Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 62
Media and Communication (ISSN: 2183-2439)
2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75
Doi: 10.17645/mac.v3i4.341
Article
Comparing Czech and Slovak Council Newspapers’ Policy and Regulation
Development
Lenka Waschkova Cisarova
Department of Media Studies and Journalism, Masaryk University, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic;
E-Mail: cisarova@fss.muni.cz
Submitted: 29 May 2015 | In Revised Form: 24 September 2015 | Accepted: 3 November 2015 |
Published: 29 December 2015
Abstract
Council newspapers form an integral part of European media systems and, as such, have been analysed for their important
contribution to the development of local politics. However, despite a recognition of the media’s important
democratic function in the transition countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) after the fall of socialism, the consideration
of council newspapers’ political role in the Czech Republic and Slovakia have been largely absent in debates
surrounding the development of regulatory frameworks until recently. Interestingly, debates regarding local government
transparency emerged recently (2011) in the United Kingdom, resulting in the Code of recommended practice on
local authority publicity, underscoring the importance of this issue. However, developments in the aforementioned situations
demonstrate divergent outcomes in such considerations: the British addressed the causes, the Czechs addressed
the symptoms, and the Slovaks have yet to make any headway. This article utilizes qualitative analysis of policy
and regulation documents to compare the trajectories of media policy and regulation of council publicity in the Czech
Republic and Slovakia, ultimately contrasting it with developments in the UK, suggesting possible future trajectories for
the development of this type of regulation in the CEE countries.
Keywords
council newspapers; Czech media; media; politics; press regulation; Slovak media; UK media policy
Issue
This article is part of the special issue "Turbulences of the Central and Eastern European Media", edited by Epp Lauk
(University of Jyväskylä, Finland).
© 2015 by the author; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License (CC BY).
1. Introduction
Recently, the deputy mayor in a small Czech town stated
during informal conversation that the council newspaper
in the town operates as the most independent
news source available to the public, suggesting its editorial
independence from town hall oversight. In fact,
the articles appearing in this publication are often written
by politicians or municipality officials themselves,
leaving the editor with nothing but the singular function
of collecting articles and handing them over to the
editorial board the majority of which is composed of
local politicians. This story clearly illustrates the conundrum
of council newspapers in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia.
The problem resides in the ambiguous nature of the
council newspaper1
and its problematic operation as
local medium2
or council publicity tool3
. Even though
1 Council newspaper is understood as a periodical publication
published by village, town, district or regional municipalities.
No information is available about the exact number and structure
of council newspapers in the Czech Republic (according to
estimations, there are over 1,000 of them; see Oživení (2010)).
2 Local newspaper is understood as a newspaper published and
distributed in the village, town, district and regional area. Czech
commercial local newspapers were analysed in 2009, there were
132 local newspaper titles, 73 of which were owned by one
ownership chain, cf. Waschková Císařová (2013).
3 Council publicity tool is understood as a publication produced
as a public relations instrument for municipalities, such as
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 63
council newspapers remain an integral part of European
media systems, they differ in key features from other
types of media (e.g. ownership models, financing,
newsroom structure, content production, relationship
with local politics). Moreover, this ambiguous function
of council newspapers has surprisingly weathered the
post-socialist transition in most of the CEE countries
since 1989. Despite the close scrutiny and reorganization
of the media’s relationship to politics being a key
feature of these transitions, council newspapers (particularly
in the Czech Republic and Slovakia) have been
largely absent from consideration in relation to debates
on the development of regulatory frameworks.
In this article, I outline the problematic relationship
between council newspapers and local politics, qualitatively
analysing media policy and regulation documents
as a means to compare the trajectories of media policy
and regulation of council newspapers in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia. I then compare the findings with
the situation in the UK as a means to consider possible
future pathways for the development of this type of
regulation in the CEE countries. Finally, I argue that
such analyses are pivotal for understanding the real
terms of the relationship between media and local politics
and similarly imperative for determining the future
media policies in CEE societies that will impact the
democratic health of media in the region.
The analysis will focus on the following questions:
What are the nature and impact of council newspapers
as media in the Czech Republic and Slovakia? Do council
newspapers serve the public or special interests?
Can they still be considered local media or are they rather
council publicity tools? How do the developmental
trajectories of media policy and regulation of council
newspapers in the Czech Republic and Slovakia differ
from one another when considering the media and political
system transition after 1989? What may be considered
“good practice” in council newspapers policy
and regulation?
2. Relationship between Council Newspapers and
Local Politics
The changing relationship between media and politics
was an unsurprisingly fundamental feature of the postsocialist
transitions in the Czech Republic and Slovakia4
.
It was reflected mainly in the interrelated changes that
occurred within policies regarding media regulation,
media ownership and initiatives to foster greater media
independence.
councils’ press releases etc.; see Zavattaro (2010).
4 Czechoslovakia split in 1993. The media conditions (i.e. the
rules applied) were similar not only up to that time, but also after
the breakup where each system was reconfigured in relation
to the general conditions of the post-socialist transitions in
the region. For insight into transition see Jakubowicz (2007).
Efforts to ensure the independence and freedom of
the media after the post-socialist revolutions produced
an understandably liberal nature within the tenets of
the Press Act (see Jakubowicz (2007)). Similarly, during
this time, the municipality acts5
—which, among other
things, sought to facilitate citizen engagement with political
communication—created the conditions and
framework for the emergence and development of
council newspapers (Svatošová, 2006).
The changes in the relationship between the media
and politics became most apparent at the national level,
with the reconfiguration of the state ownership of
the media, media privatization and the transformation
of the state owned television and radio into a public
service model (see Šmíd (2004)). Institutions, which
deviated from these proscribed media model changes,
were subsequently and publicly addressed, particularly
in relation to the public service media (e.g. regarding
the Czech television “crisis” in 2000, see Šmíd (2004);
regarding the merging of Slovak television and Slovak
radio, see ČT24 (2010).
It is important to point out, however, that serious
discussion about the unusual position of council newspapers
in the Czech and Slovak media systems only began
more clearly much later, after 2006. At this time,
scrutiny and reflection related to the national media
transformation had largely faded and there was finally
an opportunity for examining the relationship between
media and politics on the local level. The configuration
and dynamics of local media markets and the municipality’s
role in relation to them is seldom found in the
academic and public discussions and publications focused
on the media transition before 2000. Sükösd and
Bajomi-Lázár (2003) point out this anomaly as one of
the nine major problem areas in contemporary CEE
media, framing it as an ownership monopoly issue:
Media monopolies at the county, city, district, town
and village level are so common that they are often
taken for granted. In some countries, local governments
indirectly own local television stations and
newspapers. As these are the exclusive channels of
institutionalized communication at the local level
(Internet use is growing relatively slowly), their performance
is often biased in election campaigns.
(Sükösd & Bajomi-Lázár, 2003, p. 21)
The authors go on to describe a rather general problem
regarding council newspapers in the CEE countries. It is
quite usual in the Czech Republic and Slovakia that the
municipalities publish their own newspapers (see be-
5 There are three municipality acts in the Czech Republic—
Zákon o obcích; Zákon o krajích (2000); Zákon o hlavním městě
Praze (2000) and three in Slovakia—Zákon o obecnom zriadení
(2014); Zákon o samosprávnych krajoch (2001); Zákon o
hlavnom meste SR Bratislave (1990). See more later.
