The organisation INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING LAB MACEDONIA (IRL) publicly states it was created out of the need for an „independent platform\" free from political and corporate influences. But when a media or organisation that presents itself as independent receives huge sums of public money - in this case 180,000 euros from Macedonian Radio Television - the logical question is: how much of that independence really survives? Further attention is drawn by the fact that they themselves note that they were founded in 2017 with the support of the „International Project for Reporting on Organised Crime and Corruption\" - an international organisation whose partner in Macedonia is precisely IRL. That opens even more questions: how many foreign grants and donations have they received over the years, from whom, for what purposes, and does the public have full insight into those financial flows? Citizens have a right to know: how was this particular organisation chosen, by what criteria, for what kind of projects and with what public interest? Was there competition? Was there a public call? And what exactly did the public get for that money?

When a media outlet or organisation builds an image of absolute independence while at the same time using significant public and donor funding, transparency has to be maximal. Otherwise, trust turns into suspicion.

In a country where journalism is supposed to be a corrective for the system, the public expects clear answers - not declarative slogans about independence. Because independence is not proven by slogans, but by full financial transparency and an equal stance toward every centre of power.

Once the issue of the funds received by INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING LAB MACEDONIA (IRL) was opened in public, it is entirely natural that citizens started asking harder questions too. If an organisation that presents itself as fully independent receives substantial funds from public institutions, but also from foreign organisations and funds, then the public has a right to demand full transparency.

Today every citizen can freely ask: were some of IRL's projects and investigations commissioned, steered or financially motivated by certain centres of power? Who sets the priorities? Who decides which topics will become „big investigations\", and which will never be opened?

These questions are not an attack on journalism, but an essential part of democratic oversight. Especially when it concerns organisations that have for years built an image of moral and professional authority in society.