ECREA16-Abstract_book

314 / 658

312
Saturday, November 121 1 : 0 0 – 1 2 : 3 0
PN 291 The Role of Media in Transitional Justice Processes: The Case of Serbia
A. Krstic1, A. Milojevic1
1 Faculty of Political Sciences- University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
The implementation of transitional justice procedures are key tools for society’s relationship with it’s past. Designed as a mechanism for reconciliation,
transitional justice measures often mobilise divisions over the interpretation of historical events. The role of media in these processes is often neglected
(Price & Stremlau, 2012), although media can become significant political player in the contestation over the interpretation of human rights violations
occurred in the past.This paper aims to fill this void by focusing on the media coverage of the events triggered by the arrest of the formerYugoslav president
Slobodan Milosevic and his extradition to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 2001. This case caused strong political and
societal polarisation, initiating public debates on the legacy of Milosevic’s regime, the peace building process in the Balkans and the role of the international
community in public acceptance of the cooperation with the Tribunal (Bideleux & Jeffries, 2007; Scharf 2003). In order to investigate how the conflict was
mediatised, we draw on the results of a content analysis of four national Serbian print and broadcast media, conducted within the EU-FP7 funded project
“Media, Conflict and Democratisation” ). Media coverage focused mainly on disputes between Milosevic’s supporters, new democratic
ruling coalition and the international community (ICTY, EU, NATO and the USA). While media attention shifted from the legality of Milosevic’s arrest to
the question whether or not the country should cooperate with the ICTY, the three-month public debate reflected the tension between international
pressures and domestic controversies over the country’s recent past. For example, the American financial support to Yugoslavia at the donor’s conference in
Brussels in late June 2001, which was made conditional on the country’s cooperation with the ICTY, was represented as“theWashington pressure”and heavy
interference in domestic affairs. Therefore, the aspect of media representations of international political actors in domestic polarisation over transitional
justice is particularly addressed in this paper, explaining the conflicts between the country’s pro-European forces and those of a more nationalist orientation
through the lens of the mobilisation of the past. More specifically, this paper will question the role of the media in shaping the public debate on transitional
justice process in new democracies where media professionals tend to “apply the norms and rules they are familiar with from their professional life under
the old regime”(Voltmer, 2008: 28) and therefore may lack qualities in promoting inclusive politics. Bibliography Bideleux, R. & Jeffries, I. (2007). The Bal‑
kans: A Post-Communist History. London and New York: Routledge. Price, M. E. & Stremlau, N. (2012). Media and Transitional Justice: Toward a Systematic
Approach. International Journal of Communication. 6: 1077–1099. Scharf, M. P. (2003). The Legacy of the Milosevic Trial. New England Law Review 37(4):
915–933. Voltmer, K. (2008). Comparing media systems in new democracies: East meets South meets West. Central European Journal of Communication
1(1), pp. 23–40.
PN 292 Contesting or Carrying on the Past? (Dis-)Continuities of Journalistic Roles, Practices and Ethics from Autocracy to Democracy
J. Lohner1, S. Banjac 2, I. Neverla1
1 University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
2 University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Journalism is a shaper of democratization processes, and media transformation into democratic institutions is considered a prerequisite for the successful
democratization of a society. However, media systems and organizations are not created from scratch after the breakdown of old regimes. Instead, existing
ones are contested and reshaped, with residual constraints. Likewise, professional journalism does not start with regime change. Although journalistic
personnel are partially removed during transition, many journalists remain in their profession. These journalists build on their professional experience,
identities, and standards developed under the old regime. These ‘legacies of the past’ are contested, adjusted and merged with new values and practices,
leading to hybrid forms of journalism. However, how professional discourses of the past are strategically mobilized and contested, has hardly been em‑
pirically investigated. This paper investigates how journalists perceive the (dis)continuities of journalistic practices, roles and ethics after regime change.
Which historical professional discourses are contested (discontinued) or reproduced (continued)? Why do legacies and fundamental ‘reboots’ exist, which
strategies of mobilizing or contesting the past lie behind?What are the consequences for the journalistic profession and (its role within) the democratization
process? Methodologically, the paper builds on a comparative study within the EU-funded project ‘Media, Conflict and Democratisation’
eu), which explores journalistic work practices, ethics, roles, and working conditions across a set of democratisation conflicts. The study includes in-depth
interviews with 76 print, online and TV journalists from Kenya, Serbia and South Africa. Findings show that continuities exist within journalistic work
practices: routines in the selection of topics, investigation and presentation of stories, once learned and memorized through years of professional training
and experience, are transferred into the democratic order. Conversely, journalists claim that‘juniorization’of newsrooms in light of economic pressures leads
to decreasing “institutional memory” and know-how to cover democratization conflicts as many journalists have not experienced the authoritarian past
and lack historical background. Within role perceptions, discontinuities seem to prevail, as many journalists perceive themselves as watchdogs, mediators
of an inclusive public debate and fighters for sustainable democratization. In contrast, continuities can be detected, as various Serbian journalists claim that
collaborative was practiced in early transition years where journalists felt committed to supporting the new democratic regime. Self-censorship reported
by Kenyan journalists when covering ethnic and political tensions can be interpreted as continuing political parallelism and partisan journalism. Journalists
in transitional countries build on multiple identities consisting of fluid components inherited from different professional phases, contested and reproduced
over time. The degree of (dis)continuities is influenced by the nature and stage of political transformation. Explanations are also found within structural
working conditions, as persisting power structures (political ownership, clientelism) and new economic pressures in capitalist markets (financial insecuri‑
ties, low salaries) limit possibilities of investigative, independent journalism and professional development.These constraints pose a threat to the perceived
credibility of journalism as an institutional pillar of democracy.