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 64
low). The analysis suggests, that this development creates
a unique media situation: 1) these newspapers
remained owned by the municipalities during the privatization
of the state media; 2) they retain close ties
with local politicians in opposition to the developing
media tenets and initiatives which seek to eliminate
political influence in media; and 3) they are often produced
by municipality officials or politicians in contrast
to the principles of professional journalism which have
been implemented since 1989.
We should ask whether these media serve the public
or special interests? Can they be considered local
media or rather council publicity tools? Clarifying these
distinctions is profoundly important for assessing the
relationship between council newspapers and local politicians
and more important, for developing an adequate
legal framework regarding judicial oversight.
When trying to define council newspapers as local
media, problems arise, as their characteristics (ownership
patterns, business model, organization, and production
settings) differ significantly from all other
Czech and Slovak media. Council newspapers are the
only media paid for by the “state” (in this case, by the
municipalities). The only media with a distant relationship
with the state are the Czech and Slovak public service
media (in both cases television and radio), while
the Parliaments can potentially influence public service
Acts and oversight authorities. However, council newspapers
cannot be classified as public service media6
,
because they do not have this status in the regulatory
framework and in their own internal rules.
Moreover, council newspapers, while receiving
money from the municipalities are simultaneously participating
in the market competition for readers and
advertisers (see Marťák (2013)). As such, they are government
funded competitors for the commercial local
media7
, which continue to struggle to survive in light of
6 Council newspapers were at first considered as public service
media even in the analysis of NGO Oživení. However the analysis
came to the conclusion, that the analysed council newspapers
did not fulfil the principles of public service media
(Oživení, 2010, p. 14, cf. Marťák, 2013).
7 An unusual example of the possible cooperation between
commercial local newspapers and a local municipality is the
case of the Finchburg Star, a newspaper published in a suburb
of Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Commercial publications were
closed down but the local municipality in 2014 realized that the
community needed its local newspaper. Consequently, it “embarked
on an experiment: With a one-year direct financial
boost from city hall—about $30,000 to cover monthly postage,
plus the shuttering of a city newsletter that competed for ad
dollars—the paper would return to print”. After one year of
this experiment, “the Finchburg Star is now printing a monthly
edition and mailing it to the more than 12,000 residences and
businesses in town. All of the paper’s revenue these days
comes from advertising, though it is still getting some city support:
municipality officials committed $16,800” (see Hutchins
(2015)).
the 2008 financial crisis and declining local advertising
revenues (Engel, 2009; Fenton, Metykova, Schlosberg,
& Freedman, 2010). In addition, municipality officials
and/or local politicians contribute more significantly to
the content production of these newspapers than any
professional journalists (see Oživení (2010) and Kamenský
(2010)). This fact strongly suggests the potential
of misusing council newspapers for distribution of
municipality government opinion. This potential bias
(the failure to provide a plurality of opinion) conflicts
with the fact that these media are financially supported
by taxpayers. As Fenton et al. (2010) point out in
their study of the UK local media, local municipality
ownership of local news media “is not only undemocratic
but an unsustainable and ineffective use of taxpayers’
funds8
” (p. 5, original emphasis). The authors
go on to describe the municipal press as a propaganda
tool, citing their research respondent:
It’s more a propaganda for council. If you look at it,
there’s nothing about community as such like an
input and it looks so very, it doesn’t look like a
newspaper to me, it looks like some sort of election
leaflet, which they’ve pushed through the door.
(Participant, Kings Cross elderly group; Fenton et
al., 2010, p. 26)
These are strong arguments for the opinion that council
newspapers should be rather considered council
publicity tools, a point underscored by their method of
financing (the municipality establishes its public image
through public money), production structure (content
prepared by municipality officials, spokespersons or
the PR department staff, overseen by an editorial
board consisting of local politicians) and business model
(council newspapers are often free sheets distributed
directly to citizens’ mailboxes)9
(see below and
Oživení (2010)).
Staci Zavattaro (2010) argues that council newspapers
are part of council publicity, stating they are:
one of the various ways in which cities are selling
themselves as commodities; another way cities try
to control shaping their social realities; “counter-
8 Fenton et al. (2010) suggest a better way of spending taxpayers’
money for local information—namely to establish local
government subsidies for local news-hub start-ups, which
could come from local government advertising.
9 There are exceptions, e.g. the council newspaper Kopřivnické
noviny published by the municipality in the town Kopřivnice
with roughly 20,000 inhabitants. This newspaper utilizes a
standardized newspaper layout and is sold at the newsstands
(see http://www.koprivnice.cz/index.php?id=koprivnicke-noviny
-koprivnice). The hybrid nature of council newspapers particularly
comes into relief in this case, as it strongly resembles a
commercial newspaper although it is not (cf. Code of Recommended
Practice on Local Authority Publicity (2011)).
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 65
strategies“ that public administrators use to cut out
the media, which…has become increasingly hostile
toward governments. (Zavattaro, 2010, pp. 192, 200)
Referring to the aforementioned, we can conclude that
council newspapers perform as a function of localized
political advertising and marketing. The question remains
how do the trajectories of media policy and regulation
of council newspapers in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia differ in relation to the media and political
system transition after 1989. While the Czech Republic
identified the core of the council newspapers’ problem
and tried to solve it, Slovakia identified the same problem
but did nothing.
3. Differences in Czech and Slovak Council
Newspapers’ Policy and Regulation Development
As previously stated, the problem of understanding
council newspapers as media was utterly neglected in
the Czech and Slovak media transition10
and it remains
a neglected area in media and journalism analyses up
to the present day. Only after council newspapers were
initially criticized by non-profit organizations in both
the Czech Republic and Slovakia after 2006 as potential
sites for undue political influence, power, and potential
corruption, were the questions regarding their nature
and impact raised.
While the questions were recognized as serious in
both contexts, the response differed in the respective
contexts with regard to addressing the vague nature of
council newspapers and their potential for abuse by local
politicians. In the Czech context, they prescribed a
solution without adequately considering the implications
that might accompany it; in the Slovak context,
they have yet to implement a solution. This raises the
question, how exactly the trajectories of media policy
and regulation of council newspapers in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia differ during the societal transition
after 1989.
3.1. The Czech Republic: Searching Solutions without
Adequately Considering Implications
In the Czech Republic the first critic of the council
newspapers11
was the non-profit NGO called Oživení in
10 Several Bachelors and Masters theses are focused on the
topic of council newspapers (Černá, 2010; Černý, 2014; Červenková,
2011; Hándlová, 2011; Kamenský, 2010; Šedá, 2009,
2013).
11 Even the Czech professional journalists’ organization
(Syndikát novinářů ČR) was unaware of this problem. The organization
has actually accepted municipality officials working
for council newspapers as its members (SNČR, 2004). The organization
later admitted the potential problem with the close
relationship between council newspapers and local politics and
commented on this issue that municipality officials should not
2006, as part of their program focused on disclosing
the potential abuse of local politicians’ power (Oživení,
2010). After analysing one hundred regional, town and
village municipality publications, the following findings
were observed. First, municipalities annually spend
hundreds of millions of Czech crowns (millions of Euros)
on publishing council newspapers. Second, dissenting
opinion with the municipality government perspective
was present in only 27% of analysed council
newspapers. Third, more than 20% of the analysed articles
were anonymously attributed; concurrently the
less anonymity observed in the respective newspapers,
the more plurality was observed in their content.
