What becomes clear from it is a pattern that has been suspected for years, but has never been presented so clearly - a dominant part of the media space is under the control of companies and individuals outside the state.
In such a situation, Radio Television of Montenegro (RTCG) remains the only one among the leading media outlets that is fully domestically owned.
This fact has a broader significance than it seems at first glance. In an environment of pronounced media concentration and the increasing influence of foreign capital, the public service is becoming one of the rare institutions in which editorial and business policy is formed within the state. Thus, its role goes beyond the classic function of a broadcaster and enters the zone of preserving media balance.
National frequencies under the influence of foreign capital
AMU data shows that out of five television stations with national coverage, four have majority ownership outside Montenegro. These are Adria, Prva, Vijesti and Nova. Their ownership structures are not simple. On the contrary, they are complex networks of companies and related entities, often spread across multiple countries and different legal systems. In some cases, the ownership chain includes dozens of legal and natural persons.
This complexity was one of the key reasons for creating a digital map, so that, through unified data, it would be possible to identify connections that otherwise remain hidden behind formal structures.
In addition, TV E remains an exception in a formal sense. It is owned by the company Lipa Media, registered in Montenegro, which is backed by several domestic individuals.
Regional corporations and media concentration
An additional dimension to the whole picture is given by changes within the United Group, one of the key media corporations in the region. With the formation of Adria News Network (ANN), a new management model was established that unites 14 television, print and digital media. Among them are Vijesti and TV Nova M.
According to available information, the ANN system, whose legal representative is British journalist Brent Sadler, includes the supervision of an independent board of directors, clearly defined management procedures and additional mechanisms for controlling editorial decisions. This model is not specific to the region, but follows a broader European trend of media concentration, in which large systems consolidate multiple media outlets in order to increase market influence and financial stability.
However, such concentration also has a flip side. It reduces the number of decision-making centers and moves them beyond national boundaries. The result is that local media become part of larger systems in which key strategic decisions are made at a level that is not crucially tied to the local context.
Vijesti case – limited autonomy and inaccessible purchase agreement
Within this broader framework, the example of Vijesti stands out.
The purchase agreement on the basis of which the change of ownership was made is not publicly available. This fact indicates the weaknesses of the regulatory system when it comes to the transparency of the media market and the control of large ownership transactions. In such an environment, the public remains deprived of key information about the relationships between owners, management structures and possible obligations arising from these arrangements, although Vijesti has been the most vocal when it comes to calling for transparency for many years. Of course, with others.
Additional insight is provided by the company's own management model. Executive Director Marijana Kadić Bojanić's decision-making is now clearly limited.
According to the data from the Tax Administration website, it must now have the approval of the Board of Directors in the event of a decision to acquire, dispose of and encumber real estate, credit debt, surety or guarantee. It must also have the approval of the board if it wants to conclude, amend or terminate an employment contract or undertake any action that, independently or with other actions, exceeds the value of 50,000 euros per year. Such a management model is not uncommon in large corporate systems, however, but in this case it clearly shows where the real center of decision-making is located. Local management now has an operational role, but it no longer makes key decisions independently. They are approved at a higher level, outside of Montenegro.
In this sense, the example of Vijesti becomes an illustration of a broader process in which the formal structure remains local, but actual control belongs to the broader system.
Other media – a fragmented but recognizable image
A similar pattern is seen in other media. Adria TV is owned by several legal entities, including A Media Invest and Adria Management Services, as well as a number of individuals from the Marković and Tešanović families.
Prva TV is connected to a complex network of companies from the Copernicus system, including firms registered in multiple countries.
The situation is similar in print and digital media. Dan is owned by Jumedia Mont, while Pobjeda, CDM and Portal Analitika are affiliated with First Financial Holdings, which is owned by Petros Statis.
The Antena M media house remains owned by domestic founders, including its editor-in-chief, Darko Šuković, while the IN4S and Borba portals are owned by companies registered in Montenegro, with clearly defined editorial and political lines.
Who really controls the media in Montenegro?
The AMU digital map is not just a technical overview of ownership. It raises an essential question: where key decisions are made and who has real influence on the media space in Montenegro.
In a system in which leading private media outlets are part of regional and international corporations, in which ownership arrangements are not fully transparent, and local management operates within limited frameworks, the gap between formal and actual management is becoming increasingly pronounced.
In practice, it looks like this: the media formally operate in Montenegro, however, a significant part of the key decisions are made outside of it. And this changes the nature of the media system. Instead of several autonomous centers, a network is formed in which the content, business policy and editorial directions are integrated into broader corporate interests.
In such circumstances, the issue of the media ceases to be exclusively professional or market-based. It becomes a question of public interest; the question of who shapes the information that citizens receive and within which framework decisions that influence public opinion are made.
In this context, the fact that the Public Media Service of Montenegro is the only major media outlet entirely domestically owned gains additional weight. Not as a privilege, but as one of the few remaining points where decisions are made within the state, unencumbered by pressure to make a profit or implement an agenda at all costs.
Montenegro, as a small and open society, does not have the luxury of leaving the media space exclusively to the market. That is why issues of ownership, transparency and decision-making must be part of the public interest, not closed corporate arrangements. And that is why the issue of media ownership must no longer be a secondary topic, because it is a question of various types of influence, from informational to financial, and often also a question of political power. This, of course, does not mean closing the market or any restriction of freedoms, but insisting on transparency and rules that ensure a fair and responsible media space in the interests of the society in which these media operate and exert influence.
Comments