RTVS is cutting programming: 20 live sports broadcasts will be cancelled
The article discusses internal discussions within the RTVS (Radio Television Slovenia) board regarding their involvement in a campaign related to a forthcoming referendum on abolishing the mandatory payment of the RTV contribution. The board has decided to convene a special meeting on September 9th to address concerns raised by members about the proposed changes to the RTVS Act, particularly concerning the status of regional centers. The head of the administration, Natalija Gorščak, clarified that the proposals do not aim to abolish regional centers but rather redefine the scope of public service and remove organizational structure definitions from the law. Concerns were also raised about funding methods and the potential impact on national programs. Financial performance reports show RTVS achieved a revenue surplus of €142,000, though below budget expectations.
As Slovenia approaches its upcoming referendum, political tensions have reached a boiling point, with major parties and figures engaged in heated debates over media reform, foreign policy, and the role of public broadcasting. The referendum, set for October, has become a focal point of contention, raising questions about whether the intense political activity will deter voters from participating or if it will mobilize support for one side over another. Four prominent politicians, Maša Kociper of Gibanje Svoboda, Vinko Gorenak of SDS, Andrej Šter, and Jani Möderndorfer, discussed these issues during a televised debate, highlighting the deep divisions within Slovenian politics. The discussion centered around proposed changes to the media law and the management of RTV Slovenija, the state-owned public broadcaster. The government, led by Prime Minister Janez Janša and Deputy Prime Minister Zoran Stevanović, has submitted draft amendments to both the Media Act and the RTV Slovenija Act. These proposals include a new system for financial support to media outlets and modifications to how RTV Slovenija is governed. Right-wing politicians argue that these reforms are necessary to ensure objective reporting, particularly in the national news programs. Vinko Gorenak emphasized that the intervention in RTV Slovenija was essential due to the left-leaning bias he claims exists in the current programming. Andrej Šter referenced comments made by television presenter Marcel Štefančič, who suggested that the national channel has too many leftists, reinforcing the need for change. The controversy surrounding the proposed reforms extends beyond domestic concerns. Slovenia’s decision to join Czechia in opposing a European Union declaration regarding Israeli plans to build settlements in the West Bank has sparked accusations against Janša. Robert Golob, leader of the opposition party Levica, accused Janša of disgracing the country and implied that the veto was a form of payment to the SDS party before parliamentary elections. European Parliament member Matjaž Nemec criticized Janša, calling him a “Trojan horse” for Israel in the EU. Vinko Gorenak dismissed such criticisms, arguing that Nemec was unqualified to make such statements and that Golob, no longer in power, should refrain from commenting on matters of state. Prime Minister Janša defended his position on social media, stating that Slovenia had removed itself from a cycle of losing credibility through disproportionate criticism of Israel. He argued that while the European bureaucracy remained silent on issues like the destruction of villages in Nigeria, Slovenia needed to assert its interests in international affairs. During a speech to Slovenian diplomatic representatives, Janša reiterated that Slovenia aims to be a responsible member of the EU, NATO, and the global community, emphasizing that the government alone would lead the nation's foreign policy, prioritizing national interests above all else. Meanwhile, the debate over RTV Slovenija has taken on added significance amid growing concerns about the influence of political agendas on public broadcasting. Despite widespread criticism of RTV Slovenija’s programming, recent data shows that its viewership has been increasing. According to official statistics released by RTV Slovenija, the number of unique viewers for its first and second channels rose significantly this year, with the flagship news program TV Dnevnik achieving its highest average viewership in four years. This growth contrasts sharply with declining viewership trends observed across other private and commercial broadcasters, including POP TV, Kanal A, and Janša’s own Planet TV. Critics argue that the government’s push to amend the RTV Slovenija Act could undermine the quality of public broadcasting, especially given the lack of expertise among those proposing the changes. Zoran Stevanović, a key figure behind the proposed reforms, has faced scrutiny over his business credentials, with some questioning his ability to manage a complex institution like RTV Slovenija. The situation has raised concerns about the potential politicization of public media and its impact on the integrity of information reaching the public. As the referendum date looms, the political landscape remains highly charged. With allegations of vote-buying, accusations of undermining democracy, and fierce debates over media independence, the outcome of the referendum is uncertain. Whether the public will respond to the government’s call for change or reject it in favor of alternative visions for Slovenia’s future remains to be seen.
