in October, 1992, a group of independent journalists from all states of the former Yugoslavia met in the Ukrainian city of Uzgorod, at a media conference organized by the European federation of local radio stations (FERL) and decided to start an independent news service which would cover the territory of the former Yugoslavia and confront the information blockades and wartime abuse of the media. About half way through 1993, this service began to function under the name of Alternative Information Network [Alternativna Informaciona Mreza] (AIM); today, AIM has collaborators in all regions of the former Yugoslavia and is used by almost all independent media in this region; AIM also has its own English service which can be used by the media and institutions outside the former Yugoslavia. The main coordination and distribution AIM center is located in Paris and Dragica Mugos is one of the coordinators.
What is AIM and how does it function?
AIM is above all a human project and a human response to the situation in which all peoples of the former Yugoslavia found themselves. AIM was conceived as a mail-box system linking computers in editorial rooms in all states of the former Yugoslavia with the central computer in Paris; through this computer we conduct information exchange. So far, AIM has seven sections (in the capitals and one in Kosovo) which regularly send articles about their surroundings to the network; in that they guarantee the objectivity and high professional standard of reporting.
What was your motive in starting a project of this kind?
It was a response to the information blockade which existed between the countries of the former Yugoslavia at the moment when AIM was founded (October 1992). The situation was extremely difficult. A large number of journalists had been fired defending the integrity of their profession, refusing to join the nationalist propaganda and spread the hate and manipulations through the use of half truths which used (used?) to be a characteristic of the official media. A small number of independent media which succeeded in resisting the pressure coming from the ruling regimes and remained on the market, didn't have objective and high quality information about the events in other countries of the former Yugoslavia, which might have helped to break the circle of hate. Immediate goals of AIM were to break the information blockade, and provide an opportunity for the fired independent journalists to stay in the profession and to obtain the high quality information about the events in other states of the former Yugoslavia.
This type of media project, at least in Croatia, has been constantly accused of being in service of the old state and its renewal; it is claimed that your goal is to overthrow "new democratic authorities", that you are in the service of different foreign factors... Who, in your opinion, actually feels threatened by you?
The attacks don't only come from Croatia. If there is one thing in which the nationalist elites in the states of the former Yugoslavia are united, this is it. But that only reveals the true nature of those regimes. Let us start with the terminology which is used by our critics: "enemies of the state", "foreign mercenaries" etc. These attempts to discredit political opponents bring us back to the former Yugoslav regime [communists], from which all these regimes try to distance themselves, with all their might. This indicates the basis of these "new democratic authorities". Let us not get deeper into this; independent media, by offering information about other communities, break a uniform picture about the enemy and sabotage the efforts of the regime to form a monolithic, unanimous public opinion. There are two parallel images, on one hand all the horrors of the war: crimes against the population, refugees, destruction and on the other hand impoverishment of the population, destruction of the value system and the regime which holds on to the power by manipulating the first image. A transnational project like AIM raises the fundamental question: whether the existing regimes could stay in power if is wasn't for the war and everything it brings along? From there we come to a conclusion that it is possible to have good neighborly relations and that the road to the understanding of "the other" is not that long. The answer is in the construction of the democratic systems for which all nationalist elites have declared themselves and whose development they try to stop with all their might.
Do AIM editors and collaborators have problems with authorities in their environs?
Yes, although not the same kind of problems; it depends on the priorities of the authorities at a given moment: AIM was attacked in Croatia by the head of the state himself and, after that, the state-controlled media published the lists with names of AIM journalists; in Bosnia our editor has been sued; in Serbia, AIM journalists didn't receive their accreditations; in Macedonia, the nationalist press attacked our editor etc. The whole problem is that the independent media, no matter how much they are being obstructed in their work, at the end of the line, can be used to give democratic legitimacy to a given regime in front of the international community. The common characteristics of those regimes sharply come into focus in the case of institutional organizing of the journalists from the whole area of the former Yugoslavia. False claims that a group of journalists (at the moment there are 70 journalists working for AIM) wants to rebuild Yugoslavia aim to hide that fact. AIM doesn't want nor is its goal renewal of Yugoslavia. We do support development and spreading of democratic processes in all states of the former Yugoslavia through better understanding of the conditions in those countries, in similar movements and initiatives.
Many consider the former Yugoslav media to be the main culprits or at least accomplices in this war; alternatively, the media are accused that they have significantly influenced the bestial character of the war. In your opinion, what was the role of the media in the war?
Today in the world, media undeniably have a crucial role in shaping of the public opinion. In our region they have proven their absolute power. Official media used half truths, misinformation, lies and shameless propaganda of nationalistic exclusivity to penetrate homes of the great majority of population and to turn the tangible sense of dissatisfaction with the old state into "the impossibility of living together". From there, it was maybe still possible to think about the peaceful divorce if there wasn't so much hatred and exclusiveness, which were spread by the official media. I would like to question the responsibility of journalists. The attitude of the local authorities toward journalists clearly shows their responsibility and their significant role. They are still the strongest support of the authorities and, because of that, the space given to the independent media is very narrow. On the other hand, this shows that the journalistic profession is yet to develop its status. Between a "journalist as a social-political worker" [i.e. the propagandist of the ruling regime] and the todays "journalist-patriot" we need to find space for the real, professional journalism which won't require personal courage of an individual.