Fourth, in 75% of the analysed newspapers, the editorial
board was composed of municipality officials; only
8% of the analysed newspapers had opposition politicians
as members of the respective editorial boards.
Finally, the investigators found that the more the
newspapers’ production processes were outsourced
and the more opposition politicians were present on
the editorial board, the more pluralistic was the content
(Oživení, 2010, pp. 7-16).
These findings are similar to the data12
from a
deeper case study using mixed methods on the narrow
area of the ten biggest towns in one region (Olomouc
region) in the Czech Republic (see Table 1). The analysed
council newspapers are mostly freesheets, published
by municipalities themselves with unclear cost
structure (Kamenský, 2010, cf. Oživení, 2010).
The authors from the NGO Oživení point out that
the state of council newspapers “severely restricts local
democracy“ (2010, p. 6), because there is a clear conflict
of interest when local politicians control information
about themselves, which is published at the
expense of public money (2010, p. 11). The possible
abuse of council newspapers is summed up by Svatošová
(2006), who outlines five questionable practices
related to council newspapers: 1) the ban on publishing
critical views on municipality governance; 2) unpaid
promotion of local economic actors; 3) unclear procurements
related to the newspapers’ production; 4)
biased reporting on the outcomes of municipality governance;
and 5) unilateral campaigns for solving particular
local problems.
be considered professional journalists (Jelínek, 2005) and that
council newspapers should be distanced from the municipality
as much as possible (SNČR, 2006; cf. Oživení, 2010; SNČR,
2013).
12 There is lack of complex data about council newspapers in
the Czech Republic. Even Oživení could not collect data about
the overall structure of council newspapers. Only partial information
is available about specific Czech regions. These data are
from the year 2009, which is valuable in comparison with the
findings of Oživení and Transparency International Slovakia.
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 66
Table 1. Selected council newspapers’ features in the Czech Republic.
Town Population Title Type Print
copies
Period
(per
year)
Distribution Publisher Costs
(per year
in 000
CZK)
Olomouc 100 373 Radniční listy freesheet 55 000 12 by mail, free
of charge to
households
municipality 4 152
Přerov 46 503 Přerovské listy freesheet 20 700 11 by mail, free
of charge to
households
municipality 850
Prostějov 45 378 Radniční listy freesheet 24 000 12 by mail, free
of charge to
households
private
company,
contract with
municipality
1 965
Šumperk 27 754 Šumperský
zpravodaj
freesheet 14 000 22 by mail, free
of charge to
households
municipality 811
Hranice 19 302 Hranická radnice private freesheet
supplement
n.a. 52 free of charge
on special
distribution
places
municipality 500
Zábřeh 14 099 Zábřeh freesheet 6 300 23 by mail, free
of charge to
households
municipality 791
Šternberk 13 834 Šternberské listy paid newspaper
(price 7 CZK per
copy; 21 000 sold
copies per year)
1 200 21 sold in local
newsstands
and shops
municipality 582
Uničov 12 098 Uničovský zpravodaj paid newspaper
(price 2-3 CZK per
copy; 38 313 sold
copies per year)
2 150 20 sold in local
newsstands
and shops
municipality 200
Jeseník 12 096 Jeseník město a
lázně
paid newspaper
(price 10 CZK per
copy; 9 000 sold
copies per year)
850 12 sold in local
newsstands
and shops
municipality 350
Litovel 10 063 Litovelské noviny paid newspaper
(price 8 CZK per
copy; 14 880 sold
copies per year)
1 300 12 sold in local
newsstands
and shops
municipality 435
Source: Kamenský (2010).
Qualitative interviews with journalists from three media
outlets published in Prague 6, Prague 21 and
Buštěhrad revealed that these newspapers had been
established as alternatives to the council newspapers:
“The municipally owned media were being denounced
for being biased and favouring the government” (Hájek
& Carpentier, 2015, p. 6). Moreover, the team that established
Buštěhradské listy, originally worked in the
council newspaper Buštěhradský zpravodaj but had resigned
due to political pressures.
In the spring of 2012, after publishing a critique on
the local government, the editorial board became
the object of severe political pressure. The organizational
structure of the municipal title was changed
so that the local government could have more control.
As a consequence of this change, the editorial
board decided to resign and to establish a new, independent
title. (Hájek & Carpentier, 2015, p. 7)
However, as the analysis of regulation development
shows, the NGO Oživení considered the problem from
the beginning as a political one and proposed the formulation
of new anti-corruption amendments to the
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 67
municipality acts (Zákon o obcích, 2000; Zákon o
krajích, 2000; Zákon o hlavním městě Praze, 2000) (cf.
Černý, 2014, pp. 19-20). The second part of the proposed
changes was the formulation of an amendment
to the Press Act (Oživení, 2010, p. 18). The proposal
uses the term “public service periodical press” and
supports regulation leading to objectivity, impartiality
and the publishing of pluralist opinion.
The authors13
of the amendment proposal from the
NGO Oživení later enacted their recommendations—
the council newspapers’ anti-abuse measures—as a
part of the Governmental anti-corruption strategy for
the years 2011 and 2012. However, the only means of
implementation of this measure at the time was the
Press Act amendment (Strategie vlády, 2011, p. 18).
Moreover, the government version of the Press Act
amendment, which was presented in the Chamber of
Deputies in February 201214
(Sněmovní tisk 603, 2012),
had a distinctly different content (Stenografický zápis
36. schůze PSP, 2012; Stenografický zápis 57. schůze
PSP, 2013). There were three important parts to this
proposed amendment—council newspapers were referred
to as the “periodical press of the local government
unit” (not “public service periodicals”); people
who could publish alternative opinions no longer included
every citizen, but only members of municipality
council, including those from the opposition; and the
publisher was obliged to present objective and impartial
information (Sněmovní tisk 603, 2012). This version
of the Press Act amendment was later approved by
Parliament and is in force since November 2013
(Sněmovní tisk 603, 2012; Tiskový zákon, 2013). The
amendment of the Press Act changed the original, liberal
tone of the Act—e.g. the objectivity and impartiality
regulation is not applied to the commercial press,
only to council newspapers (see Tiskový zákon (2013)).
Thus, the intention of the NGO Oživení to solve the
problem between local politics and council newspapers
led only to the Press Act amendment. Ultimately it did
not solve anything but rather complicated the understanding
of council newspapers as local media instead
of the more acceptable understanding of them as
council publicity instruments.
The final form of the Press Act also provoked journalistic
criticism, mainly in relation to the absent penalties
and oversight, or out-of-date definitions of the
media, with regulation relating only to print and not
audiovisual or new media (see Vrána (2012) and Knajfl
(2012)). The municipality acts remained unchanged regarding
the original proposal related to council newspapers
regulation.
13 The director of the NGO Oživení analysis and author of the
Press Act amendment is Oldřich Kužílek, an ex-politician, now
working for the NGO (taj, 2010).
14 For a detailed description of the Press Act amendment development
see Šedá (2013) and Černý (2014).
