Can we still speak of independent media in a society where both political power and financial interests determine outcomes?
The ongoing negotiations between United Media and Telekom Srbija over the reorganization and possible shutdown of N1 and Nova S reveal a combination of political and financial motives behind what is officially described as “market reorganization.” According to OCCRP, the dismissal of N1’s executive director Aleksandra Subotić was personally requested by President Vučić. In addition, KRIK / OCCRP published an audio recording confirming that the president insisted that Subotić “be replaced quickly.”
This situation raises a critical question: can we still speak of independent media in a society where both political power and financial interests determine outcomes?
The potential removal of these TV stations threatens public access to independent news. N1 and Nova S, among the few broadcasters consistently exposing corruption, now face uncertainty while the government consolidates control over information. While authorities describe these changes as “market adjustments,” the political and financial dimensions are inseparable.
Rule of Law, Media Freedom, and Civic Responsibility
Independent media are essential for democracy. They act as a check on government and ensure diverse voices are heard. In Serbia, however, institutions have largely failed to protect this role. According to Freedom House (2025), media freedom has been steadily declining, with political and economic elites exerting increasing influence over editorial policies.
The United Media–Telekom case shows how media can be used not to inform citizens, but to maintain political power. Courts and regulators have limited influence. Media independence often depends more on the interests of owners and politicians than on laws or professional standards. With mainstream media largely under control, citizens increasingly rely on independent portals, podcasts, blogs, and social media.
Outlets like KRIK, BIRN, and independent bloggers offer investigative reporting and debate, but reach is limited, funding is scarce, and journalists face risks such as harassment or SLAPP lawsuits.
RTS, the national broadcaster, often amplifies government messages. As a result, independent information depends heavily on civic engagement and dedicated journalists. President Vučić’s strategy demonstrates that when mainstream media align with government narratives, sophisticated manipulation is unnecessary, control of information alone is sufficient to shape public opinion.
Manipulation in Everyday Life: Lies, Money, and Media
Beyond ownership and editorial pressure, citizens face daily manipulation that is easier to understand in simple terms: officials repeatedly tell people things that contradict their own experience, aiming to confuse and control.
Source: freepik.com
For example, government broadcasts claim economic growth and prosperity, yet ordinary citizens see prices rising in stores and wages lagging behind inflation. The message is clear: “Do not trust your own eyes or your wallet.”
This is not just “fake news”, it is part of a systematic manipulation strategy. Repetition of false statements, combined with control of major media outlets, conditions people to doubt their own senses. When a government, corporations that own media, and influential businessmen work together, the effect multiplies. Citizens are made to question reality, lose confidence in their own judgment, and increasingly rely on the official narrative.
In other words, everyday manipulation works like this: one man, President Vučić, makes repeated claims on TV and social media that directly contradict reality. Corporate media cooperate either by promoting these claims or ignoring independent reporting. Over time, citizens may think, “Maybe prices haven’t really gone up. Maybe the economy is fine.” This is a form of psychological pressure that weakens public resistance without using physical force.
Why This Matters
The deeper problem is not foreign influence, although Russia and China play a role (Reporters Without Borders). The main challenge is domestic: one individual controls much of the media landscape and uses it to manipulate citizens. The personalization of power, where one person acts as both performer and storyteller, means that public perception becomes a political tool. When citizens start doubting their own experiences: how their wallet feels, what they see in stores, the crisis is internal, and democracy is weakened.
Trusting your own perception is the simplest form of resistance. If life feels more difficult, no graph or official broadcast can make it feel easier. Recognizing manipulation, questioning narratives, and supporting independent media are crucial steps to preserve democratic debate and hold authorities accountable.
Civic Responsibility and Media Freedom
Media are instruments of power. In the hands of political and financial elites, they can be used to control citizens instead of informing them. Shutting down N1 and Nova S may benefit media owners financially, but society loses independent platforms for accountability. Since institutions cannot reliably protect media freedom, citizens, journalists, and civil society must take responsibility.
Even without mass audiences or large budgets, these actors play a key role in sustaining critical debate. In Serbia today, media freedom survives not because of laws or institutions, but because of the courage, persistence, and engagement of individuals. Reclaiming personal experience and trusting what you see and feel is the first act of resistance. By doing so, citizens can begin to rebuild a society based on truth and transparency.
