Citizens still think that reality shows should be abolished: What did the research show about citizens’ attitudes after the mass murder in Ribnikar? – Personal views

We were interested in whether the perception of this event changes in relation to the initial strong impression that this event produced. At the Institute of Social Sciences, we conducted an online survey on citizens’ attitudes about education in Serbia in the period December 2024-April 2025, including attitudes about Ribnikar. 2039 respondents answered the questions about Ribnikar. In our sample, there were slightly more women, respondents with higher education and politically opposition-oriented citizens.

Pond farmer and company

When asked “What are the main reasons that led to this event”, the respondents cited the availability of weapons (74%), the disordered personality of the perpetrator (67%), the insufficient care of parents about the mental health of children (67%), the high level of violence in society (61%), media content in which violence is promoted or tolerated (60%), insufficiently harsh punishments for juvenile offenders (47%), the publicity of similar events in the world (39%), the adoption of Western values (27%), the loss of authority of teachers (25%) and competitive culture in schools (23%) as factors that had a ‘great influence’.

Gender differences are most pronounced when it comes to the competitive culture in schools (60% of women believe that the competitive culture has had an impact versus 42% of men). This is followed by harsh sentences for juvenile offenders (75% of women vs. 67% of men) and the availability of guns (95% vs. 88%).

To the question “How much would the following activities contribute to preventing events like the one at Vladislav Ribnikar Elementary School in the future?” respondents state the abolition of reality television programs (86%), devoting several weeks of each school year to discussions about tolerance and empathy (75%), introducing new professional services in schools, primarily special pedagogues and clinical psychologists (71%), easier removal of problematic students from educational institutions (65%), changing the emphasis of school programs from material to social skills (60%), changing the government in Serbia (59%), marking the events from Ribnikar every year with an appropriate ceremony as a day of remembrance (57%), lowering the limit of criminal responsibility to the age of 10 (56%), introducing metal detection sensors in schools (55%), regular exercises simulating dangerous situations in schools (50%), building a memorial center so that the event from Ribnikar is never forgotten (50%) and canceling school competitions (6%). Differences between the sexes are most pronounced in support of shifting the emphasis of school programs from material to social skills (65% women vs. 43% men), lowering the limit of criminal responsibility to 10 years (60% vs. 46%), introducing clinical psychologists in schools (74% vs. 62%) and metal detector sensors (58% vs. 47%).

Some dominant media narratives have been shown to have a long-term effect on public opinion. For example, the idea of ​​the role of reality shows in the increase of violence in society, including the extreme event in Ribnikar, has persisted. However, almost consensual support for lowering the threshold for criminal responsibility immediately after the event has moderate support in our research. Citizens are divided about this solution, which means that the situational effects of Ribnikar have faded.

Asked how responsible are the following actors for the event at “Vladislav Ribnikar” Primary School? our respondents consider the perpetrator of the crime “very responsible” (83%), the father of the perpetrator of the crime (73%), the mother of the perpetrator of the crime (66%), the owner and employees of the shooting club (37%) and the management, professional service and teachers of the school (13.2%). Contrary to the logic of the criminal legislation, most respondents believe that the boy is responsible for the crime. Although there was a lot of name-calling of the school immediately after the event, respondents do not attribute much responsibility to the school – only 13% believe that the school’s management, professional services and teachers are responsible.

To the question “How do you see the event in Ribnikar today?” our respondents most often say that the event showed how deep we have sunk as a society (69%), that it showed that parents do not take enough care of their children (61%) and that it changed our perception of school as a safe place for children (61%). Half as many respondents think that it is an event that ordinary people cannot understand (36%) and that Ribnikar showed that children can be evil (31%), while about a quarter of respondents think that this event initiated long-term social changes in Serbia (27%). Few respondents believe the media spins that appeared after the tragedy about a mysterious or externally induced event (terrorism), as only about 10% answered “Who knows what really happened there.” It should be borne in mind that our sample is more opposition oriented.

Pond farmer and politics

Bearing in mind the high degree of political polarization in Serbia, we did not measure the political orientation of respondents with a direct question about party affiliation. Nevertheless, we can conclude about it indirectly based on the position on the question of whether a change of government in Serbia would contribute to the prevention of future events like the one in Ribnikar. If we treat answers 4 and 5 as opposition-oriented respondents (n=1,222), answers 1 and 2 as supporters of the government (n=331), we get some interesting results.

Opposition-oriented respondents believe that the high level of violence in society (96% vs. 73%) and media content that promotes or tolerates violence (93% vs. 79%) led to the tragedy, and somewhat more often the insufficient care of parents about children’s mental health (97% vs. 89%) and the availability of weapons (95% vs. 89%). On the other hand, respondents more favorable to the government choose “taking over Western values” as a reason much more often (67% vs. 42%). Attitudes about the perpetrator’s disturbed personality (95% vs. 93%), insufficiently harsh punishments (74% vs. 72%) and the publicity of similar events in the world (75% vs. 76%) were almost identical in the two groups.

Opposition-oriented respondents are much more likely to mention the abolition of reality TV programs (94% vs. 63%), the introduction of clinical psychologists in schools (77% vs. 55%), the construction of a memorial center (58% vs. 35%), an annual ceremony of remembrance (64% vs. 46%), and the shift of focus of school programs from material to social skills (66% vs. 46%). The views on easier removal of problematic students (67% vs. 62%), talks about tolerance (77% vs. 73%), simulations of dangerous situations (51% vs. 48%) and lowering the threshold of criminal responsibility (57% vs. 56%) were almost identical.

Opposition-oriented respondents more often consider the owner and employees of the shooting club (42% versus 30%), the perpetrator’s mother (71% versus 60%) and the perpetrator’s father (77% versus 67%), as well as the management, professional service and school teachers (15% versus 11%) as “very responsible”. The attitude about the responsibility of the perpetrator himself was almost identical (84% vs. 83%). Opposition-oriented respondents are far more likely to believe that Ribnikar showed how deep we have sunk as a society (81% vs. 37%), that he changed the perception of school as a safe place for children (67% vs. 43%) and that he initiated long-term social changes in Serbia (33% vs. 15%). On the other hand, respondents more sympathetic to the government much more often chose the wording “terrible, but similar events also happen in the modern world” (48.0% vs. 17%) and somewhat more often the interpretation “that event showed that children can be evil” (38% vs. 29%). The attitude about parental responsibility was almost identical (62% vs. 61%).

Thus, the attitude towards Ribnikar is also a test of the political position: for some, it is proof of the collapse of social values, and for others, proof that Serbia is part of the world where mass murders in schools occur, both in democratic and authoritarian societies.

The authors are sociologists

The views of the authors in the Dialog column do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Danas.