Understandably, deeper insight into the actual
changes within the functioning of council newspapers
related to the regulation changes have yet to be ascertained,
as the amended Press Act has only been in
force since the end of 2013. However, specific consequences
of the Press Act amendment are described in
a case study analysis15
conducted in 2014. Černý (2014,
pp. 74-76) outlines three primary conclusions: 1) the
council newspapers’ editors-in-chief did not change
their way of communication with municipality government,
as the local politicians from the leading party are
yet dominating in the council newspapers; 2) opposition
politicians have slightly better access to the council
newspapers—about roughly half of the responding
editors-in-chief actively seek and incorporate views from
opposition politicians, often in special sections; 3) the
structure of the newsroom, editorial board and journalists’
routines have not changed. To the point, editors-inchief
address issues of objectivity and impartiality by
promoting access for the opposition within the editorial
board. Moreover, all municipality council members can
publish their views in the council newspapers’ special
section. Similarly, they can do so by the so called “advice
method” where the opposition have information in advance
about the content and topics in the council newspapers
so as to adequately respond to them in their own
texts. However, respondents within the case study admitted
that they use the latter “advice method” more
often than any active sourcing of opposition politicians.
Specific cases demonstrate that the Press Act
amendment has not brought plurality, objectivity and
impartiality in the council newspapers. These cases appeared
most often before and after the first municipality
elections (in autumn 2014) after the Press Act
amendment went into effect. For example, in some
council newspapers, the opposition parties have had
problems to secure pre-election political advertising
since the ruling party bought up all available advertising
space in advance (Kremr, 2014; Ševčíková, 2014).
Moreover, even success in the municipal elections
has not guaranteed access to the council newspapers.
Consequently, one new local party, which obtained the
second highest number of votes and gained one fifth of
the municipality council membership in the city borough
Praha 10, decided to establish their own alternative
newspaper16
(Dobré noviny, 2015; cf. Hájek & Carpentier,
2015), stating their reasoning as follows:
We face censorship twenty-five years after the Vel-
15 The case study research design involves qualitative in-depth
interviews with the editors-in-chief of eight council newspapers
(Černý, 2014).
16 Their original plan was to collect 80,000 Czech crowns
(€2,900) through a website for publishing one issue (which was
achieved within 10 days), ultimately, 124,183 Czech crowns
(€4,500) was collected from 175 people (Dobré noviny, 2015).
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 68
vet Revolution….The council newspaper published by
the Praha 10 city borough is the mouthpiece of the
councillors and the mayor. They consider this newspaper
as their personal advertising for public money.
Citizens and opposition councillors have no access to
the council newspapers. (Dobré noviny, 2015)
On the other hand this situation also stimulated
stronger public reflection and action related to the
problem of council newspapers. For example, anybody
can now rate all council newspapers in the Czech Republic
through the webpage www.hlasnatrouba.cz [in
English: mouthpiece], which was launched in March
2015 by the NGO Oživení as a continuation of their
council newspapers’ analysis project. This NGO similarly
plans to repeat the content analysis of council newspapers
in 2015 (Kameník, 2015).
In summary, council newspapers’ development in
the Czech Republic was correctly identified as problematic
through the NGO analysis, resting upon their
unclear status (council publicity tools or local media) in
the Czech media system. In attempting to redress this
issue, the NGO proposed mainly the municipality acts
amendments. As my analysis shows, the outcome did
not produce the expected solutions, but rather further
complicated the matter of council newspapers’ status.
The proposed solution obviously failed to address how
various political opinions during the legislative process
could be fairly promoted. The ongoing problem with
the status of council newspapers in the Czech Republic
and their relationship to local politics suggests that the
issue has only become more entrenched.
3.2. Slovakia: No Solutions on the Horizon
The development of the Slovak media began conterminously
with the Czech media—namely the law and developments
were the same up to 1993, including identifying
and addressing concerns related to council newspapers.
In Slovakia however, council newspapers’ status
was not perceived as a problem in need of solutions.
In November of 2007, the Slovak branch of the NGO
Transparency International ordered a public opinion
research report concerning council newspapers. The
findings showed that a quarter of the respondents considered
council newspapers as propaganda tools for
municipality leaders (Rončák, 2008, p. 1).
Subsequently, Transparency International conducted
a content analysis of thirty council newspapers published
by municipalities in Slovak villages, towns and
boroughs, which produced results similar to the findings
from Oživení’s analysis in the Czech Republic and
case study from the Olomouc region (cf. Oživení, 2010;
Kamenský, 2010). The Slovak analysis revealed that
council newspapers are published mainly by municipalities
themselves or by their organizations. In only two
cases were the municipalities outsourcing their council
newspapers’ production. Problems were identified related
to reporting the actual costs of publishing council
newspapers (wages, overheads etc.), leading to speculation
that these numbers are deliberately obscured.
Rončák (2008) provides basic information about the
structure and features of thirty analysed titles. Five of
them from the biggest towns (see Table 2) show clear
similarities with the Czech examples (Table 1) the majority
of which were published by the municipalities
themselves, with a similar interval of publication or unclear
cost structure.
Again, local politicians from the leading parties
were identified as having direct influence on the council
newspapers content, being members of editorial
boards or working directly in the newsrooms (even the
mayor was sometimes editor-in-chief). Municipality officials
rather than professional journalists were found
most often to work in the council newspapers’ newsroom.
Finally, the local opposition was found to have
no voice in the council newspapers, with some council
newspapers explaining this by their intention to be
“deliberately apolitical” (Rončák, 2008, pp. 2-3).
Table 2. Selected council newspapers’ features17
in Slovakia.
Town Population Title Periodicity
(per year)
Publisher Costs (per year in
000 SK)
Zvolen 50 000 Zvolenské noviny 52 private company, 100%
owned by municipality
400
Nové Zámky 42 262 Castrum Novum 52 municipality 900
Šal'a 24 500 Šal'a 12 municipality n.a.
Vranov nad Topl'ou 23 000 Vranovský hlásnik 10 municipality 130
Snina 21 325 Naša Snina 12 municipality 30 (without
distribution costs)
Source: Rončák (2008).
17 There is a similar lack of complex data about council newspapers in Slovakia as in the Czech Republic. Only partial information about
30 selected titles from the Transparency International Slovakia analysis is available (Rončák, 2008), from the year 2007.
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 69
Lukáš Marťák (2013) produced a deeper analysis18
of
Slovak council newspapers and reached similar (and at
times sharper) conclusions as Transparency International.
According to his analysis, “in the Slovak council
newspapers today, forms of control are present which
remind people of the previous regime. It is as if the
media in the post-communist environment is still tied
up in the same practices” (pp. 104-109). Marťák posits
that council newspaper journalism performs as a “political
servant”:
The disruption of their independence is still present,
as well as the abolition of their right to freedom
of action and interference by the most powerful
local politicians. It is clear from our findings that
municipal politicians have real power and they have
actual power even in relation to council media. The
problem may arise, when municipality leaders consider
the council medium as “their own baby”. This
opinion is threatening in relation to their powers,
because it is only through these statements that
they are able to deny the mission of the mass media.
Beyond words or thoughts, the danger to council
media (funded by citizens) comes from politicians’
deeds. Mayors are often the murderers of
council newspapers. When the newspapers are
dead from the denial of basic journalistic values,
they provide the long-standing funeral of the medium.
