10, based on a sample of 11 media service providers. However, the REM Council, at its first regular session held on October 6 in the new composition, did not adopt the first monitoring report of those media that were under 24-hour supervision during the pre-election campaign.

If the media violate obligations related to the electoral campaign out of negligence, the law considers this a serious violation and prescribes a warning. If a media outlet intentionally violates these obligations, it constitutes an especially serious violation for which a temporary ban on publishing content or advertising messages can be imposed. The law also provides for other measures, such as reprimands, and under certain conditions, temporary or permanent revocation of a license or approval to operate. The public media service cannot be subjected to measures of temporary or permanent revocation of its license.

Informer and Kurir outside REM's pre-election monitoring despite numerous complaints

The REM Council, which can make decisions again after almost two years, rejected the proposal to include the Informer and Kurir televisions in the pre-election monitoring, even though Informer continuously targets critics of the government, especially female journalists and activists, through insults and attempts at public discreditation, and has also aired intimate photographs of a female student. The question remains open to REM as to how Informer, despite the initial support of the majority of Council members, remained outside monitoring. On October 6, the REM Council initiated two investigative procedures against the Informer television due to suspicion of violating regulations during the electoral campaign, but by October 9, no decisions had been made, prompting four Council members to warn about non-compliance with the legal deadline of 72 hours. No new investigative proceedings were initiated at the meeting held on October 16, although 13 cases were considered, ten of which related to Informer, and the REM's expert service indicated violations of regulations in most cases. No proposal for a decision received the necessary majority in the Council.

ANEM joins BIRODI's call and urges REM to, within its legal jurisdiction, examine the results of the 24-hour monitoring of the television channels RTS1, Pink, Prva, B92, and Happy for the period from September 9 to October 15, 2026, to determine whether the broadcasters acted in accordance with the provisions of the Law on Electronic Media, including Article 61, as well as Articles 4-8 of the Rulebook on the Protection of Human Rights in the Provision of Media Services, particularly analyzing program content in which political promotion, negative labeling, and discrediting of electoral actors were presented as informative and analytical content, and to publicly publish the findings of the monitoring, decisions of the REM Council, and explanations regarding the potential initiation or non-initiation of proceedings against broadcasters. The regulator's response makes sense only while the electoral campaign is ongoing, when any irregularities can still be addressed, allowing citizens to make decisions in the elections based on diverse and relevant information.