ATTACK ON KURIR FOLLOWING THE SAME PATTERN: BCBP plants false research to discredit us, old schemes and vested-interest links from the shadows have surfaced

Only a careful and meticulous reader can follow what is hidden in exactly 212 footnotes, namely that the conclusions presented, highly arbitrary and unfounded, relied on figures from the media sphere and civil society who are either linked by vested interests to Dragan Šolak and United Group or are regular participants in programmes on N1 and Nova.

At first glance it becomes clear that behind the "research" lies a series of serious shortcomings - from questionable methodology and the subsequent alteration of key parts of the text, to an obvious attempt to turn quantitative data arbitrarily into politically colored conclusions. Only a careful and meticulous reader can follow what is hidden in exactly 212 footnotes, namely that the conclusions presented, highly arbitrary and unfounded, relied on figures from the media sphere and civil society who are either linked by vested interests to Dragan Šolak and United Group or are regular participants in programmes on N1 and Nova.

Commissioned accusations

Particularly problematic is the fact that the author, after being confronted with the facts, quietly and secretly corrected his own document, practically admitting that the analytics of the company "Pikasa", on which he had originally relied, do not stand behind the interpretations expressed, but that the conclusions are exclusively his own or a commissioned construction. In addition, as "evidence" for serious accusations against Kurir, only five texts were singled out, which neither factually nor contextually can be characterized as a pro-Russian narrative, which further lays bare the weaknesses of the entire undertaking.

Since their attempt to "attach" their value judgements to the company "Pikasa", which deals with analytics based on artificial intelligence, failed, BCBP resorted to manipulation already seen in earlier attacks on our media outlet. In the absence of convincing figures or any other measurable data and facts, their so-called study reaches for questionable quotations in which certain people give entirely unfounded assessments supporting the desired and pre-shaped claims.

It is interesting, and at the same time very problematic, that the published document states that these assessments were gathered in interviews and, according to the data in the published document, the interviews with 12 individuals were conducted by the author himself and every single one of them was done during September last year. Incidentally, Vuksanović’s study encompasses an analysis of media content in three countries in the period from 2022 to 2025, with detailed monitoring during January-June 2025.

The whole matter of alleged objectivity and independent expertise completely falls apart when one considers all the people whose views are supposed to "hold up" this BCBP product. The very selection of interviewees and the favoring of people from purposefully chosen organizations creates a justified suspicion that the results were predetermined as well.

Thus, one of those interviewed was CRTA Program Director Raša Nedeljkov, whose organization directly participated in the creation of earlier reports that attempted in literally the same way to damage Kurir’s reputation, about which we have written on several occasions. Apart from being a regular interviewee on N1, Nova and other media under the United Group umbrella, media theorist Ana Martinoli is far from an independent and objective expert, considering her direct participation in United Group’s campaign to obtain a national frequency. She participated in drafting the elaboration for Nova S television during the 2022 competition for national frequencies, was a consultant in the preparation of that conceptual document and spoke at the presentation of Nova S before the REM.

Even people directly employed in United Group media served as a source of so-called independent expertise, such as Aleksandra Godfroa, who works at N1 television. The BCBP "research" also relies on interviews with KRIK journalist and Raskrinkavanje editor Vesna Radivojević, Centre for Contemporary Politics Program Director Nikola Burazer, ISAC Fund Director Nikola Petrović, political scientist Vujо Ilić, NGO Institute for Digital Communications Director Ana Mirković, and other people who can regularly be seen across all United Group media platforms.

Altering the report stealthily

The case of BCBP’s attack on Kurir is not a precedent, but part of a broader and already used pattern. Almost identical accusations and similar "analytical" attempts were seen in previous years, when narratives with the same goal were placed through different organizations and platforms - to discredit Kurir and place it within predetermined political frameworks. In those earlier campaigns, as could be seen both in publicly available information and in our many investigations, actors linked to the business circle around Dragan Šolak and the United Group he controls appeared, which further raises the question of the real motives behind such attacks.