How do you assess the current media situation on the territory of the former Yugoslavia? What is the role and influence of the independent media? Are they capable of confronting and competing with the official state media monopolies? How successful is AIM in that?
At the moment, the media situation is quite complicated. There are official and private media, which is often confusing. In the West, privately owned media are usually considered to be independent. When we say independent media we include only those who in their editorial policy do not depend on a ruling party, or on other parties, and which follow the journalistic code of conduct. Media of that kind occupy only ten percent of the total media space in the former Yugoslavia, which in itself determines their power and real influence on the public opinion. Likewise, in comparison with the official media there is a negligible number of the independent electronic media and, consequently, far less opportunity to use picture and live word to directly influence the public. AIM shares the destiny of the other independent media, above all that of the independent press, since the independent press is its main customer. As our goal is to develop communication and understanding among the peoples between which all links have been severed, we view even the smallest breakthrough in that field as a success. Our work is gradual and we have long term goals. We would like to contribute to the development of the foundations for the future democratic societies and we can do that only with an objective and timely information. Because of that, we consider a success when, for example, Koha, an independent weekly published in Albanian in Pristina, publishes an article written by our journalist from Belgrade, or if the same article appears in Albanian and Macedonian in Macedonia. We also feel honored when a newly started magazine Izbor in Tuzla states that "AIM is a reliable, well tested source of information ... which has distributed thousands of articles in which is denounces stupidity and mortal danger coming from exclusion of the other, totalitarianism and fascism."
Where do you see the future of the independent media projects and, specifically AIM? Can these projects develop through self financing, without outside help
The future of independent media depends on the development of situation in each one of the successor states of the former Yugoslavia. Where democratic development wins in the end, the independent media will to a large extent become an engine for those developments and gain much more media space than today. However, if the current situation goes on, the future of independent media, including AIM, is more than uncertain in the situation where the ruling regimes absolutely control the market on which the independent media are supposed to survive; therefore, it is hard to talk about their self financing in those circumstances. Let me list a few examples: starting with the newsprint price which is, for example in Serbia, three times higher for the independent media than the price for the official media, difficulties in obtaining printing services (Croatia), to the complete inaccessibility of the distribution network [most newspapers are sold on kiosks, which are property of the state-controlled media] controlled by the official media, let alone the problems facing electronic independent media for which it is impossible to obtain free bandwidth [which is distributed by the state]. Anyway, it is a common practise everywhere in the world to subsidize large media houses; in our case this is only true for the official media, which can also obtain additional income from advertising. Because of that it is necessary to still count on financial help coming from the institutions and foundations which are willing to to help, taking into account extremely important role and difficult position of the independent media.
Can you reveal who is AIM's financial backer, what are your expenses and how do you assess the relation between the invested resources and the achieved results?
Variety of the AIM's financial backers testifies that a lot of organizations are ready to support an undertaking of this kind; also we cannot rely on a small number of financial supporters, because that wouldn't be sufficient. Our more important backers are the European Union, European Council, UNESCO and also numerous humanitarian and non-governmental organizations. As far as the AIM's budget is concerned, we work with what we get and are unable to plan more than two to three months in advance. Because of all that we should consider the relationship between the invested resources and achieved results in a different light. In my opinion, the most important investment is related to the human commitment, extending the friendly hand to "the other" who is in the same situation and shares identical democratic values. In these, sort of gloomy, times, this kind of project has awakened the hope that it is possible to build bridges of understanding. The greatest recognition we have received, and this is at the same time a measure of our success, is that all independent media on the territory of Yugoslavia regularly publish AIM's articles.
There are different opinions about the aid and investment of various international foundations and institutions into development and support of independent media. Was this assistance structured and organized appropriately, was it sufficient, were there any mistakes?
I think that at the beginning, the attitude of international foundations and institutions only reflected unpreparedness of the international community for the break out of war in the former Yugoslavia. Only the first report by Mazowiecki about the role of the official media in the preparation and the break out of the war brought about the realization and the decision to help the independent media. From there, a gradual, unorganized flow of assistance began; there, we could talk about mistakes since a lot of things depended on a lobby abroad, but that cannot decrease the importance of the offered assistance and the readiness of the ordinary citizens, outside institutions, to contribute to that. I would criticize one thing, regarding "large" benefactors, since the 'small" ones usually give aid unconditionally: the fact that they expect an independent media outlet to quickly prove itself on the market. That is, to say the least, unrealistic, since the assistance was given in order to develop democratic processes (therefore they start from the realization that there is no democracy), and than they behave as if everything in a certain country functions in a most normal fashion. Besides everything I have already listed as problems for independent media breakthrough to the market, it is enough to remind that they cannot advertise themselves through the official media outlets and usually remain unknown as far as the wider audience is concerned. Because of all that, I think that the assistance, not only must continue, but also must be increased, because it is an investment in peace in Europe and it turned out that a war is much more expensive.
From time to time, we hear rumors that AIM will fold because of the lack of funds. Is this possible, and how do you see the future of AIM and its perspectives?
From the very beginning we work without knowing how long we will be able to survive. And this lasts since October 1992. In that sense we share the destiny of the majority of independent media in the former Yugoslavia. We are fighting with all our strength to survive, because we are deeply convinced that the project which proved its value by breaking the information blockade has a lot of sense in the domain of conflict prevention; we accomplish that by offering information which contributes to the mutual understanding and peaceful coexistence of peoples between which the nationalistic regimes have erected barriers of hate.