(Marťák, 2013, p. 105)
Despite similar findings regarding council newspapers
as in the Czech Republic, no specific steps towards any
solution were taken in Slovakia. Seven years after
Transparency International’s analysis, its author, Ivan
Rončák, reflects:
It was just a small research project, probing into the
current state….We did not have the ambition to
bring about the legislative initiative, but rather only
to contribute to the public debate. The initiative is
generally unconsidered in the political environment
(e.g. political parties). I have worked with the findings
in the drafts of anti-corruption measures, but
there was no independent trajectory to produce
legislative change. (Rončák, 2015)
The author added that this council newspapers analysis
was part of the solution to the problems in local poli-
18 This analysis was based on qualitative interviews (23) with
three types of respondents: 1) municipality political leaders; 2)
local politicians, members of municipality councils, members of
committees for media, members of council newspapers’ editorial
boards; and 3) journalists, respectively employees of council
newspapers; in three county towns in eastern Slovakia in
2012. An additional method was the use of focus group interviews
with selected experts (see Marťák, 2013, pp. 11-16).
tics (regarding corruption). He confirmed that the Slovak
insights into council newspapers came from the assumption
that council newspapers are publicity tools
for municipality politicians.
As the regulation analysis revealed, the Slovak
council newspapers are, from the legislative point of
view, defined as other periodical publications and are
regulated by the Press Act. There is no special section
for these types of print media, as the Slovak Press Act
(Tlačový zákon, 2008) is similarly liberal and similarly
structured as the Czech Press Act. Akin to its Czech counterpart
are the municipality acts (Zákon o obecnom zriadení,
2014; Zákon o samosprávnych krajoch, 2001); Zákon
o hlavnom meste SR Bratislave, 1990), which allow
municipalities to publish council newspapers.
A significant difference in the Slovak media policy
compared to the Czech media policy is the existence of
the Press Council of the Slovak Republic (Tisková rada
Slovenské republiky), which provides ethical oversight
to all newspapers, including council newspapers. However,
when the Council receives complaints regarding a
newspaper’s impartiality or bias, its sanctions are rather
symbolic (Rončák, 2015). The Press Council recently
discussed two complaints regarding council newspapers,
and in both cases the decision was that
newspapers did violate the journalistic code of ethics.
The problem was mainly a failure to provide space for
oppositional viewpoints in the council newspapers’
content (Rozhodnutie TSRS 07, 2008; Rozhodnutie
TSRS 08, 2008).
The regulation and policy analysis resulted in findings,
which demonstrated that no significant changes
regarding greater regulation of council newspapers
was subsequently enacted, despite several controversial
revelations pertaining to their use. One can assume
that council newspapers in Slovakia are understood as
local media, not council publicity tools, due to the oversight
of the Press Council. But the oversight authority
does not have adequate decision-making powers.
There are also other controversies concerning
council newspapers in Slovakia, which underscore the
need to clearly and officially classify the status of council
newspapers. A local online journalist characterizes
the council newspaper in his city as competition paid
for by citizens’ taxes: “It serves the propaganda purposes
of the mayor and the municipality leaders from
the taxpayers’ money. Impartiality should be implemented
through the new editorial board, but the space
devoted to the mayor, however, has not diminished
and still forms a substantial part of the newspaper”
(Bučko, 2013).
Politicians have also complained about the bias of
the council newspapers. For example, a mayor candidate
complained before the municipal elections that
the council newspaper in the Bratislava borough of
Petržalka “does not provide free or objective information
about the political rivals of the current mayor…,
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 70
although the municipality paid over €100,000 towards
its publication” (Nechala, 2014).
There was even a nationwide conflict caused by the
council newspaper Náš kraj published by the regional
municipality in Banská Bystica. The new regional governor
was accused of using council newspaper for his
own self-promotion, including hate speech (Repa,
2014) and his admiration for the fascist Slovak state
(Vražda, 2014). In 2014, a criminal complaint against
this council newspaper was filed by the district prosecutor
on the suspicion of having committed an offense
regarding the denial of the Holocaust and approval of
the crimes of political regimes. The police later dismissed
the complaint (Mab, 2014) and the council
newspaper is still published under a slightly altered
name (Bystrický kraj, 2014, 2015). According to Slovak
Transparency International, this was an unprecedented
situation:
[The regional governor] distributed from the council
monthly partial propaganda leaflets to an extent
unparalleled by any of his predecessors. Not only
are there the traditionally numerous photos of the
regional governor and unlimited space for interviews
with him, but personal attacks on opponents
were added without publishing reactionary commentary,
all the while celebrating the wartime Slovak
Republic. We call for a cessation of funding for
such council monthlies through public money. (as
cited in Roháček, 2014)
4. Comparison: When Two Do the Same Thing, It Is
Not the Same Thing
As demonstrated, Czech and Slovak council newspapers
face similar problems. Analyses demonstrate how
they differ from the professional press in myriad
ways—their business models, employees, content,
etc.—so that they can fairly be defined as council publicity
tools. However, from the legislative viewpoint,
Czech council newspapers are regarded as media,
while in Slovakia, no resolution was proposed and
council newspapers are still seen as local media.
A “good practice” solution to the problem of council
newspapers remains to be ascertained in the Czech
Republic and Slovakia. Adopting the western media
model is hardly a solution in light of the critiques found
in Hallin and Mancini’s (2005, p. 218) path dependent
premise of media system development, and those advocating
against any CEE transition to a Western media
model as “final destination” (Sükösd & Bajomi-Lázár,
2003, p. 15). Moreover, problems related to media development
are more widely shared by a variety of national
media systems regardless of their status as “in
transition” or “developed” (see Waschková Císařová,
2013; Sükösd & Bajomi-Lázár, 2003).
Consequently, it is also important to consider the
Czech and Slovak council newspapers’ development
within a comparative framework in relation to council
newspaper policy changes in the United Kingdom.
While the Czech and Slovak approach has been identifying
the problems and—in the Czech case—addressing
the indications, the British approach can be viewed as
actually addressing the root causes.
4.1. United Kingdom: Deeper Insight Brings a Clear
Solution
Interestingly enough, the debate about council newspapers
in the United Kingdom occurred at the same
time and for the same reasons as in the Czech Republic
and Slovakia. Similar problems were identified in relation
to the status of council newspapers—namely a
need for objective information for local readers without
producing the conditions for unfair competition
with the local commercial media (a point underscored
by the 2008 financial crisis) (see Explanatory Memorandum
to The Code of Recommended Practice on Local
Authority Publicity, 2011).
The policy documents and regulation analysis reveal,
that in-depth debates about the transparency of
local government in the United Kingdom resulted in
the 2011 Code of recommended practice on local authority
publicity19
clearly indicating the importance of
this issue. This solution from the very beginning sought
to define council newspapers as local politics publicity
tools (not media), yet more precisely and in detail
name the consequences of such a definition regarding
the council newspapers’ very existence within the
broader media system. The Publicity Code is applied to
municipalities’ publication of free newspapers and
newssheets and these publicity tools should be lawful,
cost effective, objective, even-handed, appropriate,
have regard for equality and diversity, and be issued
with care during periods of heightened sensitivity
(Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority
Publicity, 2011, p. 2). Moreover, the Publicity Code sets
the rules (among others) to solve local authority publicity
problems: assess their value for taxpayers money;
assess the content as to whether it provides balanced
19 The Code of recommended practice on local authority publicity
came into force as part of the Local Government Act on 31st
March 2011 and the Publicity Code regulates municipal publicity
only in England. There was extensive debate about the Publicity
Code content, and the whole policy is a part of a larger
project Making local councils more transparent and accountable
to local people (Code of Recommended Practice on Local
Authority Publicity, 2011). The Publicity Code was reviewed in
2010 (350 responses) utilizing the opinions of experts; publishers;
people from newspapers; business etc. Moreover, as was
stated, “there will be a post implementation review of the Publicity
Code in 3 to 5 years after it comes into effect” (Explanatory
Memorandum to The Code of Recommended Practice on
Local Authority Publicity, 2011, paragraph 8, 12).
