FALSE BCBP REPORT! Kurir once again targeted by unfounded accusations: Amateur "research" in the service of discrediting Serbia’s European path

Kurir has once again come under attack through completely unfounded accusations that it is a pro-Russian media outlet. This time, the main executor of the attack is the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCBP), which tried to foist on the public a document with the pretentious title Made at home - Political elites and media narratives on the Ukraine war in Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, in free translation, "Home-made - political elites and media narratives on the war in Ukraine in Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina".

Instead of serious analysis and evidence, in the BCBP pamphlet we can read a string of insinuations and manipulations aimed at discrediting Kurir’s editorial work and damaging its reputation, which has for years been firmly pro-European. For that reason, this is at the same time an attempt to undermine Serbia’s process of European integration, which has been the state’s strategic commitment for more than twenty years.

The specific allegations about Kurir in what BCBP in one place calls a study, and in another a report, are neither factually nor contextually accurate. Nor can they be if one looks at the methodology they used, because of which Kurir had to react and ultimately obtained an implicit admission from BCBP that their research is in fact non-existent, that is, that their claims merely float without any grounding whatsoever in facts.

Namely, BCBP altered the text of the so-called study after publication, and did so non-transparently, without any notice on the website on which the report was posted. It is particularly problematic that this alteration of the text concerns the research methodology, which, according to basic scientific rules and postulates, cannot be changed after the research has been completed and its results published. That was BCBP’s cardinal mistake, and it came to light when Kurir uncovered the manipulation in the methodology and forced BCBP into desperate moves in the hope of salvaging the mission of smearing Kurir. But even that was done sloppily, as indeed was everything that had preceded it.

 In its first version, BCBP tried to justify its claims by referring to data collected by Pikasa, a company for analytics based on artificial intelligence, but it is perfectly clear that such quantitative data cannot simply be turned into value judgements, and especially cannot measure sentiments, which this analysis forcibly imputes.

“This study relies on a comprehensive data set generated by the artificial-intelligence-based analytics company Pikasa, encompassing analysis of media content in three countries in the period from 2022 to 2025, with detailed monitoring during January-June 2025. Using its platform, Pikasa analyzed the reporting of 50 most influential media outlets in each country, identifying narrative clusters, shifts in sentiment, thematic peaks and cross-border spread of content. This data set provides a structured basis for examining the ways in which narratives emerged, intensified and spread within interconnected, but politically diverse, media spheres,” is stated in the first version of the study.

This part of the text was altered and BCBP was forced to admit that Pikasa does not stand behind the conclusions stated in the study.

Non-existent credibility

“This study is based on media monitoring data provided by Pikasa Analytics, which are based on quantitative monitoring of media content in three countries during the period January-June 2025. This data provided a structured basis for the analysis in the report, while the interpretation of the findings, analytical conclusions and shaping of the narrative remain within the authorship of BCSP,” reads the amended version of the same text.

 From this it is clear how BCBP manipulated and tried to plant non-existent credibility for its false report. On the basis of its own investigation, Kurir established beyond doubt that BCBP grossly misused the data collected by Pikasa, because the examples of Kurir texts with which BCBP wished to illustrate its false study were not at all part of the monitoring of this artificial-intelligence-based analytics company. Pikasa in fact collects and quantifies the number of audience reactions, but in no way deals with qualitative valorization, which BCBP tried to impute to it.

At the very least, it is also unclear which sample from among all the texts was used to draw completely inaccurate conclusions, since the study cites a total of five texts, none of which, if objectively analysed, can be regarded as a pro-Russian narrative. Kurir especially cannot be accused of supporting the Russian side because it carried reports of credible agencies and other media or informed the public about the messages that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky presented at a press conference. It was precisely such examples that BCBP used to accuse Kurir of being a pro-Russian media outlet in Serbia.

These are only the most serious shortcomings of the pamphlet that BCBP wanted to present as a credible study allegedly showing that Kurir is a pro-Russian media outlet. For whose interest this was done, we may assume, but also quite justifiably suspect, given earlier attacks on Kurir and the same pattern. BCBP’s attack irresistibly recalls unfounded attacks on our company, such as the one in 2023, when the International Press Institute (IPI) published an article reporting negatively on the work of our media and companies, implying that our media are unobjective and under political influence.

This text was initially signed by the author Jan-Peter Westad, incidentally a former employee of the lobbying house Highgate, which, as Kurir previously wrote, lobbied for the interests of Dragan Šolak and United Group, with the aim of striking at the competition, which includes Kurir. The name of the said author was withdrawn and instead the authorship was "taken over" by the Balkan free media initiative (BFMI), an organization that stresses its independence, but in fact is closely linked by vested interests to Šolak and United Group.

Commissioned narratives

In the next instalment, we shall explain in more detail how BCBP’s doctored research was rigged, who stands behind it and how part of Šolak’s machinery functions, creating, with the help of certain media, non-governmental organizations and so-called independent experts, false reports, commissioned narratives and similar deceptions in domestic and international circles at his diktat, thereby "clearing" the space for his business interests.

Kurir is this time as well the target of almost the same kind of attack - not because of facts or professional work, but because it does not fit someone’s political or financial interest. It is clear that behind such "research" stands an agenda that has nothing whatsoever to do with the truth, but solely with an attempt to discredit a media outlet that is not afraid to put out what others keep silent about and that actively supports Serbia’s European path, which has been the state’s official policy for 25 years. Šolak, on the other hand, because of his own business agenda, undermined Serbia’s European agenda and became deeply financially connected with Moscow. Kurir is a thorn in Šolak’s side, among other things because of revealing those links and publishing all his suspicious deals with Russian oligarchs.

Immediately before the publication of this text, Pikasa’s answers arrived at the address of the Kurir editorial office, and we shall publish them in tomorrow’s instalment.