Development_Challenges.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1—DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES

The approach set forth in the SMS statement of work was developed in response to findings from a Media Assessment conducted by an external assessment team for USAID/Serbia between November and December of 2016. The views expressed in the assessment do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government.

The assessment found that Serbian media face complex challenges in five key broad areas: 1. Economic conditions, 2. Policy and Regulatory Environment, 3.Technological developments, 4. Professional Capacities, and 5. Changing media audiences.

Key challenges:

1. Economic conditions:

a. The Serbian media landscape is oversized. The number of media outlets is increasing while investment remains scarce. In 2016, a total of 1559 media outlets were registered (comparatively, Croatia has 750 and Slovakia 900 outlets).

b. The privatization process has been focused on limiting state influence on media outlets, rather than on ownership restructuring that could attract new investment or ideas. At the same time, many privatized media inherited contracts with the state, and many media outlets remain economically dependent on project-based co-funding by the state.

c. The advertising market cannot sufficiently support the current media sector. The average advertising income per registered media in Serbia is almost 5 times lower than in Croatia and

3.5 times lower than in Slovakia..

d. Investment in media remains low with growth predominately in the tabloid market.

e. Media ownership structures and financing remain non-transparent, especially with respect to public financing of media.

2. Legal and Regulatory Framework:

a. Media laws are not currently fully implemented, and are often not accompanied by by-laws and regulations,

b. Media regulatory institutions may lack the staffing and the frameworks to fulfill their mandates,

c. Media policy and legislation currently does not take into account digital developments

(internet, social media, etc.)

3. Technological developments:

a. The media sector is not able to fully respond to new technological developments in terms of regulation, oversight or professional capacity in terms of digital literacy,

b. Younger media audiences are moving to online media,

c. Activism is also moving online.

4. Professional capacities:

a. Concerns regarding the space for free expression and media freedoms contribute to self-censorship and low job security,

b. Poor economic conditions affect job security,

c. Divisions exist among professional t associations which result in low solidarity and an absence of joint efforts.

5. Changing Media audience:

a. The audience is changing its role – no longer simply acting as a consumer, but as a media actor itself,

b. Due to new technologies, audiences are now able to create their own content and assume greater oversight roles than possible before,

c. New patterns of news consumption are affecting how advertising money is being distributed

(away from traditional media and towards mobile and internet platforms).

Conclusions, Opportunities and Recommendations

The key opportunities for engagement on media issues were found to be: 1. Resilience and vitality of some media at the sub-national level, 2. Emerging efforts of media and players from other sectors (e.g. civil society, private sector) in developing partnerships, networks, expanding audience reach and new business models, 3. Understanding technological developments (e.g. digital) and using them to generate revenue, 4.

Entrance of new actors into the media market that can play a role in reinforcing professional and ethical standards and contribute to positive market competition, 5. EU negotiations as a window for tailored legislative and regulatory solutions with an emphasis on implementation.

However, the development of the new media strategy1, EU accession process and the development of new networks and business models alone will not lead to sustainable and long-term improvement in the media sector unless the media environment is improved in terms of legislation, its implementation and the economic field is levelled for all participants. This calls for a more systemic and bifurcated approach to programming USAID assistance to Serbian media sector.

The assessment recommended that future programing engage on following issues:

• Support to and cooperation with emerging networks of media in terms of supporting new and sustainable business models,

• Support to emerging cross-sectoral partnerships and networks in providing a diversity of views to citizens,

• Increasing the voice of media in partnerships that oversee the EU accession process through building expertise and connections of media sector representatives with entities such as the National Convent on EU, EU Negotiation Team.

In order to contribute to levelling the complex economic playing field for media in Serbia, the Assessment recommended complementary support to be provided in the following areas:

1 OSCE, with the support of EU, is currently convening the stakeholders from the Serbian media community and channeling discussion on a set of recommendations to be taken forward to the Ministry of Culture and Information (MOCI) who are in charge of drafting and proposing the new national media strategy. It is expected, as stated by the new State Secretary at MOCI for media that the Strategy will be adopted by mid- 2017 (http://www.danas.rs/drustvo.55.html?news_id=337045&title=Medijska+strategija+do+sredine+godine).

• State aid (e.g. more rigorous by-laws and criteria on public funding and more rigorous oversight),

• Co-financing and indirect financial support (e.g. introduction of VAT reductions and other fiscal measures),

• Systemic and strategic advocacy on transparency of ownership,

• Improving professional standards and labor rights,

• Support to regulatory institutions interested in engaging in the reform process.