Branislava Kostić
Faculty of Engineering Science of Novi Sad
MEDIA MANAGEMENT IN LATENT
PHASE OF SOCIAL CONFLICTS
Abstract
Social conflicts are social interaction states of open
antagonisms, whose basic content and essence contain
inner and inter-group struggle towards mutually opposing
interests and values, and for domination over limited, yet
important resources. The actions of the media in
conditions of social conflicts are significantly different
from their activity in standard circumstances. Specific
about media activities during social conflicts is high
motivation of audience across the region and across the
social environment where these conflicts take place, as
well as high motivation of audience across the social
milieus and across the regions that are highly interested in
the course of events and in the result of social conflict. In
these environments there is an increased degree of
audience’s attention towards the media, especially towards
its informative contents, where the audience prefers social
conflict-related content.
Media management in social conflicts thus becomes a
significant factor in creating and manifesting social
responsibility of the media, both for overcoming and
prevention of social conflicts, as well as for the course and
methods of manifestation and resolving social conflicts.
Actions of the media during the process of state
decomposition and armed conflicts in the former
Yugoslavia (SFRY), provide comprehensive research
materials essential for analysis, direction and projection of
media management in social conflicts, especially in the
latent phase of conflict, in which the interests of the
opposing sides are defined, and with the help of the media,
they implement a process of preparation of their own
public opinion for the imminent conflict. Analysis of media
management in latent phase of social conflicts is important
for the development and promotion of sustainable media
management in social conflicts, whose goal is to achieve
optimal influence of media on prevention, overcoming, and
humanisation of social conflicts in all their stages.
Keywords: management, media, social conflicts, latent
phase of conflict
Social conflicts imply manifestive social processes,
whose cause are opposing and/or contrary interests,
values, or the need for limited resources and/or
international economic and political position, in which
the directly engaged parties opt for an active struggle
(fight) as a method of achieving their own interests.1
1
Compare with: Milašinović R, Milašinovič S, "Introduction
to the theory of conflict", Faculty of Civil Defense, Belgrade,
Unlike history of conflicts, which observes social
conflicts in the context of dominant matrix of social
development, experts' attitude toward social conflicts is
vitally determined by their understanding of homo-
sapience's nature and the cause/social goals of his
organization. Therefore, the gap between all theories of
social conflicts is defined by a response to the primary
question – are social conflicts: immanent to human
society (the consequence of "man’s nature", or "nature
of society"); a phenomenon caused by historic
circumstances which is characteristic for certain periods
of human society development, in which a socially
accepted/acceptable model of behavior in a socially
significant processes; desirable and efficient functioning
of the model/social behavior in the middle, or -
pathological phenomena, impertinent to human society
and to the man as an intelligent being.2
1. Social conflicts as controllable and
foreseeable processes
Social conflicts are an integral part of human history,
and that is the basic reason conflicts are considered to be
a model of communication3 that is immanent to man and
his community, as well as to relations between the
community groups.
Most theoretics (sociologists, anthropologists,
psychologists) find models of aggressively marked
human conflicts in primitive societies, in which every
adult, a physically capable male member of the tribe, is
at the same time a warrior. In Leviathan, proving that
"the natural state of man" is not just an abstract
philosophical structure, but the real state which is
characteristic for pre-institutional society, Hobs begins
forming a classic, broadest and most commonly
accepted understanding of primitive societies as a source
of conflict: "We might think that such a time, or such a
state, never existed. In fact, I believe that it was never so
in the entire world. However, there are many places
where people still live like that today. In many places in
America “savages”, with exception of small families
whose unity depends solely on the natural desire, have
2004, pp. 9/10
2
Golubovic Z, "Man and his world in antropological
perspective", Prosveta, Belgrade,1973; Kostic B, "Media
Management in social conflicts and crises", Coinsulting
"Toward the time of Knowledge", Sremski Karlovci, 2007,
Proceedings of, p. 38/48
3
Puhovski Ž, "Other assets/War- continuation by other
means morality", Symposium on "War, the father of all
things", in Lechu (Austria) September 2000, Word, number.
