‘Ambush Suicide’: Melancholic Hrga Seeks 40,000 Kuna in Damages from Novosti Publisher

In the dispute initiated by journalist Mirjana Hrga against the publisher of the Novosti portal, the Serbian National Council, regarding an article in which Hrga’s appearance on RTL was described as “the greatest media suicide in the history of Croatia,” her husband Staša Stefanović and HRT journalist Damir Smrtić testified that the journalist was deeply affected by the claims made in the disputed article for which she is seeking compensation of 40,000 kuna.

Hrga initiated the dispute due to a TV critique of the show “RTL Danas,” which she had recently edited, published on May 5, 2016, on the Novosti web portal under the title “Ambush Suicide.” In the satirical column

“Tar and Feathers,” author Petar Glodić wrote, among other things, that Hrga “still routinely drives on autopilot from the time of Motrišta” and assessed that her appearance on RTL was “the greatest media suicide in the history of Croatia, which otherwise does not lack similar anomalies.”

Melancholic, miserable, and dejected

Hrga’s husband Staša Stefanović assessed that the journalist was ‘stamped’ with a label due to her work in Motrištima and testified that after the publication of the article, she was “melancholic, miserable, and dejected” and questioned for weeks whether she was “a nationalist, a chauvinist, whether she hates Serbs and people of other faiths.”

At the hearing on Wednesday held at the Zagreb Municipal Civil Court, Stefanović also stated that after the publication of the disputed article, people began to look at her with suspicion and that “she could not go out for coffee without someone stopping her on the street.”

“As a young journalist, she was labeled due to her work in Motrištima, and going to Sarajevo changed that; there she could perform her job without someone counting her blood cells. When she returned to

Croatia, she believed that this story would not continue, however, after the publication of this article, everything started again,” said Stefanović. He added that, unlike other journalists in Motrištima, Hrga never publicly distanced herself from that HRT show from the 90s, believing that it was unnecessary because she was a young journalist and presenter and did not edit or conceptualize that show.

He stated that “motrištara” is implied as a person who hates someone, does not recognize other nations, and is extremely nationalistic, and that all of this, as he said, is not true for his wife.

“Whenever it comes to someone’s interests, whether financial, political, or otherwise, she is labeled a right-winger and the entire connotation with Motrištima is attributed to her,” said Stefanović.

Desperate act

When asked by the judge how he comments on Hrga’s post on Facebook where she wrote: ”I find these stormtroopers charming. I hope they have enough money to cover the damage of such ‘responsible’ journalism,” Stefanović said that it was “obviously some desperate act because at that moment she had no defensive mechanisms considering her work obligations and could not take any special action without the employer’s consent.”

He testified that after the publication of the disputed article, her colleagues from Al Jazeera supported her, but also that “some Serbs from the Serbian National Council called her and said that what Novosti published really made no sense.” He also denied the defense’s claims that she was dismissed from RTL due to falling viewership and damaged interpersonal relationships.

Label of Motrištara

HRT journalist Damir Smrtić recalled that in a phone conversation after the publication of the disputed article, Hrga was “disturbed, stressed, and generally felt very uncomfortable.”

Smrtić stated that the “label of Motrištara” means a connection with right-wingers and HDZ, which, in his opinion, is an incorrect perception. When asked by the SNV lawyer whether the disputed text actually contained a value judgment within the framework of journalistic freedom that included exaggeration and provocations, Smrtić replied that he believes that “the use of metaphors, hyperboles, and exaggerations is permissible, but without insults and labeling.”

The next hearing in this dispute is scheduled for January next year when, among other things, Mirjana Hrga is expected to present her view of the dispute.