From Genc Burimi

A question burns your lips as soon as you hear the news that Edi Rama has decided to entrust (former) journalist Jonida Shehu with a position in the Prime Minister's Office, with a state salary, as a media advisor. Does Rama consider that he is turning to the kettle to advise him on the kettle?

It seems unbelievable. Rama doesn't need advice on anything, much less on something he has long despised, such as the media, which he has always insulted with the epithet "boiler."

So why does Rama maintain such an ambiguous relationship with the media, worthy of Stockholm syndrome in a prisoner? The appointment of Jonida Shehu as Prime Minister is not an isolated case. It is the same motivation for the Prime Minister as when he made former journalist Iris Luarasi an MP, or when he made Mustafa Nano an ambassador. It is the inexhaustible desire to subjugate the media, with or without grace.

Through the whip, with operations to arrest journalists, with expulsions of media outlets from their buildings, or with fines and fiscal controls against the owners of disobedient media outlets. But the Prime Minister also knows how to use the “kulaç”, by making journalists deputies, ambassadors or high-ranking state officials. The kulaç takes on the value of the American lottery in this case. Fortune can knock on the door of any journalist who has the right reflex not to fall for luck with his feet. If he does not criticize the government and, better yet, if he defends and promotes the “achievements” of the government, then anything is possible in his career. The Kazan syndrome thus turns into the binomial “give to me, give to me”.

What Rama is doing is not at all original. Unfortunately, other leaders, not only in authoritarian countries – because there the stick is “enough” – but also in those with democratic regimes, happen to have the same syndrome towards the media and journalists, as if to make them this “necessary evil” for themselves. What is original and special in this relationship is the resistance of journalists, both to the stick and to the carrot of those in power.

In one of Jonida Shehu's latest interviews on a Çim Peka show, commenting on the current situation in Albania, she made a detailed analysis of the "test" mechanism of institutions and people ("Çim Peka Live", December 1, 2025). According to her, all institutions in Albania are in a moment of testing in the face of the Balluku file. Under test, according to Jonida Shehu, is SPAK, is the Constitutional Court, is the government, is the entire political class, and even public opinion as a separate institution. Her analysis would have been even more exhaustive if we had known at that moment the act that Jonida herself would take two months later: journalists in Albania are also in a state of testing. How much do they resist the sirens (in the Homeric sense) of power?

Just over a year ago, a few weeks before his death, Pope Francis addressed journalists around the world in a solemn address. One sentence caught the eye in that appeal: “Your craft is more than a profession, journalism is a mission.” He then elaborated: “A free journalist makes the whole of society even freer.”

Question: what would happen to a society if all journalists acted like Jonida Shehu?