On the last day of the year, the ruling coalition adopted a media bill away from the public eye, which has already attracted much criticism for its repressive nature. And if you think the media law does not concern you, you should read the rest of this article, because everyone who posts on social networks is now a target.
“This means that they can actually target anyone who posts on a social network and has a little bit more reach, even if they do not actually monetise it, that is, they don’t earn any money from their posts, but just participate in discussions as a natural person, as a citizen,” explained media expert Borut Rončević, who added that the government will probably also try to crack down on the social network X, which does not allow censorship. They will not be able to do this directly, but indirectly – through fines.
The government presented the law as a step towards greater pluralism and media freedom, but a closer analysis reveals that it is actually a dangerous tool to increase political control over media space and punish those who think differently or disagree with the ruling authorities – all of them. The depoliticisation that has been carried out at the national media outlet, Radio-Television Slovenia (RTVS), is now being extended to the entire media space, especially to media that are not fully under the influence of the coalition. The government, led by the Left party (Levica), has put into law a series of measures that are accompanied by a worrying tendency towards totalitarianism.
More taxpayers’ money for the media that are in favour of the current authorities
“This is all very worrying. They will use public funds to feed their own media, even more than before, which is outrageous in itself. In fact, they want to legitimise the possibility of controlling or censoring any kind of freedom or media independent from the government – here, I am referring to this provision in the law that says that anyone who publishes their thoughts that then have the possibility of influencing public opinion must register as a media outlet,” Rončević explained, adding that anyone who expresses his or her thoughts will be at risk of being threatened with a heavy fine.
Be quiet or pay the fine
Rončević pointed out that “this will accumulate huge fines that the average person will not be able to pay, which means that if you don’t want to endanger your own existence, you will simply be forced to be silent.” However, if there is anyone who simply registers as a media outlet for this reason, their opinion will be threatened by a media inspector who will demand the removal of any post that the rulers “do not like”, which is already happening on Facebook. The inspector, who will be responsible for prosecuting inappropriate content, will be appointed by the Minister of Culture in agreement with the Prime Minister. Rončević also pointed this out on the social network X, where he cited the example of Žiga Turk, who publishes his blog online, to which Turk responded that he does not intend to register his blog as a media outlet. “We do not live in a time when every typewriter should be reported to the authorities. And if they give me a hard time, I’ll chase them to the European Court of Human Rights,” he wrote.
Given the well-known ideological orientation of the current authorities, it is clear that the position of the inspector would be used for selective censorship. This is also reflected in the persistent rejection of court decisions, which has become one of the main characteristics of the current government. “It is a terribly worrying matter at the moment, but it is also unwise, because what if, at the next elections, the government changes and their political opponents get such a powerful tool?” he wondered, adding that laws should be written in such a way that they “appeal to you even when you are in opposition. The law has totalitarian tendencies, and it allows the authorities to control freedom of thought and speech.”
“The more I read the proposed Media Law, the more I realise that I will have to register at least 3 times as a media outlet that publishes “content for the public”: – as #Požareport – as #UraResnice – and as #BojanPožar on X. P.S.: This is not a joke, because this is required by law – otherwise, I’ll be fined. I will surely be the first one to be targeted,” investigative journalist Bojan Požar responded to the content of the new bill.
Apparent freedom, actual censorship
Under the guise of guaranteeing pluralism, protecting journalists and the rights of the audience, the bill will introduce three key changes: 1. Ideological targeting of inappropriate content: media outlets that do not comply with the guidelines of the current authorities will be fined heavily or have their content removed. 2. Selective financial support: Government-friendly media will receive additional funding, further increasing their dependence on the government and reducing their independence. 3. Depletion of critical media: Financial pressure on media outlets that disagree with government policy will become a tool to silence criticism.
In addition to these measures, the law also contains provisions that show a lack of understanding of the modern functioning of the media, such as prescribing a separation between advertising activities and editorial content.
He is not optimistic about Brussels’ reaction
Rončević believes that there is a possibility of a reaction from Brussels, “especially if we look at how strongly they reacted to the developments in the media space in Hungary, or perhaps before that in Poland – before the change of power in Poland,” he continued, adding that he is not very optimistic, especially after what the Slovenian public saw in the case of the constitutional ruling on the Radio-Television Slovenia Act, when the Constitutional Court was visited by the European Commissioner Věra Jourová, and afterwards, everything changed. “The communication from that time is still being kept very hidden. Therefore, I am not counting on Brussels, unfortunately.”