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 71
and factually accurate information, guards against
overt political statements; and insures that any publicity
describing the council’s policies and aims is as objective
as possible, concentrating on the facts or explanations
or both; oversees that public money is not used
for political campaigns; insures that in political controversies
all positions are presented; insures that any local
authority publicity should not seek to emulate commercial
newspapers in style or content; and that the local
authority publicity should identify itself as a product of
the local authority (Code of Recommended Practice on
Local Authority Publicity, 2011, p. 3, paragraph 10, p. 4,
paragraph 15-16, 19, p. 5, paragraph 28, 30).
The more particular rules related to council newspaper
publishing were the rule of periodicity and content,
which sought to solve the problem of unfair competition
for commercial local newspapers:
Where local authorities do commission or publish
newsletters, newssheets or similar communications,
they should not issue them more frequently
than quarterly, apart from parish councils, which
should not issue them more frequently than
monthly. Such communications should not include
material other than information for the public
about the business, services and amenities of the
council or other local service providers. (Code of
Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity,
2011, p. 5, paragraph 28)
There is an oversight authority with the adequate decision-making
powers—compliance to the Publicity Code
is overseen by the Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government. In this role Eric Pickles, attracted
attention20
in April 2014 for publishing a press release
about those councils, which were breaking the
Publicity Code rules. He reported that five councils of
various London boroughs were given a fortnight to explain
why steps should not be taken to stop their
“propaganda on the rates”, mainly due to their lack of
objectivity or balance, while publishing council newspapers
more often than four times a year (Press release,
2014). The Secretary announced, that he was
prepared to take further steps against those councils
that undermine local democracy (Press release, 2014).
One year later (in March 2015), the Secretary issued
proceedings in the Court seeking to enforce the Publicity
Code in the Royal Borough of Greenwich (to only
maximally publish council newspapers quarterly in-
20 The media quoted Eric Pickles strict assessments: “It is scandalous
that bloggers have been handcuffed for tweeting from
council meetings, while propaganda on the rates drives the
free press out of business. Only Putin would be proud of a record
like that….‘Town Hall Pravdas’ not only waste taxpayers’
money unnecessarily, they undermine free speech” (Press release,
2014).
stead of weekly; see Government response, 2015). Another
four councils were sent notices again in March
2015 (see Policy, 2015).
However the British journalists’ organizations find
themselves in the strange position of commenting on
the development of the Publicity Code and trying to
stand up for the local commercial newspapers on one
hand, and often also representing the council newspapers’
journalists on the other hand. For example the
National Union of Journalists (NUJ) faced this conundrum
after its general secretary Michelle Stainstreet
said “there was “no case at all” for Communities Secretary
Eric Pickles to be given statutory power over them.
She also denied that council newspapers are used to
deliver political messages or that they divert advertising
revenue from local papers” (Hollander, 2013). This
opinion angered journalists in local commercial newspapers
in light of council newspapers’ competitive advantages
in the marketplace. Moreover, Amanda Brodie,
the chair of another professional organization (the
Chartered Institute of Journalists) stated: “We are
astonished that the NUJ has come out against the proposed
legislation, which is aimed at supporting local
newspapers, and can only help to safeguard journalists’
jobs. This is not a political issue, as the NUJ seems intent
to make it” (Hollander, 2013).
Thus, the British policy, having identified the problem
regarding unfair competition with council newspapers
sought specific solutions through a series of initiatives
(public debates, numerous analyses), a clear line
of council publicity, and a commitment to enforce
compliance of the rules. In the Czech Republic and Slovakia
the NGOs identified the problem of unclear classification
and possible misuse of council newspapers. In
both states, however, council newspapers are still understood
as local media, even though the analyses
show their close relationship with the local politics and
significant differences from the professional media.
The second problem of policy and regulation development
in the Czech Republic and Slovakia is the absence
of an oversight authority with adequate decisionmaking
powers. In these problems, the Czech and Slovak
states would do well to follow the British “good
practice” policy and regulation development.
5. Conclusions
The British policy concerning council newspapers contrasts
the Czech and Slovak policies. While problems
were identified in all three countries, only in Britain
were specific initiatives taken to establish an oversight
authority. However, any initiatives for strengthening
state regulation over the media are met with skepticism
in CEE countries because of their experiences under
socialism.
In summary, we can state that Czech and Slovak
council newspapers serve the special interests of local
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 72
politicians. They can therefore be considered as council
publicity tools and they should become part of the local
policy and regulation with appropriate oversight au-
thority.
The British example indicates that the CEE countries
can benefit from the experience of their western counterparts
concerning the issue of council newspapers.
The Czech Republic and Slovakia should more effectively
address the anomalies in their media policy in ways
that provide real solutions for the development of
democratic media practices, while at the same time
remaining sensitive to the proclivities of the context.
If the development of the CEE media and societies
is to continue along a democratic path, it remains pivotal
to continue examining the terms of the relationship
between media and politics along all levels of society,
especially if there is to be a promising path
forward regarding the media’s role in fostering and securing
more inclusive democratic practices in the CEE
countries.
Acknowledgments
The author acknowledges the support of the VITOVIN
project (CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0184), which is co-financed
by the European Social Fund and the budget of the
Czech Republic.
Conflict of Interests
The author declares no conflict of interests.
References
Bučko, M. (2013, July 9). Radničné noviny sú vyhodené
peniaze daňovníkov. [Publishing council newspaper
is wasting public money]. bbonline.sk. Retrieved
from http://bbonline.sk/blog/radnicne-noviny-su-
vyhodene-peniaze-danovnikov
Bystrický kraj. (2014). [Council newspaper Bystrický region].
Retrieved from http://www.vucbb.sk/Úrad/
Informáciepremédiá/ČasopisyBBSK.aspx
Bystrický kraj. (2015). [Council newspaper Bystrický region].
Retrieved from http://www.vucbb.sk/Úrad/
Informáciepremédiá/ČasopisyBBSK.aspx
Černá, M. (2010). Zpravodaje pražských městských částí
[Council newspapers in Prague districts]. (Bachelor
thesis). Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Černý, A. (2014). Novela tiskového zákona a její reflexe v
redakcích vybraných pražských radničních periodik
(Případová studie) [Press Act amendment and its reflection
in selected Prague council newspapers’
newsrooms (case study)] (Master thesis). Brno: Masarykova
univerzita.
Červenková, A. (2011). Mediální mapa zpravodajů měst
a obcí na Hodonínsku [Media map of council newspapers
in Hodonín district] (Bachelor thesis). Brno:
Masarykova univerzita.
Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity.
