Below is the report entitled Museum of Genocide Victims in the Media: Internet and Social Networks
At the initiative of the Director of the Museum of Genocide Victims (hereinafter, the Museum), Prof. Dr. VeljkoĐurićMišina, I have done an analysis of the presence of the Museum in the media, namely the visibility of that institution on the Internet and social networks. The report was compiled on the basis of quantitative and qualitative research of the presence of the Museum on the Internet, in the following order:
1) Quantitative analysis based on Internet surveys,
2) Interview with a digital marketing expert and
3) Research methods and limitations.
The first part analyzes the structure of the compiled samples and answers and then draws the appropriate conclusions based on the results obtained. In the second part, in addition to the qualitative analysis of the appearance and content of the Internet platform used by the Museum for the purpose of presenting its activities, certain recommendations on possible ways of managing these platforms have been given. In the final consideration, we pointed out certain limitations of the research itself.
1. Analysis of the survey "Museum of Genocide Victims: Visibility on the Internet"
In the period from February 17 to 24, the Internet survey "Museum of Genocide Victims: Visibility on the Internet" was conducted using the Google Survey Toolkit in order to measure the visibility of the Museum on the Internet.  The manner of researching the topic was conditioned by the very subject of the research. A sample of 287 subjects was collected seven days into the research.
The structure of the collected sample is as follows:
Male (141 respondents, or 49.47%),
Women (144 respondents, or 50.53%);
Total Answers: 285
From 18 to 25 years of age: 59 respondents, or 22.6%,
From 26 to 33 years of age: 98 respondents, or 37.5%,
From 34 to 41 years of age: 60 respondents, or 22.9%,
From 42 to 49 years of age: 27 respondents, or 10.3%,
From 50 to 57 years of age: 8 respondents, or 3.07%,
From 58 to 65 years of age: 1 respondent, or 0.38%,
From 66 to 73 years of age: 7 respondents, or 2.68%,
From 74 to 81 years of age: 1 respondent, or 0.38%;
Total Answers: 261
Serbia - 228 respondents, or 80.28%,
Croatia - seven respondents, or 2.46%, respectively,
Bosnia and Herzegovina - 47 respondents, or 16.5%
Slovenia - one respondent, or 0.35%,
Montenegro - four respondents and 1.4% respectively
Macedonia - one respondent, or 0.35%;
Total Answers: 284
Primary school - one respondent, or 0.35%,
Secondary school - 50 respondents, or 17.6%, respectively,
High school - 15 respondents, or 5.28%, respectively,
Higher education (faculty, graduate, master, master, doctor) - 220 respondents, or 77.46%;
Total Answers: 284
Unemployed - 21 respondents, or 7.37%
Pensioner - 10 respondents, or 3.5%,
Student - 61 respondents, or 21.4%
The private owner (owner or employee of the private sector) - 89 respondents, or 31.2%
Employed in state or social enterprises - 69 respondents, or 24.2%, respectively,
Independent work (freelancer) - 42 respondents, or 14.7%, respectively,
Farmer - 1 respondent, or 0.35%;
Total Answers: 285
The aim of the survey was to answer the following questions:
1) Did you know before the survey of the existence of a specialized institution for investigating the suffering in the territory of the former Yugoslavia - Museum of Genocide Victims?
With this question, I measured how many respondents know about the existence and activities of the Museum and, more importantly, how much of them do not know! It was an introduction to the next question that was intended to reveal, from the sample of respondents who responded positively, what are the means of information through which they learned about this institution.
2) If you knew about the existence and work of the Museum, it was through: a) TV / newspaper, b) Friends, c) Social networks, d) Professional publications (monographs / anthologies) and e) I answered the previous question with "no".
As in the case of the first question, the goal was to reduce the collected data to a verifiable and reliable data on the visibility of the Museum on the Internet. Thus, the last question was to gain insights into the ways in which the respondents, who knew about and follow the work of the Museum, were informed of its existence and activities, e.g. through social networks / the Internet. The question was:
3) If you follow the work of the Museum via social networks / the Internet, you do it most often through: a) Official Website of the Museum, b) Facebook pages of the Museum, v) Youtube Accounts of the Museum, g) Blogs, and d) I answered question number 1 with "no".
Answers to the questions:
1) Before the survey, were you aware of the existence of a specialized institution for investigating the suffering in the territory of the former Yugoslavia - Museum of Victims of Genocide?
