Pee RE REE EE

THE INTERNAL CONTEXT OF PSEUDO-DEMOCRACY

Every single word has a life of its own in Yugostavia:- responsibility is non-existent: there is an absolute monopoly of a sin-

gle family;

- inequality of the media: state-run media and pro-government media have much greater technical and financial ca-
pacity; independent media are subject to a repressive law and unequal treatment in the exercise of their basic
rights;

- national conflicts have been a regular occurrence for most of the past decade, the authorities simply resolving one
national conflict by generating another;

- guarantees of any sort are virtually impossible as there is no legality and everything is reduced to autocracy and the
willfulness of the narrow circle of people in power;

- the independent media have no choice but to cling to survival without the possibility of developing and establishing
serious and strong alternatives to the state-controlled media’

- democracy and democratisation: these terms have been completely discredited by constant media manipulation
and the false promotion of anti-democratic values as democratic.

- the regime uses the media as an army whose task is to thoroughly prepare the ground and then instigate and bru-
talise national conflicts;

- the isolation brought about by sanctions doubles their effect on the independent media: the flow of information de-
creases.

COMMON ELEMENTS OF THE INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL CONTEXT

Because of the limitations imposed by commercialisation (Infotainment), worldwide information networks report superfi-
cially by creating stereotypes without seeking insights into conflict.

| believe that the public has no autonomy; public opinion on conflicts in remote countries is shaped largely according to
the suggestions of political and other elites. Such opinion in turn influences politicians and governments to behave simi-
larly, thus exacerbating the conflict or contributing to the emergence of new conflicts for which the most powerful partner
is responsible, regardless of whether he is a tyrant or a criminal or takes a pro-democracy stance.

Commercialisation is a function of the regime's self-promotion and anti-cultural trends towards light entertainment and
kitsch, Through a monopoly these impose themselves as the dominant cultural and social form.

Foreign commercial programs are most easily available to state-run media, as the state has substantial financial re-
sources at its disposal. Consequently these programs are available to those who use the context of these shows to promote
vilification, violence and intolerance.

Telecommunications are also firmly controlled by the repressive authorities. International telecommunications corpora-
tions cooperate with the regime through joint ventures. This represents direct assistance to the undemocratic regime (as
seen in the purchase of 49 per cent of the state telecommunications company by Greek and Italian corporations immedi-
ately before the election, when the regime most needed money). This leads to restrictions in licensing resources to inde-
pendent media, NGOs and so on.

The distribution of frequency licenses is basically politically manipulated, which is tolerated despite international stan-
dards and regulations dealing with this issue. Access to satellite distribution is also limited.

The Internet is frequently censored and the infrastructure which would allow a more serious commercial approach to the
offering of Internet services is inaccessible.

CONSEQUENCES OF THESE PROCESSES:

The core program content of state-run and pro-government media is the promotion and endorsement of the interests of the
oligarchy. This, of course, has nothing to do with the communal role of public media.

In contrast to the public state-run media, the independent professional media design their program content by taking the
public interest into account.