62/8, June 2001, p. 242
no leadership at all, and till present day they live almost
like animals".4 Although Hobs’s ideas were common in
his time, even then there were a number of sociologists,
ethnologists, and anthropologists who, despite the
dominant social understanding, considered that
superficial explanations of primitive societies as quarelly
or conflict ones can not contribute to their good
understanding.5 Maurice Davie6 upholds precise analysis
of available anthropological and ethnological research of
primitive societies, with conclusions that are opposed to
common comprehension of primitive societies as
conflict ones. One of his conclusions is that in primitive
societies we see the earliest form of social awareness
manifest, of existence and need of organized social
conflicts control. The first form of socially accepted
models for resolving standard conflict situation (within
the tribe) first occurred in these communities - through
ritual forms of communication and behavior. Davie
states that basic characteristics of communication within
the community / tribe is harmony, based on the
prevention and control of conflicts, while the outside
relations between communities are based on the conflict
and struggle.
Many contemporary authors insist on the existence of
the pacifist theory and practice through the entire course
of human history7, which has, among other things, given
birth to numerous international declarations that are
trying to establish a "righteous peace". Throughout
history, parallel with dominant matrix theory and
practice of wars and violence, theoretics and
practitioners who believed in the possibility of non-
violent and non-conflict communications have always
existed and advocated for it (Hiang Sung, 535. BC -
"league of peace"; idea of omnipresent Peace in Hellenic
times; idea of omnipresent reconciliation of states and
cities, Hugo Grocijus, De iure belli ac pacis, 1625;
Brian-Kelog’s Pact - to be able to ban the war as a
phenomenon that is illegal under international law,
Gandi’s movement, etc).8
Although there are different opinions on whether social
conflicts are a fact or historically circumstanced
processes that are not (or - do not need to be) immanent
to human community, all known conflict theories agree
4
Hobbes T, Leviathan, Sirey, pp. 125
5
De la Boesi E,“ Anti-Dictator“, New York: Columbia
University Press, 1942) pp. 8-9
6
Davie M, " The Evolution of war" , New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1930, Pp.x, 391
7
Golubovic Z, "Man and his world in antropological
perspective", Belgrade, Prosveta, 1973; Volter, "The debate
on telerance" Utopia, Belgrade, 2005; De la Boesi E, "The
debate on voluntary slavery", Anti-Dictator, New York:
Columbia University Press, 1942
8 9
Puhovski Ž, "The other assets/War, the continuation of
morality by other means" Symposium on "War, the father of
all things", in Lechu (Austria) september in 2000, Reč,
number. 62 / 8, June 2001
that social conflicts are among the relatively controllable
social processes, whose course and outcome strongly
depend on the methods that are used by directly engaged
sides. If observed as processes, social conflicts are
among the relatively foreseeable processes in which
there are certain, more or less clearly visible phases.
Regardless of the specifics of numerous social conflicts,
all social conflicts have two basic stages: latent and
manifestive.
Throughout the conflict, especially during its latent phase,
there is a great possibility of controlling and directing all
the processes that lead to a manifestive stage of the
conflict. Bearers of control and the ones directing are not
only institutions of social and political system, political
parties, national non-governmental organizations, media,
but also international associations, movements,
influential stakeholders (economic, religious, cultural
and scientific...), as well as prominent individuals. In the
manifestive phase of the conflict, the possibility of
acting and directing the process is significantly reduced,
with greater ability of "stronger side", to impose their
interests and goals to the opponent. Therefore, the
actions of all factors which have the ability of
controlling the conflict are at the same time the actions
of those who have the possibility to work preventively at
the beginning of the conflict by eliminating the
possibility of its realization.
A process which represents the introduction to each
conflict, which is easily detected and tracked throughout
research, is the establishing of social distance, which is one
of the reasons why modern societies take great care for
monitoring and permanent research of social distance
levels, that exist between certain social groups, or within
some social groups. Establishing a social distance as a rule
is a sign that the latent phase of potential social conflict has
started.
2. The media as an active agent in latent phase of
social conflicts
Establishing of social distance is a lengthy process,
therewith, after establishing, the situation of the social
distance is seen by all participants as connotative and
insuperable.9
The existence of social distance, backed by political,
semantic, ethical, cultural, economic and other
connotations, which in the context of accepted social
distance represent its deepening, make it possible to
perceive established social distance as a latent conflict,
with clearly opposing interests / ideas / values.