The law introduces excessive regulation and outdated rules, such as the separation of advertising and editorial content, which do not meet modern media standards. Critics, including the Slovene Association of Journalists (Društvo novinarjev Slovenije – DNS), warn that the law opens the door to political bias and subjective interpretations, which could limit media independence and freedom of speech. The Ministry of Culture is singled out as a key actor in this bias because of its ideological orientation. We have also addressed our questions to the Slovene Association of Journalists, but so far, they have not responded.
People should take to the streets
Rončević agrees that it is also problematic that most people think that the media law does not affect them and that they are ignoring the issue. He believes that people should take to the streets, but he is not counting on that either, because “if people don’t take to the streets when their wages are being cut through higher and higher taxes than when new taxes are announced, then they will also not do it for this. No, of course, people are not to be expected to take to the streets because of the media law.” He argued that in this case, the Left party is grossly abusing its position to achieve ideological goals, and warned that the Left party is, in fact, very dangerous for democracy.
He was, however, positively surprised by the widespread discussion on the social network X, where this is being talked about extensively, noting the call by the columnist and practical philosopher Andrej Drapal and his colleagues to “fight” against this law, as they have fought against similar laws in the past. We are talking about Article 133 of the Criminal Code. “Of course, none of this is going to happen, but in fact, interestingly – all those who fought against Article 133 for democracy in Yugoslavia actually played a positive role. Now, they are not going to deal with this problem.”
Indeed, the provisions of the law on inappropriate content and sanctions seem disturbingly similar to Article 133 of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY) Criminal Code, which regulated verbal offences. While the threat of imprisonment is not (yet) part of the law, the financial and legal consequences for disobedient media may have a similar effect.
Article 133 had the ambition to curb “hate propaganda”, but it was remembered by the public as the article sanctioning verbal offences. It could, for example, be used to prosecute journalists and young (and not so young) people who dared to talk back too often,
The law will also affect “influencers” and anyone with a larger online following. A young influencer, Zala Klopčič, also responded to the worrying content of the media bill, writing on Instagram: “The state will judge whether our posts are hateful, and if so, the authors will face punishment. This will get rid of all criticism and silence us for good. The law practically bans all media except the national media outlet, RTV Slovenia, because it does not allow media and advertising to operate at the same time. Oh, and all those who publicly disseminate their opinions must register – so that you can be monitored. This is, of course, a blatant attempt at censorship and a restriction on freedom of speech, which is laid down in the Constitution. If we don’t stand up to this, we are finished.”
According to Rončević, it is also worrying that the ruling coalition is trying to wrap all this repressiveness in cellophane, claiming that the law is about “good intentions”. He drew a parallel with Orwell’s work, where “the Ministry of Truth was responsible for propaganda and the Ministry of Peace was responsible for war – what is going on here is a very similar thing,” which he believes will also make it harder to get anything done in Brussels. But no one is buying the fine words, not even former RTV television presenter Igor Pirkovič, who said: “At the end of the day, all would be well and good, if only we didn’t know the proposers, or their understanding of media freedom, and the intentions of the Prime Minister himself. And if we didn’t know their patterns of action. As if the clean-up wasn’t happening fast enough. In my opinion, this is another step in the direction of reducing what media freedom is left.”
“The media and the public critical of the authorities must be neutralised before the elections, because nothing can be left to chance. What would you think of a fox saying that the chicken coop should be secured with a new fence?! Much will be left to the subjective judgement of the censors, and if Svetlana Makarovič is their icon, nothing can surprise us anymore. I mean, what would the world come to if just anyone on the social network X could address the general public? Of course, in a way that would be critical of the government’s work or woke ideology!!! No way!”
The law poses a serious threat to freedom of speech
The fact that this law is more than controversial was also demonstrated by the attempt of Žiga Turk to ask an artificial intelligence programme to give an opinion on the law. “The Media Bill, which we received on New Year’s Eve, is a serious threat to freedom of speech and the beginnings of media pluralism. That’s what artificial intelligence says,” Turk wrote on his blog, among other things.
The law, which still needs to be approved by the National Assembly, opens the door for political reckoning with the media. The ideological bias evident in the actions of the current government suggests that any critical voice will be declared hate speech if it threatens the hegemony of power. Despite the possible reservations of some members of the coalition, it is almost certain that the law will be approved. However, the question remains whether the Slovenian public will be ready to accept such a radical encroachment on media freedom.
Tanja Brkić
