Search

Vid Mlakar described the ratio of three votes in favor and one against in a close match as an exceptionally good result. He wrote that the government received the green light for the dismantling of funding for RTV Slovenia, and that the law on the parliamentary investigation is therefore less important in his opinion. He forecasted that critical information about the left will gradually come to the media and the public, adding that the left has "replaced the farmer with a fortress." #politika #Slovenija #RTVSLO (translated)

Liberatec noted that the parliamentary investigation represented the last propaganda attempt by the communists at RTV Slovenia. He claimed that they invested everything they had in an effort to address the mafia, while sinking themselves. He believed that the biggest mistake now would be an attempt to reform RTV instead of abolishing it. #RTVSlovenija #komunizem #politika (translated)

The SDS parliamentary group recorded that MP Alenka Jeraj wanted to point out Robert Golob's statement from 2023 about the "cleaning of Janšists" at RTV Slovenia. According to the group, when she began to explain the meaning of the statement for the discussion about the RTV contribution, a journalist interrupted her and prevented her from continuing. The group asked whether this was still about moderating the debate or already about silencing uncomfortable questions, and expressed concern that public RTV does not allow discussion about statements important for understanding its operations. #RTVSlovenija #RTVPrispevek #Soočenje #RTVSlovenija #Soočenje #Mediji (translated)

Žiga Turk accused RTV Slovenia of using the floods in the Savinja basin to campaign for a referendum, calling such conduct perverse. According to him, the voice for abolishing the subscription sent a depoliticized message that it is time for change. #referendum #politika #Savinjska (translated)

Aleš Štrancar has proposed the liquidation of RTV Slovenia. According to him, the RTV Slovenia Symphony Orchestra and the RTV Slovenia Big Band should be transferred to new companies and financed directly, while the remaining activities should be left to the market or designated for quarries. https://t.co/R3WroiTmjE #RTVSlovenija #SimfoničniOrkester #BigBand (translated)

"Everything that goes through the National Assembly and the government means dependency," Asta Vrečko emphasized in a conversation with Rok Tamšek that RTV Slovenia is a public good with a century-old heritage that we must nurture and preserve for future generations. #RTVSlovenija #kultura #politika (translated)

Info360 Novice recorded that Flurina Ametaj participated in a pre-referendum debate about the amendment to the Foreigners Act on TV Slovenia, after she also took part in the show Debate with Bergant the evening before. According to the author, RTVS's rules explicitly prohibit such editorial practice.   https://t.co/jjWLD1Hkx3 #RTVS #zakon #politika (translated)

The Voice of the People publicly asked SDS, the SDS parliamentary group, and member of parliament Andrej Kosi whether they had already received an apology from Aigul for her allegedly inappropriate and violent behavior, according to the author. He described the events of the previous day at RTV Slovenia as horrifying and stated that Aigul had threatened the member of parliament and insulted citizens. Upon publication, he called for sharing. https://t.co/psKYBVOtn6 #Slovenija #politika #nasilje (translated)

Dr. Boštjan M. Zupančič stated that he believes the issue at hand is not personal grievances but rather the professional responsibility of the public media. He noted that Rosvita Pesek hosted a program in which RTV had recorded and prepared a statement from Jože Možina, but did not air it, and the viewers were not presented with the specific insults that are the subject of the dispute. Zupančič felt that RTV Slovenia should have published a correction or supplement, indicated the statements to which the lawsuit pertains, clarified that the label "Liar" was not part of the disputed text, and published or accurately summarized Možina's recorded statement. He called this the minimum professional correction. He added that criticism is legitimate if the public media omits essential facts and the response of the affected party, and that Možina is right at this point. #RTVSlovenija #mediji #profesionalnost (translated)

Jana Gržinič criticized the leadership of RTV Slovenia and wrote that the president of the RTV council, Forbic, spoke about fascists and their influence on the program at a meeting, and that Radio and TV Koper demanded explanations. She deemed Forbic unsuitable to lead the national broadcaster and stated that she would therefore vote for the abolition of the RTV fee. She also wrote that such behavior, in her opinion, would not happen on any national television in Europe, where the presidents of national television councils should not participate in political campaigns. She accused the leadership of being controlled by individuals from the left political spectrum, bringing the RTV almost to bankruptcy, and called for their resignation. #RTVSlovenija #Slovenija #politika (translated)