Analysis of media activity in this, pre-conflict stage on
the examples of conflict in the former Yugoslavia
Sartr JP, "Les coments de la drole de querre", Gallimard,
Paris, 1983, Brzezinski Z, "Out of Control: Global Turmoil on
the Eve of the Twentyfirst Century", Macmillan, New York,
1993
(SFRJ)10, shows that the media has an important
influence on the acceptance of social distance as an
understanding model of social opinions and behavior. A
selection of topics, preference of opinions, terminology
and bringing out the stereotypes based on social
distance, the media have an important influence on the
establishment of the dominant system of values and the
dominant model of thinking. This process takes place
gradually and continuously, before and during the entire
phase of latent conflict11.
Latent phase of conflict can often remind on a series of
unrelated incidents that occur and resolve without clear
hints of possible escalation. Quantity, frequency and
increasing frequency of such "incidents" indicate their
true nature that it is a sporadic manifest of latent
conflict, which tends to its manifest. Latent phase of
social conflicts manifests through several stages, each
has its own specific characteristics. The role of media in
each of these stages is also specific.
In the first stage of latent conflict phase, there are two
social groups with opposite interests, between whom
there is a social distance, therewith at least one of those
social groups understands their interests as opposed to
the interests of the "other side"; cultural elite constructs
first questions related with "historic role / guilt / sin" of
the "other side" in relation to his own nation / group /
class / religious community. Media treats these questions
as provocation and, as a rule, they give a significant
attention to it, because it represents a step forward in
comparison with the normal public discourse. In other
words, such unorthodox themes and rhetorics have a
high level of media attraction, which media use for the
purpose of increasing attention and binding auditorium.
In the second stage, both groups have a clear
consciousness of their opposing interests; awareness
about the obstacles that could represent the interests,
values or position of the "other side" (projection of
obstacles) grows on both conflict sides – one followed
by another; historical "errors" and "injustice" to the
other side is countered and questioned; constructs that
uphold "historical circles of injustice" are created.
Historical circles of injustice which show their own
public opinion that the other side has "always" been
hostile/exploitive/unfair; Historical facts are selected
and modified to prove these allegations. Stigmatization
of the other side is still incomplete. In this stage, media
begins the long-term projects, such as articles, series of
historical and so-called historical analysis, interpretation
of history and present by "experts" in special shows etc.
The main goal of such media products is the elaboration
and support of media attractive issues, which are only
10
Kostic B, "Media Management in social conflicts and
crises", Consulting "Toward the time of Knowledge", Sremski
Karlovci, 2007, Proceedings of, p. 38-48
11
Kostic B, "Crime of magic box", Journal of communication
between cultures "Horizonti", Novi Sad, September 1994
mentioned in the first stage of latent conflict. Increased
frequency of interviewing celebrities that uphold the
ideas which the social conflict is based upon is a special
characteristic of media manipulation. By a process of
making things unusual, which amplifies public attention,
public figures who are engaged in music, film and sports
are drawn to engage into current political themes,
whereby through media, their (private) opinion gets the
power of "authority".
Third stage of the latent phase, as a rule upholds through
a clear polarization of interest and escalates the
projections of obstacles set by one side; realistic
appearance of obstacles begins, which is, in terms of
communication - sending messages of a conflict being
unresolvable, the elite of the future subjects in conflict
and prepare and motivate their own public opinion to
ensure the participation of "their" group / nation /
association in projected conflict; conflict terminology
and stigmatization enter public speech; own public
opinion is reminded on the "bright past," the examples
of self-sacrifice in its nation, war heroism and "fighting
for the dignity of their nation." In this stage, media
presents stigmatization of the other side defining
desirable wording12. In this way, establishing clear and
simple lexical expression of simplifies relations towards
the other side, simplifies reasons for conflict, and any
criticism of conflict policy is simply discarded by
stigmatization of people with different opinion as
enemies. In this stage, the media have regular "specials",
changing the common radio and TV programmes and
page order in the newspapers; new specialized
magazines that deal with "development" theme which is
the subject of conflict start to come out13. Before the end
of the third stage, the opposing side is only known by
adopted stigmatisms. Also, the opposing side begins to
be connected with evil, or with non-humans, which leads
to complete "cementing" in all in the media.
