1. Course of Discussion
Working Group II intended to draw up an up-to-date inventory in the field "Media and Culture in Montenegro" and to discuss future perspectives and, if necessary, alternative solutions for the ongoing transformation process.
The Working Group mainly consisted of participants from Montenegro, i.e. representatives of government and parliament, executive employees of non-state media and cultural bodies - from the film and cultural fields, as well as from literature and cultural sciences. In other words, this forum predominantly contained persons, who are - due to their social and political positions - tied up in the discourse on the ways and means of democratically transforming their country and who are also directly confronted with the every-day consequences of this process. This background of experience lead to a lively, constructive and open discussion about the gap between the needs and reality, also because of many facts controlled from outside and deprived of own influence and will.
In the field of media, especially the new Media Act inflamed a controversial discussion: in how far does it change the quality of the institutions - especially the mass media (and here especially the electronic media and television were queried).

		Will the democratic control of a station, for example, work out just by establishing a broadcasting council ("Rundfunkrat")?
		Does this already mean a release from political influence?
		Would such legal frameworks already be a guarantee for independent reporting?

Despite some differences in evaluating the governing bodies, the participants agreed that a good law does not necessarily lead to journalistic professionalism. Neither does privatization per se. But what is the core problem?

Criticism culminated in the following statement:

"It is wrong to draw attention only to the connotation of media and politics: our problem in Montenegro is the fact that we do not have a state which is strong enough - neither politically nor economic-wise. Therefore we do not really have to fear any predominance from this side. It is a problem, however, that our system is not ready as yet to ensure the implementation of the act or to rather accept it. Neither have we sufficiently qualified journalists or editors, nor those, who do not stick to the old mental patterns, who are critical when it comes to the past and who are free of self-censorship towards political power. Conclusion: Also in this regard, Montenegro is still living in a closed-up and authority-fixated society".

Thus a problem of not only political but also social emancipation came up. Surely a drawback, which cannot be solved within a short period of time.
Compared to such criticism regarding the underdeveloped democratic substance of the Montenegrin society, the concerns about assigning the broadcasting frequencies and licenses, which are a disadvantage for the financially week Montenegrin market especially while facing the Serbian interest, seem rather moderate. Investors, like the German WAZ group (at Vesti) were even rated "valuable". Such co-operations are considered to promise the country much more security, inputs for technological innovations and thus better market chances. Paternalism with regard to the contents, however, is not really suspected.
But, it is the unloved "Big Brother" Serbia, whose center of power, Belgrade, is still too much equated with the political focus of Serbia and Montenegro, who is obviously producing the fear of foreign infiltration. Especially since at least the participants of this Working Group would like to see themselves independent from Serbia rather today than tomorrow, if necessary only in three years, like it is provided by the latest international agreements. Unison, there were complaints about the Serbian hegemony pursuit, which grabs like the tentacles of an octopus at all fields of the social, economical and political life in Montenegro - media and culture surely included. Only little own economic power is opposing the Serbian push on the small Montenegrin market. In addition, it is a restraint that especially cultural operations are still very steadfastly, conservative, i.e. incrusted. It was even expressed that exactly this creative field is the least reformed social sector, when it comes to its structures.
In the field of media, especially the influence of the commercial and politically most dubious Serbian TV-channels "Pink" and "BK" were criticized as a transmission belt for exclusively Serbian positions and values. There is no space for specific Montenegrin contents. There are, however, big and drastic differences in the tradition and culture of both states and nations, which require medial negotiations.
In the discussion about cultural questions, the aspect of protecting the national identity was strongly emphasized. If Montenegro now steps out of the close political connection with Serbia, it is even more important to commemorate its own century-old history of national independence, when there was enough time to develop own Montenegrin values and life style. In those, the variety of national minorities has always had its own space. But this cultural self-image has to be enforced much more than it is the case right now, and the localization of Montenegro as an independent cultural factor in the European context, as well. This, however, requires the support of the Ministry of Culture, e.g. by protecting and promoting the national heritage more extensively, also as "strategic partnerships".

2. Recommendations
The discussions resulted in a variety of detailed recommendations and wishes, which are here divided in two groups, according to the people addressed:

The following recommendations are addressed to those responsible in Montenegro

1.		To reduce the permanent staff of the public radio and television station of Montenegro from presently 1000 to 300 employees so that the work there will be more (cost-) efficient. In consequence:
				to appropriately compensate the released employees;
				to professionally train the remaining staff in vocational training courses to meet the requirements of modern and democratic media;
				to develop mechanisms in order to avoid further politicizing of the supervisory boards
2.		Not to repeat the finalized licensing procedure (according to the Media Act), since this would lead to uncertainty again; however, to correct obvious mistakes
3.		To particularly protect minorities media, especially because of the (financially) potent competition from outside (Serbia, Albania).
4.		To apply additional strict criteria for authorizing these foreign media, since they could bring foreign cultural infiltration and destroy the weak Montenegrin media (e.g. TV Pink, which is - due to the Serbian market - financially much stronger and equipped with better advertising possibilities). The target should be to gain equal opportunities with Serbia.
5.		To maintain and consciously promote the existing regional/local variety of the media: this is politically necessary for the democratization process, even though partly counterproductive, economically speaking.

The following recommendations are addressed to the international/German partners:

1.		To intensively and further support the journalists' qualification, because:
				professional journalists enable a better control of the power bodies;
				professional journalist can deal with hot topics (corruption, social questions) in a better manner.
2.		To promote and enable disputes on "what went wrong in the past".
3.		To set up special journalistic training and informative programs dealing with European integration.
4.		To offer projects for regional integration (Montenegro and its neighbors: Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, Kosovo, Albania).
5.		To support quality: of journalists as well as of the media as such.
6.		To harmonize the laws on the media of the whole region and not to concentrate the support only on Montenegro and Serbia.
7.		To help the small, local media with special donations (of German or international foundations?) to survive the radical changes. Effects:
				the creative potential, especially available in small stations, is supported;
				the "milieu of cultural and regional variety" is preserved;
				specific modernization, professionalizing and networking would reinforce these stations and ensure better chances to survive.
8.		To offer "strategic partners" for Montenegrin media to resist the "import of culture from neighboring republics", from the "hegemonic power Serbia". Therefore
				to support media and cultural projects which contribute to the preservation of Montenegro's cultural heritage and cultural identity: to take Montenegro's worries and needs about it serious: "The Montenegrin question is a democratic question: Keep the pressure from outside away from us!"
9.		To forward claims to the neighboring countries so that they are behaving fair and respect Montenegro's identity.
10.		To further promote NGOs and independent media because they are most important guarantors for a civil society.
11.		Montenegro has played a positive part in the conflicts and is therefore appreciated as a regional meeting point and is respected by all neighbors: This should be especially esteemed and promoted (with projects, conferences).
12		Montenegro should become the domicile of foundations (at least of a German foundation).
13.		To promote the German language.

Translation: Claudia Puscher