The article discusses the upcoming referendums scheduled for October 11th, focusing on the proposal to abolish the mandatory payment for RTV Slovenia programs. The author criticizes the lack of genuine consultation with citizens, suggesting that the proposals aim to gauge agreement rather than engage in meaningful dialogue. They highlight historical context, including a petition started by Major Troha in 2014 and its revival through media attention in 2016. The piece argues that the current push for a referendum reflects a broader populist strategy, with critics claiming that the arguments against RTV funding are based on flawed reasoning. The author concludes that the nationalistic stance towards RTV is detrimental and urges opposition to the referendum.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the debate around RTV funding as a populist strategy driven by nationalist sentiments, criticizing the government's approach as manipulative and culturally damaging. It implies that the proposed abolition of the fee is ideologically motivated rather than based on rational economic
Why factuality (85): The article provides detailed historical context regarding the origins of the petition against mandatory payments for RTV Slovenia, citing specific events from 2014 and 2016 involving Major Troha and Janez Janša. It references the role of SDS's Nora24TV in promoting the petition as 'new' and giving
Why objectivity (70): The article uses emotionally charged language such as 'odsluženi prostitutki' (used by Janša) and frames the situation as a potential 'kulturno najusodnejše in najdolgoročnejše posledice' (culturally most unfortunate and long-term consequences), suggesting a critical stance toward the proposed refer
The article discusses internal discussions within the RTVS (Radio Television Slovenia) board regarding their involvement in a campaign related to a forthcoming referendum on abolishing the mandatory payment of the RTV contribution. The board has decided to convene a special meeting on September 9th to address concerns raised by members about the proposed changes to the RTVS Act, particularly concerning the status of regional centers. The head of the administration, Natalija Gorščak, clarified that the proposals do not aim to abolish regional centers but rather redefine the scope of public service and remove organizational structure definitions from the law. Concerns were also raised about funding methods and the potential impact on national programs. Financial performance reports show RTVS achieved a revenue surplus of €142,000, though below budget expectations.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced discussion between different stakeholders within RTVS, including the board members and administrative representatives, without overtly favoring any particular political stance. It includes multiple perspectives and does not exhibit clear ideological leaning in its phr
Why factuality (75): The article reports on internal discussions within RTVS regarding potential changes to the mandatory TV contribution and the role of RTVS in an upcoming referendum. It mentions the formation of a joint statement by the board and provides details on proposed legislative changes. While there is no pri
Why objectivity (68): The tone remains relatively neutral, presenting different viewpoints from various stakeholders including the board members and external experts. However, there is a slight leaning towards the official stance of RTVS, particularly in describing the intent behind the proposed legislation, which may in
The article discusses the growing viewership of RTV Slovenia despite widespread criticism of its programming. It highlights that RTV Slovenia's first and second channels have seen increased viewership across all age groups, with over 1.78 million unique viewers between January and July 2026. This growth contrasts sharply with declining viewership trends among other major television programs like POP TV, Kanal A, and others. The article notes that while RTV Slovenia has faced negative perceptions regarding its content being outdated and unappealing, actual data suggests otherwise. The piece also mentions the upcoming show 'What Does Love Have to Do With It?' hosted by Vesna Milek, which is expected to further boost RTV Slovenia's ratings.
Bias read (Progressive): The article critiques the ruling coalition's proposed populist referendum aimed at changing the law governing RTV Slovenia, suggesting it seeks a blank check to alter regulations under the guise of consulting citizens on payment methods. The tone implies skepticism toward the government's motives, a
Why factuality (70): The article presents some factual information about the proposed changes to the RTV Slovenia law and mentions the referendum context. However, it does not provide detailed statistical evidence or sources for claims about viewership. It references a specific TV program but doesn't offer comprehensive
Why objectivity (45): While the article acknowledges different perspectives (e.g., government coalition's referendum plans), it leans toward a critical stance of RTV Slovenia, using emotive language like 'pavšalna mnenja' (superficial opinions) to frame public perception negatively.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
Slovenia
![[Video] This musician supports RTV's contribution: ... that we have music that no one cares about and shows that no one watches ...](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=iasstorage.vecer.com%2Fcdn-cgi%2Fimage%2Fwidth%3D1200%2Cquality%3D75%2Fdata%2FResources%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F00%2F06%2F09%2F37%2F85%2F6093785qC2EBEF6D2D9231276E12E37E8120CA2D_1200.jpg&w=3840&q=75&output=webp&we)