In the fourth stage of latent phase of the conflict both
sides have organizational, resource, public opinion and
personnel preparations for entry into manifestive phase
of the conflict; the interest positions of both sides are
being "formed"; wording and stigmatization of the
"other side" is completely formed and transforms from
public speech into media speech, and from media speech
into private speech, speech of hate becomes a daily mark
of communications; other side is gradually negated of all
positive human characteristics; promotion of the idea
"them, or us"; pushing forward the idea that the other
side is the embodiment of evil, of which only evil can be
12
Lalic L, "Images and words of hate: Seccond year",
Foundation Law on the picture and the word, B92-ARHITEL,
1997; Kurspahic K, "Right Time Crime, Balkan Media in War
and Peace", Dangraf, Belgrade, 2003
13
Thompson M, "Forging the war - the media in Serbia,
Croatia, Bosnia and Hercegovina", The Media Center,
Belgrade, 2000
expected, the question of opposing the other side
becomes a question of patriotism, ethics, dignity and
Nation’s and its member’s self esteem, opponents of
such ideologies are declared for traitors and eliminated
from public speech.14 Ending the stage of conflict and
the announcement of manifestive phase starts in the
moment when it becomes normal / usual to the media to
connotate and declare the other side as non human, the
human negation ( "non human", "beasts", "there is
nothing human in them", etc.)
14
Proceedings "Media and War", Argument, Belgrade, 2005.
Manifestation of the last phase of latent conflicts
depends on the institutional capability for the realization
of conflict. If there are system possibilities, conflicts will
take place in controlled conditions of legitimate
institutional struggle. In such conditions, even in the last
latent stage of conflict, there is a real possibility that the
conflict does not convert to manifestive. If, however,
there is no institutional capability for conflict to occur, it
inevitably becomes manifestive. The role of media in
this last stage of latent conflict can be decisive, because
the media exploitation of possible compromise, creating
a media attractive display of harmonizing factors, giving
space for efforts to establish dialogue and understanding,
eliminate stigmatization of the other side, etc. That can
significantly influence on the journey toward slowing
manifestive conflict phase, which allows strengthening,
non-conflict communication and finding compromise. In
practice, however, this implies possible conflicts with
the dominant public opinion in media’s own
environment, as well as confronting with the authority in
its own country, at the moment when the public opinion
is already prepared for the conflict as "the only possible
alternative." Therefore, at this stage the media very
rarely dare to begin with denial of dominant public
opinion, which is established for years thanks to the
media. In this way the media are "in trap" to which
creation to which they themselves have significantly
contributed, as well as the political elite, which do not
have the ability to revise previously formed attitudes,
myths, projected obstacles and highlighted goals.
Generally speaking, in the last stage of latent conflict
phase, the persons, whose actions significantly
influenced the outbreak of the manifestive phase of the
conflict have significantly narrowed their field of
activity, because the majority of compromising and
harmonizing factors are immobilized by previous
process of preparing public opinion for war, therefore,
any abandonment of these ideas can be considered
treasonous. In ways of communication, war becomes
imminent, before it comes to the actual armed conflict,
thanks to the fact that all the voices that would speak
against him are silenced, and those who speak for it are
drastically increased. Tunes normal for human ears and
ideas normal for reasonable human being are no longer
heard: there is no one to create peace, and no one dares
to withdraw from war.
It is interesting that at the beginning of latent phases of
conflict there are clearly defined media who advocate a
democratic solution, coexistence, researching various
possibilities in overcoming the conflict etc. During a
relatively short period, this group of media either gets
media attractive information, arguments or evidence...
which the escalation of conflict absurd (seemed to be
happening to a few major media in the UK during the
preparation of public opinion for Iraqi war), or retreat,
either under pressure from the market (cause they lack
public support), either under the direct influence of
centre of power.
In contrast to the classical understanding of media,
modern practice has shown processes and actions that
lead to boost or calming the conflict atmosphere.
Modern media are also very active, relatively
independent factors in creating conflict atmosphere and
conflict environment, which during the entire phase of
latent conflict has the possibility of choice.15 The
possibility of choosing the dominant orientation in
message that media sends to public opinion is attached
with relative risk for survival of the media (authoritarian
society), or by reducing the size of auditorium
(Democratic Society), considering that dangers of
loosing auditorium is a factor with limited effects,
because by media means, independently from the
dominant mood in the community, recycling of the
audience is not only possible, but it can also lead to an
enlargement of audience.
3. Specifics of media activity in latent phase of social
conflicts
Elementary specificity of media activity in conditions of
social conflicts is a particularly motivated media
auditorium, in the region, and social surrounding in
which the conflict is happening, as well as in social
milieus and regions that are particularly interested in the
course and the outcome of the conflict. In these frames
higher degree of attention is present in all levels of
public towards media, especially toward the news
content, with preference on informative content related
to the conflict.