(2011). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment
_data/file/5670/1878324.pdf
ČT24. (2010, December 15). Slovenský parlament rozhodl:
Veřejnoprávní rozhlas a televize se sloučí [Slovak
Parliament decided: Public radio and television will
merge]. ČT 24. Retrieved from http://www.ceskatele
vize.cz/ct24/media-it/110066-slovensky-parlament-
rozhodl-verejnopravni-rozhlas-a-televize-se-slouci
Dobré noviny pro Prahu 10. (2015). [Good Newspaper
for Prague 10]. Retrieved from https://www.
startovac.cz/projekty/dobre-noviny-pro-prahu-10
Engel, M. (2009). Local papers: An obituary. British Journalism
Review, 20(55), 55-62. doi:10.1177/095647
4809106672
Explanatory Memorandum to The Code of Recommended
Practice on Local Authority Publicity. (2011). Retrieved
from https://www.gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/567
1/1840982.pdf
Fenton, N., Metykova, M., Schlosberg, J., & Freedman, D.
(2010). Meeting the news needs of local communities.
London: Media Trust. Retrieved from http://
www.mediatrust.org/uploads/128255497549240/ori
ginal.pdf
Government response. Greenwich council newspaper.
(2015). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/govern
ment/news/greenwich-council-newspaper
Hájek, R., & Carpentier, N. (2015). Alternative mainstream
media in the Czech Republic: beyond the dichotomy
of alternative and mainstream media. Continuum:
Journal of Media and Cultural Studies.
doi:10.1080/10304312.2014.986061
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2005). Comparing media systems.
In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass media
and society (pp. 215-233). London: Hodder Arnold.
Hándlová, M. (2011). Mediální mapa obecních periodik
na území Pardubického kraje a případová studie
struktury redakcí a redakční práce [Media map of
council newspapers in the Pardubice region, case
study of newsrooms’ structure and editorial work]
(Master thesis). Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Hollander, G. (2013, July 19). NUJ accused of defending
‘Pravdas’ against journalism. Press Gazette. Retrieved
from http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nuj-accused-
defending-‘pravdas’-against-journalism
Hutchins, C. (2015, February 27). How one town’s government
brought the local paper back to life. Columbia
Journalism Review. Retrieved from http://
www.cjr.org/united_states_project/fitchburg_star_ci
ty_hall.php
Jakubowicz, K. (2007). Rude awakening. Social and media
change in Central and Eastern Europe. Cresskill:
Hampton Press.
Jelínek, M. (2005). Noviny, které platíme, aniž je chceme
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 73
[Newspapers, that we don’t want, but we pay them].
Mediažurnál, září, 1, 3. Retrieved from http://
www.bezkorupce.cz/aktuality/noviny-ktereplatime-
aniz-je-chceme
Kameník, M. (2015). Unikátní monitoring cenzury
radničních zpravodajů uveřejněn. Občané mohou
sami nahlašovat problematické zpravodaje [The
unique monitoring of council newspapers’ censorship
was published. Citizens can report problematic council
newspapers]. Retrieved from http://www.
bezkorupce.cz/blog/2015/03/12/unikatni-monitoring-
cenzury-radnicnich-zpravodaju-uverejnen-obcane-
mohou-sami-nahlasovat-problematicke-zpravodaje
Kamenský, S. (2010). Mediální mapa radničních periodik
v Olomouckém kraji [Media map of council newspapers
in Olomouc region] (Bachelor thesis). Brno: Masarykova
univerzita.
Knajfl, E. (2012, March 20). Prostor v radničních
novinách dostane i opozice [The opposition also get
the space in the council newspapers]. Události v regionech.
Retrieved from http://www.ceskatelevize.
cz/ct24/regiony/169027-prostor-v-radnicnich-
novinach-dostane-i-opozice
Kremr, T. (2014, August 4). Opozice: Radniční zpravodaj
v Králově Poli si koupila ODS [The opposition: Council
newspaper in Královo Pole was bought by ODS party].
Brněnský deník. Retrieved from http://brnensky
.denik.cz/zpravy_region/opozice-radnicni-zpravodaj-
v-kralove-poli-si-koupila-ods-20140804.html
Mab. (2014, April 20). Polícia doanalyzovala mesačník
Náš kraj. Dôvod na trestné stíhanie nevidí! [Police
finished analysis of council monthly Our Region. They
don’t see the reason for criminal prosecution].
Plus7.dni.sk. Retrieved from http://wwww.plus7
dni.sk/regiony/stredne-slovensko/kotleba-si-
pomohol-namiesto-zruseneho-mesacnika-vytvoril-
bystricky-kraj.html
Marťák, L. (2013). Mestské periodiká a politika—Stav a
možné riešenia [Council newspapers and politics—
Status and possible solutions] (Doctoral dissertation).
Ružomberok: Katolícka univerzita v Ružomberoku.
Nechala, P. (2014). Bajan zneužíva Petržalské noviny,
Nechala ho za to žaluje na súde [Bajan abuses
Petržalka council newspaper, Nechala is suing him
for it]. Retrieved from http://nechala.blog.sme.sk/
c/368251/bajan-zneuziva-petrzalske-noviny-nechala-
ho-za-to-zaluje-na-sude.html
Oživení. (2010). 20 let demokracie: Kraje, města, obce na
rozcestí mezi korupcí a vládou práva. Výzkumy,
analýzy a legislativní návrhy [20 Years of Democracy:
Counties, cities, municipalities at the crossroad between
corruption and the rule of law. Researches,
analyses and legislative proposals]. Retrieved from
http://www.osf.cz/media/com_form2content/docu
ments/c5/a346/f20/20_let_demokracie.pdf
Policy. (2015). Local council transparency and accountability.
Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/govern
ment/policies/making-local-councils-more-transpare
nt-and-accountable-to-local-people/activity
Press release. (2014). Eric Pickles takes action to defend
the independent free press. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/eric-pickles-
takes-action-to-defend-the-independent-free-press
Repa, M. (2014, May 20). Kotleboviny [Council newspaper
and regional governor Kotleba]. Pravda.sk. Retrieved
from http://nazory.pravda.sk/komentare-a-
glosy/clanok/318288-kotleboviny
Roháček, F. (2014, April 8). TIS: Kotleba spravil zo župného
mesačníka propagandistický plátok [TIS: Regional
governor Kotleba made from a regional council
newspaper propaganda tool]. bbonline.sk.
Retrieved from http://bbonline.sk/tis-kotleba-spravil
-zo-zupneho-mesacnika-propagandisticky-platok
Rončák, I. (2015). E-mail communication, March 2015.
Rončák, I. (2008). Radničné noviny—tlačené periodiká
vydávané samosprávami (správa z monitoringu)
[Council newspapers—print periodicals published by
municipalities (monitoring report)]. Transparency International
Slovensko website. Retrieved from
http://www.transparency.sk/wp-
content/uploads/2010/01/Radničné-noviny–-
tlačené-periodiká-vydávané-samosprávami.pdf
Rozhodnutie TRSR 07. (2008). [Decision No. 07, Press
Council of the Slovak Republic]. Tlačová rada Slovenskej
republiky. Retrieved from http://trsr.sk/
rozhodnutia/Page-20
Rozhodnutie TRSR 08. (2008). [Decision No. 08, Press
Council of the Slovak Republic]. Tlačová rada Slovenskej
republiky. Retrieved from http://trsr.sk/
rozhodnutia/Page-20
Šedá, A. (2009). Zpravodaje měst a obcí na Brněnsku—
charakteristika mediální krajiny. [Council newspapers
in Brno region—characteristics of media landscape].
(Bachelor thesis). Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
Šedá, A. (2013). Radniční periodika jako součást
mediálního systému [Council newspapers, part of
media system]. (Master thesis). Brno: Masarykova
univerzita.
