At a time when the communications industry is increasingly struggling to navigate formal procedures, market pressures and accelerated technological change, questions of integrity, responsibility and meaning are becoming more important than new tools and formats. Public tenders are increasingly functioning as a form without real competition, media space is burdened with contractual obligations, and artificial intelligence is often used in practice as a substitute for strategic thinking rather than as its tool. At the same time, the public is showing growing fatigue from constant crises, conflicts and narratives that offer no solutions, only additional noise.
This conversation with Apriori World brings reflections on the boundaries of the profession, on the moment when PR stops protecting clients and begins protecting the public, and on decisions made not on the basis of comfort but responsibility. We discuss situations where truth matters more than a perfect narrative, professional integrity that sometimes implies consciously losing a client, and communication that must have a clear ethical and strategic foundation if it is to maintain trust.
1. Which reputational decision from 2025 would you sign again today even without legal counsel, because you know it was morally right, even if it was risky?
For 23 years I have been connecting the profession both regionally and globally, and for a full 14 years we have been granting recognition to individuals who, by leading their teams, created added value for the organizations in which they operate. I would never allow, not even at the cost of discontinuing the PRO PR Globe People Awards, for the recognition to be paid for or for me to receive money for it, even though I have already had such opportunities.
2. In which situation this year did you realize that PR no longer protects clients from the public but rather protects the public from poor client decisions?
The public addressed by clients demands truthfulness, consistency, trust and tradition. However, fake news, fake web shops, poor stories and cheap narratives can seriously harm a client, but can equally temporarily elevate them. The influence of social media strongly changes the perception of clients, their products and services. The public, often without knowing the full truth, can instantly believe stories spreading across social networks. Globally there are many such examples, among the most well known being stories about slimming teas and preparations that, in various forms, have circulated through the media space for decades.
3. If a book titled “Things the PR Industry Doesn’t Want to Admit” were published in 2026, which chapter would bear your name?
Public tenders have become a form, not only in the communications industry but generally. In practice, public tenders often have no real meaning if the client has already decided whom they want to work with, whether due to quality, personal relationships or other interests. In such cases, the tender already has content adapted to favor a pre-selected bidder. It is a situation in which those issuing the tender, in most cases, though not all, are simply satisfying a form. I believe public tenders for communication and marketing services should be abolished, allowing clients, whether in public administration or the private sector, to make decisions based on content, quality or clearly expressed preferences.
4. Which sentence did you keep in the drawer the longest in 2025 because it was true but “too honest” to publish?
Most jobs in marketing agencies, advertising, but also PR, no longer depend on good contacts but on media house price lists.
5. What was the moment when you had to choose between a perfect narrative and an uncomfortable truth, and what did you learn then about your own boundaries?
Unfortunately, despite the work of relevant services within media houses, there is a large number of texts in the media space that are not thoroughly verified but published primarily due to annual contracts. This particularly applies to topics related to the lifestyle industry, various preparations, and especially today, when artificial intelligence has an increasing influence in media and when there are portals fully managed by AI. We are facing a crisis of the value of humans and their knowledge. Reading some of these articles, I realized that, unfortunately, instead of content and quality, money is placed first. Money has defeated knowledge and content, and with that even truth itself has been called into question. That is why I rightly ask: does anyone today even care about the truth?
6. Which term in the PR vocabulary would you most like to ban in 2026 because fear most often hides behind it rather than strategy?
At this moment it is artificial intelligence. The reason is that artificial intelligence, as we use it today, largely relies on knowledge, experience and content created by people, while at the same time it is often used as an excuse for fear, insecurity or avoidance of responsibility for strategic thinking. Instead of discussing artificial intelligence as a tool that can improve processes, in PR vocabulary it is too often used as a cover behind which the lack of clear strategy, vision and understanding of communication is hidden.
7. Which crisis in 2025 proved that reputation depends not on messaging but on behavior, and how did that change your approach to advising clients?
There are many interesting cases, but in my perception the most interesting in the industry and the region is definitely the case of the factory producing Plazma biscuits, which was hit by a fire in the summer of 2024. However, the perception crisis continued at the beginning of this year. Particularly significant was the campaign related to Plazma biscuits, which temporarily disappeared from the market due to the crisis and whose return was later announced. Consumers loyally awaited its return, clearly demonstrating that its reputation, together with established taste habits, is extremely strong and that for many it is irreplaceable. The campaign linked to its return was well communicated and successfully responded to the crisis challenges.
8. If you had to predict one moment in 2026 when the public will collectively say “enough,” to whom will that “enough” be directed, and why?
If I had to predict one moment in 2026 when the public will collectively say “enough,” I believe it will be directed at conflicts and wars. The public is tired of constant crises, violence and insecurity, and the need for peace, stability and dialogue is becoming stronger than ever. That would be the message of all those who want a future based on cooperation rather than division.
9. Which story this year showed you that the media still recognize authenticity even when PR tries to be “too clever”?
On a global level, it is definitely the case of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Their story showed that the media still very clearly recognize authenticity, even when PR communication tries to be “too clever,” controlled or strategically overstated. Precisely in those moments it becomes visible that audiences and media value sincerity and humanity more than a perfectly packaged narrative.
10. Which crisis did you not resolve because you prevented it, and what was the first, almost imperceptible signal that a catastrophe was approaching?
Unfortunately, a confidentiality agreement does not allow me to speak about details. It is important to emphasize that we are an office with one of the largest numbers of successfully resolved crisis situations. Some are related to cases such as “Slavonski Brod, city at auction” at the Supreme Court, Pfanner juices, Telemach, and Bayer in the pharmaceutical industry. However, in response to your question I can mention only one name, without further explanation. Everything else I leave to publicly available information and research. It concerns the Fresenius company.
11. If in 2026 you had to consciously lose one client in order to preserve your professional integrity – what would be the reason?
In 2026 I would consciously lose a client to preserve my professional integrity because of a person, but also because of the company’s reputation. I would do so at the moment when I found myself in a situation where I had to communicate something that was not true or that would knowingly mislead the public.