Specificity of media behavior during social conflicts is
based on the fact that media are basically interested in
media treatment of social conflicts. Unlike people in the
past, modern man’s problem is overloading with
information, which has resulted non-sensibility and
superficiality. Hyper-production of media content which
is available to the auditorium, reduced sensibility,
patience and attention of auditorium, force the media to
search for effective content, which will bind the
audience and bring new consumers to media. In context,
media effective conflicts are, above all, conflicts in
which percents significant part of population where the
media is present participates, or is interested in that
conflict, as well as conflicts that cause emotional
reactions of media auditorium. Those conflicts that are
unusual by their cause, course and participants and are
therefore interesting.
The primary determinant of media behavior in the so-
called "developed democracies" according to social
conflicts is their market orientation. In less developed
societies and the so-called "societies in transition", in
which the media has retained significant political
15
Bel F, „media“, Clio, Belgrade, 1977
guidance, significantly reduced independence of media
in relation to state institutions, in addition to market
orientation, there is a strong tendency towards satisfying
the interests of the ruling political options, which is in
position to directly or indirectly determine the position
of the media (in under - developed) market. Also, the
media, which operate in the territory under conflict, as a
rule, are directed to accepting the war propaganda of
their country / part of the country that is included in
conflict, while the media who are outside the territory
affected by conflict, generally respects the basic
requirements of (their) markets, sometimes avoiding
officially proclaimed interests of their country (example:
the media in the UK during the preparations for
aggression against Iraq).
Generally observed, managements of media in case of
intensified public attention towards media content, but
also increased interaction between the media and
different levels of the public, who are typical of social
conflicts and crises, have the task to:
• ensure the permanent influx of new information
(reports) about conflicts, because it represents goods
media uses to place to the market, but also to provide
the media with "extra profit" - which guarantees the
uniqueness of product which other media have to
acquire
• to ensure the image of the (neutral) citizens service in
informing about social conflict for its own media, as a
requirement for gaining trust and positioning in
relation to other media
• to use increased attention of public for better
positioning of media: increasing the number of direct
consumers (electronic media: increasing numbers and
length of contact with media), increasing the volume
of interest advertisers and / or donors (depending on
whether the media is acting on the territory under
conflict, or beyond), improving conditions of own
media contents sale to other media or other media
networks, which mostly refers to media, which
operates outside the zone affected by conflict.
In latent phase of the conflict media are equally active in
"their" national auditorium, but also on the national
auditorium of opponent's side, because the media of two
sides in the conflict quote each other, thus providing
additional argumentation for their arguments for war.
Also, at this stage media works on a wider public
opinion, on the media that are interested in facts used by
media directly engaged in the conflict, which they use
for their own analysis of the situation and the causes of
war. Generally speaking, media in latent phase of social
conflicts perform three basic functions, which have
successively become the dominant media themes:
creating an atmosphere in which the war is possible,
explaining the causes of war and making it inevitable
and marking the opposing side as one responsible for the
war.
While defining a stage in which latent phase of the
conflict is, according to dominant media topic it can be
concluded how far did the preparations for conflict go,
or what amount of time remains available until the
moment of possible outbreak of the conflict, which starts
when the process of marking opponent's side as
inhumane and responsible for future war is completed.
Experiences, in terms of the role of media, in war
conflicts at the Balkan area, as well as the experiences
related to the war in Iraq, show the vital role of the
media in a variety of different stages of conflict, but it
also shows that the role of the media is largest in latent
phase of the conflict, which, in the modern world,
without the support of media was not possible.
4. Conclusions
Although the media have an active role in all phases of
social conflicts, it is most significant in the latent
conflict phase - the phase of public opinion being
prepared for war, when "causus belli" is promoted. In
this phase the media is placed in the service of politics,
accepting and promoting war-propaganda phrases, the
logic of "revenge for caused injustice", "disregard to the
principles of democracy," or any similar empty phrase
that is used to prepare public opinion for war. The next
step in latent phase, which would not be the possible
without the media's "expert explanation of reality," in
which "experts" and "analysts" present through the
media a broader, "scientifically argued" and "backed by
examples" argumentation of war, or demonizing
opponents. Through the media, opponent is defined as
our negation, an instrument of annihilation of our
essence and a destroyer of our sacred values. Through
this process, an opponent becomes an enemy, and
additional arguments are located in the field of history,
culture, religion, and even biology. Thanks to the
media’s propaganda, stigmatization and demonizing
opponents, public opinion is gradually getting used that
"there is an enemy", that "the enemy is our contrast and
negation!", that "wants to deny /disable us what we are
meant to be", that" the enemy wants to force us with
something that is by the nature of things impossible, or
degrading. In this context, the proceedings of the enemy
are "inhumane" and "undemocratic", "criminal" and
"degrading for us and our nation," so that "the only way
of resolving a conflict with such enemy is - the war!".
