Skip to main content

Communicating Power and Resistance in Democratic Decline: The 2015 Smear Campaign against Serbia’s Ombudsman

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Media, Communication and the Struggle for Democratic Change

Abstract

The chapter explores diverging implications of global democratic decline for public communication in new and old democracies. It draws on empirical evidence from a government-sponsored smear campaign against Serbia’s ombudsman between January and May 2015, including data from quantitative and qualitative analyses of print and electronic media and of Twitter content and from semi-structured interviews with key political, civil society and media actors. The analyses of the main arenas of conflict showed the prevalence of emotions and personal beliefs, as opposed to evidence, in public debates, just like in old democracies. It also revealed, however, a much broader repertoire of strategic deception and authoritarian manipulation, which resulted in sharp polarization in public discourse, systematic violations of press freedom and political competition, and a sharply declining quality of journalism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See http://www.mecodem.eu/mecodify/.

  2. 2.

    If not quoted directly, interviews are coded as follows: Country code (SER = Serbia), type of interviewee (Jour = journalist, Act = civil society activist, Pol = political actor).

References

  • Al-Saqaf, W. (2016). Mecodify: A Tool for Big Data Analysis & Visualization with Twitter as a Case Study. Retrieved May 15, 2016, from: https://mecodify.org/mecodify-whitepaper.pdf.

  • Apel upozorenja demokratskoj javnosti. (2015). Centar za praktičnu politiku. Retrieved November 20, 2016, from http://www.policycenter.info/apel-upozorenja-demokratskoj-javnosti/.

  • Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The Logic of Connective Action. Information, Communication & Society, 15, 739–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corner, J. (2010). Promotion as Institutionalized Deception: Some Coordinates of Political Publicity. In M. Aronczyk & D. Powers (Eds.), Blowing Up the Brand: Critical Perspectives on Promotional Culture. Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, D. (2010). Liberation Technology. Journal of Democracy, 21(3), 69–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English Oxford Living Dictionaries. (2016). Word of the Year 2016 is …. Retrieved November 6, 2017, from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/word-of-the-year/word-of-the-year-2016.

  • Hannan, J. (2016). Truth as the First Casualty of American Politics. In J. Hannan (Ed.), Truth in the Public Sphere. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkin, J., & Rosamond, B. (2017). Post-truth Politics, Bullshit and Bad Ideas: ‘Deficit Fetishism’ in the UK. New Political Economy, 23, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, P. N. (2010). The Digital Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Information Technology and Political Islam. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ipsos Strategic Marketing. (2015). Jačanje medijske slobode: analiza medijskog tržišta Srbije. August 2015 report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction into Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2010). Why Democracy Needs a Level Playing Field. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockie, S. (2017). Post-truth Politics and the Social Sciences. Environmental Sociology, 3(1), 1–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihaylov, T., & Nakov, P. (2016). Hunting for Troll Comments in News Community Forums. The 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin, 7–12 August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (Eds.). (2012). Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective for Democracy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorf, K. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. (1994). Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy, 5(1), 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. (1998). Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies. Journal of Democracy, 9(3), 112–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panizza, F. (Ed.). (2005). Populism and the Mirror of Democracy. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappas, T. (2016). Modern Populism: Research Advances, Conceptual and Methodological Pitfalls, and the Minimal Definition. In W. R. Thompson (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partner Research Solutions (2015). Čitanost štampanih medija u Srbiji. May 2015 report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, K. (2012). Networked Authoritarianism and Social Media in Azerbaijan. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 283–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suiter, J. (2016). Post-truth Politics. Political Insight, 7(3), 25–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

  • The Economist. (2016, September 10). Post-truth Politics: Art of the Lie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlada Republike Srbije. (2015). Audio/Video Press 2015. Retrieved November 3, 2016, from http://www.srbija.gov.rs/vesti/dokumenti_sekcija.php?id=228474.

  • Vladisavljević, N. (2016). Competitive Authoritarianism and Popular Protest: Evidence from Serbia under Milošević. International Political Science Review, 37(1), 36–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, C., & Orttung, R. W. (2014). Breaking the News: The Role of State-Run Media. Journal of Democracy, 25(1), 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yee, A. (2017). Post-truth Politics and Fake News in Asia. Global Asia, 12(2), 66–71.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nebojša Vladisavljević .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix: Names and Positions of the Involved Actors

Appendix: Names and Positions of the Involved Actors

  • Saša Janković, Serbia’s ombudsman from 2007 to 2017.

  • Dragan Vučićević, the owner and editor-in-chief of Informer, a pro-government tabloid.

  • Bojana Maljević, an actress and Twitter user who supported Saša Janković.

  • Tamara Skrozza, a member of the Press Council and the Independent Journalist Association of Serbia (NUNS).

  • Željko Mitrović, the owner and CEO of Pink TV, a national private pro-government broadcaster.

  • Veselin Simonović, the head manager of Blic, a national daily.

  • Aleksandar Vučić, Prime Minister 2014–2017, currently the President of Serbia.

  • Marijan Rističević, a ruling coalition’s MP known for his inflammatory speeches against the opposition.

  • Nebojša Stefanović, the interior minister since 2014.

  • Bratislav Gašić, the defence minister 2014–2016.

  • Predrag Gojković, found dead in Janković’s apartment in 1993; his death was ruled a suicide.

  • Milan Antonijević, director of YUCOM, an NGO which supported Janković during the conflict.

  • Vladimir Đukanović, ruling coalition’s MP, who spoke against Janković.

  • Dragan Šutanovac, Democratic Party’s MP who supported Janković.

  • Rodoljub Šabić, the public information commissioner.

  • Dragan Popović, President of the Centre for Practical Politics, who supported Janković.

  • Vukašin Obradović, President of NUNS during the conflict.

  • Dragan Đilas, the former president of the Democratic Party, who in 2014 had to endure a smear campaign similar to the one against Janković.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vladisavljević, N., Krstić, A., Pavlović, J. (2019). Communicating Power and Resistance in Democratic Decline: The 2015 Smear Campaign against Serbia’s Ombudsman. In: Voltmer, K., et al. Media, Communication and the Struggle for Democratic Change. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16748-6_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics