It either rewards supportive or non-critical media outlets, or it subsidizes critical yet ailing media companies that the government wants to silence. State advertising cash is used in two ways that serve the same goal.

“Across the globe, this resource is misused by states to support friendly media and discriminate against critical journalism.” “Of all the means that states have to support media, state advertising is arguably the least transparent and thus the most problematic,” wrote Martijn de Waal in an overview of trends in the media economy. Exceptions include the UK, Uruguay, Japan, and South Africa. And in most of them, analysts recognize that state advertising is manipulating the media on their behalf. States spend advertising money in almost half of the 56 countries surveyed in the Mapping Digital Media research coordinated by the Open Society Program on Independent Journalism. But, of course, in most cases, they are looking to buy much more than advertising space. Governments around the world know that the digital revolution and the financial crisis have hit media revenues hard, so that state advertising can keep many outlets afloat. This pattern of state subvention is far from unique to Macedonia. It is a high figure for a country of two million inhabitants, where wages average €340 a month, and even less for journalists.

This campaign was only one in a bevy of advertising contracts totaling €20 million that the government gave to media companies over five years. This was a curious initiative in one of Europe’s poorest countries, where almost a third of the people are unemployed, and the same proportion live under the poverty line. Several years ago, the government in Macedonia, in power for more than eight years now, spent close to €600,000 on a campaign urging citizens to be more optimistic and respect good values.

Watchdog government example