By that, beginning of the first stage of latent phase, the
media have an important influence on: the
establishment, expansion and deepening of social
distance, the emergence and development of awareness
about opposing interests, defining, projection and over-
dimensioning obstacles, defining the aims of the
conflict, defining and manifestation of conflict
terminology and stigmatization of the "other" side,
guiding the public attitude toward the acceptance of
impossibility of peaceful solution of conflict,
preparation of public opinion for the imminent conflict -
accepting attitude about inevitable conflict, marking and
removal of public figures and groups that oppose the
conflict.
Media thus significantly and actively participate in
creating conflict atmosphere. By that, they become
direct participants in latent phase of the conflict; At the
same time, the media thus become directly responsible
for the escalation of latent conflict and his transmutation
to a manifestive conflict!
The conclusions of this work, reduced:
1. In social conflicts and crises, the media stop
being just carriers of information and become
direct participants in social events.
2. Media significantly influence on the burst,
course and solution of social conflicts and crises.
3. The biggest influence the media have in social
conflicts is in the latent phase of conflict, which is
also the most controllable phase of all social
conflicts.
4. Media management in social conflicts and crises
is directly dependent on the attitude of media
management towards social conflicts in general,
and towards concretely social conflicts and crises
in which the media is involved.
5. Media management can significantly contribute
to the effective prevention of social conflicts and
crises.
6. Sustainable media management in manifest
phase of social conflicts, for a longer period, is not
possible if there is a complete separation with the
dominant public opinion, considering that this is a
medium that acts in the area inside the manifest
phase of the conflict, but is possible - if it comes to
the media, which operates outside the area of
conflict.
7. Survival of the media who is acting contrary to
the dominant public opinion is possible in latent
phase of the conflict, but only for a limited duration
Used literature (in alphabetical order)
1. Baćević Lj, Đinić F, S Flere, Panasiuk (Kostic) B,
“Disobedient media”, CIP RTNS; Novi Sad, 1990.
2. Bek U, "Risky society - Meeting the new modern", Filip
Višnjić", Belgrade, 2001
3. Brzezinski Z, "Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the
Eve of the Twentyfirst Century“, Macmillan, New York,
1993
4. De la Boesi E,“Anti-Dictator“, New York: Columbia
University Press, 1942
5. Golubović Z, “Man and his world in anthropological
perspective”, Prosveta, Belgrade, 1973;
6. Hobbes T, Leviathan,, Sirey
8. Kostic B, "Media Management in social conflicts and
crises", Consulting "Toward the time of Knowledge",
Sremski Karlovci, 2007
9. Kostic B, "Crime of magic box", Journal of
communication between cultures "Horizonti", Novi Sad,
September 1994
10. Kurspahić K, "Zločin u 19.30, Balkanski mediji u ratu i
miru", (Prime Time Crime - Balkan media in war and
peace), Dangraf, Belgrade,2003,
11. Lalic L, "Images and words of hate: Seccond year",
Foundation Law on the picture and the word, B92-
ARHITEL, 2005.
12. Milašinović R, Milašinovič S, "Introduction to the
theory of conflict", Faculty of Civil Defense, Belgrade,
2004
13.Davie M, „The Evolution of War“, New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1930
14. Mark Thompson, „Forging the war - the media in
Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina”, Medija centar,
Belgrade, 2000
15. Puhovski Ž, "Other assets/War- continuation by other
means morality", Symposium on "War, the father of all
things", in Lechu (Austria) September 2000, “Reč”,
number. 62/8, June 2001,
16. Sartr J.P, "Les coments de la drole de querre“,
Gallimard, Paris, 1983
17. Volter,“The debate on telerancy”, Utopija, Belgrade,
2005
18. Proceedings "Media and War", Argument, Belgrade,
2005