The statesman does not shy away from any question: Spajić does not communicate with the public in a manner befitting the position he holds

By sporadic appearances in parliament, rare interviews - with media outlets considered close to the government, while avoiding critical ones, and relying on social media as a platform for sending important messages - the Prime Minister Milojko Spajic He continues the decades-old policy of irresponsibility of high-ranking officials towards the public, so his manner of communication can hardly be considered statesmanlike.

This is how media theorists and communication experts with whom "Vijesti" spoke see Spajić's relationship with the public.

Although, due to the nature of the function he performs, he is often present in public, the impression is that the Head of Government is not overly keen to communicate with her beyond official channels (the executive branch) and social networks (dominantly the "X" network).

There are many examples of avoiding more direct contact with the public - such as confrontations with MPs in the Parliament, press conferences, interviews with critical media - and the latest occurred on Wednesday. That day, after speaking at an event organized by the American Chamber of Commerce "Openly with the Prime Minister", Spajić then spent 15 minutes answering questions from businessmen present, after which he went to a cocktail party. On his way out, he refused to talk to reporters, saying that he already had "a lot of questions and answers". This left the public deprived of answers to questions about the rise in fuel prices, the opposition's dissatisfaction with the work of parliament, the war in the Middle East...

Prime Minister on leave

Professor at the University of Montenegro Vuk Vukovic He told "Vijesti" that, from the point of view of communication culture, Spajić's behavior can hardly be considered an example of a statesman's model of communication. He reminds that in modern democratic systems, the prime minister, in addition to his executive function, is also a key political communicator who must maintain a continuous and transparent dialogue with the public, parliament and the media.

"Prime Minister Spajić is, unfortunately, a prime minister in absentia, or, more precisely, a prime minister in absentia," Vuković assessed.

He says that avoiding regular institutional formats of communication, such as the prime minister's hour in parliament or open conversations with the media that ask critical questions, speaks of the weakness - both of the arguments, but also of the political responsibility that the institution of the prime minister emulates, adding that parliamentary oversight and media questions are not just a formality, but part of the system of public control of government.

According to him, another problem is the selectivity of the Prime Minister's communication.

"When a political leader communicates almost exclusively through social networks or in media that are not perceived as critical, he practically takes complete control over messages and avoids situations in which he would have to answer uncomfortable or complex questions," Vuković underlines.

The interviewee explains that Spajić, essentially speaking, avoids the dialogue of arguments and participates in communication only in controlled conditions, so that the question can be justifiably asked - does this also imply a controlled set of journalistic questions?

The university professor points out that such a strategy is relatively common in contemporary politics, but that it also changes the nature of public debate - from dialogue to unilateral communication of positions, and that the message sent to the public can be multi-layered.

"On the one hand, it can be interpreted as an attempt to avoid political risk and control the agenda of public debate. On the other hand, it can create an impression among a part of the public that the government is closed and that it is less willing to be accountable and engage in institutional dialogue. By doing this, the Prime Minister is openly aligning himself with a decades-long policy of continuity and irresponsibility towards the public, and it seems to me that he is doing this with premeditation," he said.

Vuković said that statesmanship in a democratic context usually implies the exact opposite - a willingness to regularly answer questions, to participate in parliamentary control mechanisms and to communicate with critical media. He points out that this does not mean that a political leader must accept every interpretation or criticism, but it does mean that he must be present in the spaces where that criticism is articulated.

"... And, more importantly, it must offer arguments that potentially challenge that criticism," says Vuković.

More interviews with foreigners

The Prime Minister is, one could say, generally willing to answer questions from Montenegrin media outlets perceived as close to the government or not critical of it, or to give interviews to European and Asian portals and newspapers. However, he rarely does this.

Since taking office as Prime Minister at the end of October 2023, Spajić, according to an analysis by "Vijesti", has given 21 interviews - 10 to domestic and 11 to foreign media. Of the domestic ones, he has been a guest on the Public Service Broadcasting Service six times, and once each on the televisions "Adria" and "Nova M", the MINA agency, and the daily newspaper "Pobjeda". He has dedicated his time to regional media three times (television "Hayat" in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the portal "European Western Balkans" and the podcast "Spotlight"), while he has appeared several times at the European level - three times on "Euronews", and once each in "Politico", "Financial Times" and "Eunews". He has also given interviews twice to Japanese newspapers - "Nike" and "Yomiuri Shinbun".