Sergij wrote that he hopes that Janez Janša and Giorgia Meloni will address this issue at today's meeting. He argued that the head of RTV Slovenia, whom he labeled a leftist NGO, should not equate Italians and Italy with fascism. He demanded that either this person or RTV Slovenia should leave, adding that in his opinion, no one in the EU has the right to spread such chauvinism. https://t.co/BEeY3tbJrv #RTVSlo #šovinizem #politika (translated)

Jože Možina wrote that RTV Slovenia and Odmevi, in his opinion, inadequately reported on that day in the trial. He praised the mention of the new attack by Svetlana Makarovič on the journalist, while also claiming that the media had omitted his arguments about delays. He added that he had been the target of attacks because of broadcasts on TVS, and accused Rosvita Pesek of attributing a mild insult to Makarovič that she did not utter, while ignoring more serious insults. He questioned on whose behalf the media reports in this way, and wrote that this reminded him of a saying about friends and enemies. #mediji #sojenje #novinarstvo (translated)

Rok Ravnikar accused RTV Slovenia of not fulfilling its mission of balanced reporting and presenting different views. He wrote that more than which side it supports, he is concerned about the loss of space for the exchange of opinions and confrontation in a democratic republic. He compared two television debates. Last November, during the referendum on euthanasia, he participated in a debate where, according to him, the time was evenly divided between supporters and opponents. There were supposed to be considerably more opponents, so each was given about 45 seconds, while supporters had two minutes each. In a debate about one of the four current referendums, they announced that each participant would get 40 seconds. Ravnikar asked why RTV Slovenia changed the criteria for time distribution, as the same time for each side and the same time for each speaker with a different number of participants would mean a different ratio between the sides. He added that as an active citizen, he expects a response from the journalistic, media, and legal professions. In this context, he cited the stance of Levitsky and Ziblatt from the book *How Democracies Die?*, that changing the rules to one's own benefit and to the detriment of opponents is characteristic of authoritarian regimes. #mediji #demokracija #poročašnje (translated)

More than 2000 words blame how the public @rtvslo does not fulfill its mission of balanced reporting and presenting different views. You cannot make a bigger anti-ad. And it is the least important which side I support - what worries and saddens me the most is that as a democratic republic we are losing the space for exchange and confrontation. Why do you think of the "others" as so stupid? When did the attitude towards the "others" change so much? Yes, I ask you, who prepare the program. I understand, you have your own agenda and your own views, but in a democratic community mutual respect is a fundamental value. Twenty years ago, I worked as a PR person in politics. Even then, we knew who belonged where and which uncle from the background had more influence. But I felt that those of us on the ground, who were in direct contact – journalists, editors, and PR people – respected each other on a professional level. When I participated in a debate last November about the referendum on euthanasia, the time was evenly divided between the "FOR" side and the "AGAINST" side. There were significantly more opponents at that time, so each of us got, if I remember correctly, 45 seconds. Most barely managed to present one thought. On the other side, the supporters had two minutes. There were also some pretty bizarre embarrassments, as some could not come up with enough arguments for a two-minute speech. Last night, I heard an introductory announcement at a debate about one of the four current referendums that each speaker would get 40 seconds. Seriously? So back then equal time for both sides, now equal time for each speaker. These are different criteria, which with a different number of participants also mean a different distribution of time between both sides. Why did you change the criterion? I am just an active citizen, I expect that the journalistic, media, and legal professions will provide their criticism and assessment. "Changing the rules to your advantage and adjusting the conditions to the detriment of opponents is one of the basic characteristics of authoritarian powers." (Levitsky & Ziblatt: How democracies die?) #demokracija #mediji #poročanje (translated)

The on-duty activist @rtvslo Boris Vasev says that there was a "dispute" between the pilot and co-pilot. Yes, the argument arose after one pilot wanted to crash into the city center of Tel Aviv, and in favor of that goal, he threatened the other, while the other disagreed with the crashing and the threat. https://t.co/E7MeLGozG7 #pilot #TelAviv #novice (translated)