TROLL OF THE MONTH: Prime Minister Edi Rama in Albania

The Balkan Troll of the Month is an individual, a group of individuals or a media outlet that spreads hate based on gender, ethnicity, religion, or other diversity categories. The Balkan Troll is selected based on hate speech incidents identified across the Western Balkans region.

Prime Minister Edi Rama was questioned during a parliamentary session by the opposition regarding allegations of industrial waste potentially containing hazardous toxic substances. In his response, Rama stated that the investigation is still ongoing and dismissed the accusations made by the opposition as speculative. However, during his reply, Rama shifted the response toward opposition MP Gazment Bardhi, making sarcastic remarks about how Bardhi supposedly gains his expertise. His remarks had sexist connotation in addition to being an ad-hominem attack used against the political opponent.

The session was broadcast by Top Channel – a popular Albanian national television network – with a sensationalised headline containing some of the harmful and inappropriate language Rama used, further amplifying the sexist language and rhetoric. Although Rama didn’t use the exact words presented in the headline, the network prioritised provocative content, knowing that viewers are more likely to react to sensational headlines rather than watch the full speech.

As Prime Minister of Albania, Edi Rama holds a position of significant power, influence, and responsibility. Rather than engaging in heated debates and ad-hominem attacks filled with insults and hostility, he should set a positive example for other MPs and members of society as a whole. Political differences or opposing views should never justify hateful rhetoric, especially from someone in such a high office as in the case of Rama.

This incident reflects a very concerning trend towards the normalisation of inappropriate language in political discourse whereby personal attacks overshadow substantive debate. Politics is inherently pluralistic, with diverse opinions and perspectives, and the only way to navigate these differences is through debate and constructive dialogue rather than through offensive language and directed hate. Prime Minister Rama’s comments, coupled with the media’s sensationalising of the event that took place, contribute to a toxic environment that detracts from meaningful political discussions.

When someone with high status and prominent significance such as a prime minister spreads such offensive (and sexist) rhetoric in parliament, it sets a dangerous precedent, signalling that such behaviour is acceptable at the highest levels of government. Furthermore, the media has a role and responsibility not to amplify hate speech, no matter who the perpetrator is. The media plays a crucial role in conveying events to the wider public, but it must do so responsibly and ethically. Broadcasting moments of hostility and tension during parliamentary sessions, accompanied by sensationalistic headlines for clickbait, attract the wrong kind of attention. Simultaneously, the media have a role to counter hateful speech and use their platform and reach to condemn cases of hate and hostility like these. Indeed, the media’s failure to condemn and instead amplify this rhetoric risks further normalising and encouraging such discrimination and sexism in public discourse.