Ševčíková, L. (2014, September 30). Passer prý zneužil
radniční tisk pro svou propagaci. Radnice to odmítá
[Passer allegedly abused council newspaper for his
own promotion. Municipality refuses this]. Parlamentní
listy. Retrieved from http://www.parla
mentnilisty.cz/zpravy/Passer-pry-zneuzil-radnicni-
tisk-pro-svou-propagaci-Radnice-to-odmita-337252
Šmíd, M. (2004). Czech Republic. Media ownership and its
impact on media independence and pluralism. Ljubljana:
SEENPM, Peace Institute. Retrieved from http://
www.mirovni-institut.si/media_ownership/index.htm
SNČR. (2004). Stanovisko členské komise k členství
novinářů z časopisů vydávaných úřady [Czech professional
journalists’ organization opinion on membership
of council newspapers’ journalists]. Mediažurnál,
březen, 6.
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 74
SNČR. (2006). Stanovisko Syndikátu novinářů k
radničním tiskovinám [Czech professional journalists’
organization opinion on council newspapers]. Mediažurnál,
červenec, 1-2.
SNČR. (2013). Stanovisko k novele tiskového zákona
[Czech professional journalists’ organization opinion
on the Press Act amendment]. Mediažurnál, 4, 15.
Sněmovní tisk 603. (2012). [Parliamentary Press No. 63,
Press Act amendment]. Novela zákona—tiskový zákon.
Retrieved from http://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie
.sqw?T=603&O=6
Stenografický zápis 36. schůze, 20. Března. (2012).
[Stenographic record of 36. Parliamentary meeting,
March 20, 2012]. (2012). Poslanecká sněmovna, Parlament
ČR. Retrieved from http://www.psp.cz/
eknih/2010ps/stenprot/036schuz/36-5.html#494
Stenografický zápis 57. schůze, 8. srpna 2013. (2013).
[Stenographic record of 57. Parliamentary meeting,
August 8, 2013]. Poslanecká sněmovna, Parlament
ČR. Retrieved from http://www.psp.cz/eknih/
2010ps/stenprot/057schuz/s057064.htm
Strategie vlády v boji proti korupci na období let 2011 a
2012. (2011). [Governmental anti-corruption strategy
for the years 2011 and 2012]. Retrieved from
http://www.mvcr.cz/soubor/strategie-vlady-v-boji-
proti-korupci-na-obdobi-let-2011-a-2012-pdf.aspx
Sükösd, M. & Bajomi-Lázár, P. (2003). The second wave
of media reform in East Central Europe. In M. Sükösd
& P. Bajomi-Lázár (Eds.), Reinventing media. Media
policy reform in East-Central Europe (pp. 13-27). Budapest:
CEU Press.
Svatošová, H. (2006). Vydávání tzv. “radničních novin“ v
právních souvislostech. [Publishing council newspapers
in a legal context]. Retrieved from
http://www.iure.org/sites/default/files/article/down
loads/33_vydavani_radnicnich_novin_v_pravnich_so
uvislostech.pdf
taj. (2010, September 6). Kocáb s Jochem se shodli.
Novým zmocněncem by mohl být Kužílek [Kocáb and
Joch agreed. Kužílek could be a new commissioner].
idnes.cz. Retrieved from http://zpravy.idnes.cz/
kocab-s-jochem-se-shodli-novym-zmocnencem-by-
mohl-byt-kuzilek-p5v-/domaci.aspx?c=A100906_
130042_domaci_taj
Tiskový zákon. (2013). [Czech Press Act]. Zákon 46/2000
Sb. o právech a povinnostech při vydávání periodického
tisku a o změně některých dalších zákonů
(tiskový zákon), změna 305/2013 Sb. Retrieved from
http://www.mkcr.cz/cz/media-a-
audiovize/periodicky-tisk/zmena-tiskoveho-zakona--
tzv--radnicni-periodika-199168
Tlačový zákon. (2008). [Slovak Press Act]. Zákon č.
167/2008 Sb. o periodickej tlači a agentúrnom spravodajstve
a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov
(tlačový zákon). Retrieved from http://old.culture.
gov.sk/uploads/a6/74/a674978243efa444ce2aef17d
63a5391/zakon-c.-167-2008-tlacovy-zakon-uplne-
znenie.pdf
Vrána, K. (2012, August 29). Změní se žalostný stav
radničních novin? Novela je má otevřít opozici [Will
change the poor level of council newspapers? The
Press Act amendment should open newspapers for
the opposition]. Reportéři ČT. Retrieved from
http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/ct24/domaci/193704-
zmeni-se-zalostny-stav-radnicnich-novin-novela-je-
ma-otevrit-opozici
Vražda, D. (2014, April 11). Kotleba prišiel o million eur
pre úrad i časopis Náš kraj [Regional governor Kotleba
lost one million Euro intended for regional municipality
and council newspaper Náš kraj]. sme.sk. Retrieved
from http://bystrica.sme.sk/c/7168000/kotle
ba-prisiel-o-milion-eur-pre-urad-i-casopis-nas-
kraj.html
Waschková Císařová, L. (2013). Český lokální a regionální
tisk mezi lety 1989 a 2009 [Czech local and regional
press between 1989 and 2009]. Brno: Munipress.
Zákon o obcích. (2000). [Czech Municipality Act]. Zákon
128/2000 Sb. o obcích. Retrieved from http://
portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/zakon.jsp?page=0&nr=
128~2F2000&rpp=15#seznam
Zákon o krajích. (2000). [Czech Regional Municipality
Act]. Zákon 129/2000 Sb. o krajích (krajské zřízení).
Retrieved from http://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/zak
on.jsp?page=0&nr=129~2F2000&rpp=15#seznam
Zákon o hlavním městě Praze. (2000). [Czech Act on the
capital Prague]. Zákon 131/2000 Sb. o hlavním městě
Praze. Retrieved from http://portal.gov.cz/app
/zakony/zakon.jsp?page=0&nr=131~2F2000&rpp=15
#seznam
Zákon o obecnom zriadení. (2014). [Slovak Municipality
Act]. Zákon č. 369/1990 Zb. o obecnom zriadení. Retrieved
from http://www.minv.sk/?zakon-snr-c-369-
1990-zb-o-obecnom-zriadeni
Zákon o samosprávnych krajoch. (2001). [Slovak Regional
Municipality Act]. Zákon č. 302/2001 Zb. o samospráve
vyšších územných celkov (zákon a samosprávnych
krajoch). Retrieved from http://
www.zakonypreludi.sk/zz/2001-302
Zákon o hlavnom meste SR Bratislave. (1990). [Slovak
Act on the capital Bratislava]. Zákon č. 377/1990 Zb.
o hlavnom meste SR Bratislave. Retrieved from
http://www.minv.sk/?zakon-snr-c-377-1990-zb-o-
hlavnom-meste-sr-bratislave&subor=149282
Zavattaro, S. M. (2010). Municipalities as public relations
and marketing firms. Administrative Theory and
Praxis, 32(2), 191-211. doi:10.2753/ATP1084-
1806320202
Media and Communication, 2015, Volume 3, Issue 4, Pages 62-75 75
About the Author
Dr. Lenka Waschková Císařová
Mgr. Lenka Waschková Císařová, Ph.D. works as assistant professor at the Department of Media
Studies and Journalism, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. Her research
focuses on journalism studies, media ownership, local media and transformation of media
markets.