The dominant topic in these interviews was Montenegro's European integration, while problems on the "domestic front" - and for him "ticklish topics" - were rarely on the agenda. The exception was the interview that Spajić gave to Radio Television of Montenegro in April last year, in which he "justified" to a part of the public the controversial agreements that the Government signed with the United Arab Emirates.

The unbearable lightness of irresponsibility

Communication specialist Miodrag Strugar He told "Vijesti" that everything is visible in communication and that nothing has to be waited for to be shown, adding that the way the Prime Minister communicates with the public has been "problematic for a long time."

"We are witnessing the unbearable ease of irresponsibility towards the public's right to know. In democratic systems, leaders not only choose the topics they will talk about, but also have an obligation to answer questions - especially when they are unpleasant or critical," the interlocutor states.

According to him, avoiding journalists, rarely appearing in parliament, and relying almost exclusively on social media indicate a communication model in which the politician seeks to control the message but avoids dialogue.

Strugar assessed that the path to a civilized and democratic society is unthinkable without public debate and dialogue, saying that the way the Prime Minister and many other officials communicate leads the public to ask themselves whether they want a civilized and democratic society or are running away from journalists because they do not have answers to questions that interest the public.

The interviewee states that a statesman does not hide from questions, nor does he choose only secure communication channels, but on the contrary - political responsibility implies presence in institutions and readiness for public questioning of decisions.

"Communication that is reduced to tweets or selective interviews creates the impression that the public is treated as an audience to whom ready-made messages are conveyed. We see that the Prime Minister and other politicians sometimes try to be funny, and really are funny - until we realize that we are paying them for much more serious things and that they are not there to entertain us, but to serve. It is in the public interest, and it is also in the public interest that they conduct a dialogue with the public and answer questions from journalists," Strugar said.

Avoiding the messenger

Spajić is not a frequent guest in parliament, and on several occasions, due to his absence, he has caused dissatisfaction among the opposition, and the collegium of the Speaker of the Assembly has discussed potential changes to the rules of procedure, in order to "force" the Prime Minister to attend sessions of the highest legislative chamber that are reserved for parliamentary questions to him...

The situation is similar with the sessions of the Defense and Security Council, which have been postponed several times because the Prime Minister did not confirm his attendance.

However, when he decides to address citizens, Spajić's "favorite medium" is his account on "Iks." He has repeatedly informed the public about events and decisions important to them through this social network, and he has mostly done so concisely - in a few sentences.

And on that network, as well as in public, he did not engage in dialogue many times, nor did he answer users' questions.

Spajić's office did not answer "Vijesti" why the prime minister's primary means of communication is the "Iks" network, why he avoids giving statements to critical media, whether his behavior is statesmanlike, and what message he is sending to the public with such behavior.

Poor communication undermines trust in institutions

Miodrag Strugar said that Spajić's way of communicating could have serious consequences for trust in institutions in the long term, because, according to him, citizens expect the highest state officials to be available to the public, especially at times when there are important political or social issues.

"... And here we have an abundance of them, mostly unanswered. In other words, a political leader can temporarily avoid unpleasant questions, but he cannot avoid the communication effect of avoiding them - and that effect is almost always additional suspicion and a decline in trust in institutions," he pointed out.

Vuković also agrees with Strugar's assessment.

"In the long run, such an approach may contribute to the erosion of trust in institutions, as the public expects the highest executive authorities to be available for questions and accountable to parliament and citizens. If the prime minister chooses to communicate only when he himself determines the questions and format, then it is no longer a political responsibility - it is a political pamphlet," Vuković concluded.

Note: The original version of the text did not state that Prime Minister Spajić had interviews with Television "Nova M" and the daily newspaper "Pobjeda". It also erroneously stated that he left for the cocktail party after refusing to answer journalists' questions. We apologize to the Prime Minister and readers.