That is precisely why BCBP’s latest action should not be viewed in isolation, but as yet another use of an established pattern in which, under the cloak of research and the struggle for media standards, vested-interest score-settling is conducted on the domestic media scene. At the same time, the way in which this construction was placed before the public additionally confirms that this is not a matter of research work, but of a pre-prepared campaign to discredit the competition. Without the most basic professional responsibility, without clear criteria and with selective choice of material, BCBP tried to turn a few torn-out headlines and neutral informative texts into a narrative that simply does not exist.

Such an approach is not only contrary to the rules of the profession but directly insults the intelligence of readers. It is particularly indicative that the entire document ignores the continuity of Kurir’s editorial policy, which for years has clearly and unequivocally followed and actively supported Serbia’s European path and has reported in accordance with professional standards. Instead, simplifications and labelling are resorted to, which is a method characteristic of propaganda, not of serious research.

An additional problem is the fact that BCBP, after being caught in obvious manipulation, did not offer any meaningful explanation nor accept responsibility for placing inaccurate and misleading claims. On the contrary, the attempt quietly to correct the methodology without publicly admitting error only deepened suspicion regarding the real motives of the author of this pamphlet. Therefore, what arises here is not merely the question of the credibility of one "study", but, more broadly, the question of the misuse of quasi-research formats for political score-settling and the targeting of media that do not suit certain vested-interest groups. Such practice represents a dangerous precedent and a direct blow to media freedom.

Kurir will, as before, continue to report responsibly, professionally and in the public interest, regardless of attempts to discredit such work through unfounded accusations and poor covert campaigns. Because the facts are relentless, and in this case they clearly show that the only thing that is "home-made" is in fact a poor and unsustainable attempt at a construction that collapsed under the weight of its own inconsistencies and malicious plantings.

In other words, what we are witnessing today in the BCBP pamphlet is not any isolated case, but a well-known and previously seen mechanism. The scheme is the same, only the actors rotate, while the goal remains unchanged - the discrediting of media that do not belong to a certain circle of interests.

Namely, an almost identical pattern was used earlier as well, when other organizations assumed the role of "independent analysts" and, as may be seen from available data and our earlier investigations, were linked by vested interests with the network around Dragan Šolak and United Group. Then, just as now, reports with predetermined conclusions were produced, which were then disseminated through a coordinated media campaign.

Contractors carrying out the work

One of the most obvious examples of such practice is the activity of the organization Balkan Free Media Initiative (BFMI), which formally presents itself as independent, but is closely linked to the interests of Šolak and United Group. It was precisely through such channels that on several occasions "reports" were created that had the same aim as this newest one - to label and discredit competing media, including Kurir, under the false slogan of a struggle for media freedoms. The structure of Dragan Šolak’s mechanism, by which he removes the competition and thus secures for himself unobstructed growth of wealth, is extremely branched, but the main levers are certainly lobbying houses such as Highgate, non-governmental organizations such as BCBP, the organizations Balkan Free Media, CRTA and others. Integrated into all this are also media outlets, the most active of which are N1, Nova and Danas, as well as advertising agencies operating beyond the borders of Serbia, just like cable operators throughout the region.

The steps of manipulation are always the same: first a document is created that lays claim to analytical seriousness, then an international "setting" is secured in order to give it greater significance, and then, through the media network, a narrative is disseminated that is meant to leave an impression of credibility. Thus, for example, one such report was presented even in the European Parliament, in order to create the appearance of institutional weight, although it was in fact an event without real political significance, serving rather as a platform for vested-interest score-settling.

It is particularly indicative that in all those cases the same pattern of manipulation appears - reliance on "independent research" which, once one scratches beneath the surface, boils down to arbitrary interpretations and constructions.

That is precisely why the newest attack through BCBP represents nothing new, but rather continuity in which, with the help of a network of connected actors, an attempt is made to create a false picture of media that do not submit to editorial control and vested-interest dictates.

When all these examples are placed in the same context, it becomes clear that this is not a matter of isolated omissions or "methodological errors", but of a systemic approach in which research is used as a tool for achieving business and political goals. And when research is turned into an instrument of score-settling, then it ceases to be research - and becomes precisely what this latest "study" has shown itself to be: a cuckoo’s egg in the form of a propaganda pamphlet with a verdict written in advance.