Yes - 141 respondents, or 49.47%, respectively,
No - 146 respondents, or 51.23%
Total Answers: 285
2) If you knew about the existence and work of the Museum, it was through:
TV / newspaper - 41 respondents, or 14.86%,
Friends - 71 respondents, or 25.7%
Social networks - 46 respondents, or 16.67%,
Professional publications (monographs / anthologies) - 23 respondents, or 8.3%
To the previous question, I answered "no" - 132 respondents, or 47.8%
Total Answers: 276
3) If you monitor the work of the Museum through social networks / the Internet, you do it most often through:
The official website of the Museum - 42 respondents, or 16.15%
Facebook page - 66 respondents, or 25.38%,
Museum’s Youtube Channel - 7 respondents, 2.69%
Blogs - 18 respondents, or 6.9%
I answered the first question with "no" - 147 respondents, or 56.5%.
Total Answers: 260
What the results of the survey are telling us:
When it comes to the structure of the collected sample, the obtained results mostly fall within the expectations. For example, the three largest groups among the respondents are, at the same time, the youngest: 18-25 (59 respondents, 22.6%), 26-33 (98 respondents, 37.5%) and 34-41 (60 respondents, 23%). In total, 227 respondents, or 78.1% of the total sample. The Internet is used mainly by the younger part of the population and we did not encounter any major deviations here. 
Also, most respondents came from the following countries: Serbia (228 respondents, 80.3%), Bosnia and Herzegovina (47 respondents, 16.5%) and Montenegro (4respondents, 1.4%), which is 279 respondents, or 98.2% of the total sample. The activities of the Museum of Genocide Victims, although focused on the entire area of the former Socialist Yugoslavia, have, until now, mostly been focused on the three countries mentioned above. Therefore, this result is not surprising.
Similarly, the education degrees of respondents is predominantly higher education. Specifically, 220 respondents (77.5%). Not only are educated individuals more and more often using the Internet, but the very topic of the Museum is quite specific which makes it more interesting to those with higher levelsof education. 
When it comes to employment status, the three largest groups are: private sector employees (89 respondents, 31.2%), employees of the state (69 respondents, 24.2%) and students (61 respondents, 21.4%). They comprise 219 respondents, or 76.8% of the total sample. What is interesting is that the group of self-employedrespondents (the so-called freelancers), which mainly uses the Internet to fulfill their work tasks, is not among the top three with only 42 respondents, or 14.7% of the sample. However, this is two, or three, times the respondents of the bottom three groups (the unemployed, pensioners and farmers).
When it comes to the answers to the above questions, the obtained results reflect the current visibility of the Museum on the Internet / social networks. Positive answers to the first question are 49.5%, i.e. 141 respondents,negative responses are 51.2%, i.e. 146 respondents. The remainder of 0.3% belongs to the respondents who did not answer the first question at all.
The respondents found out about the existence and work of the Museum mainly via the Internet / social networks (16.7% and 46 respondents). The respondents mostly knew about the Museum through friends (25.7%, 71 respondents), while a portion of them were acquianted through traditional means of information (TV / newspaper - 14.9%, 41 respondents). Expectedly, the smallest percentage of respondents knew about the Museum through professional publications, 8.3% or 23 respondents. The number of those who did not know about the Museum until this online survey was 47.8 %, or 132 respondents.
As for the final question, the Internet platform through which the Museum's work is most closely monitored is the Facebook page - 25.4% or 66 respondents. The second, most relevant, platform for respondents is the official website of the Museum with 16.2% or 42 respondents, followed by various blogs (6.9%, 18 respondents) and the Youtube Channel(2.7% or 7 respondents). Again, the percentage of those who did not know about the Museum until this survey remained around 51% mark, or more precisely - 56.5% (147 respondents).
Given that 78.1% of the respondents belong to the 18-41 age bracket, and that 77.5% of the respondents have a university degree, it could be said that the result of only 49.5% or 141 respondents with positive responses to the first question  indicates that the presence of the Museum on the Internet / social networks is not at a satisfactory level. This conclusion can be backed up by the following data: for example, the most common way people learn about the work of this institution is through friends - 71 respondents, compared to the 46 who have learned about the Museum via the Internet / social networks. The difference between the twois even greater than compared to the tradional forms of communication, such as TV / newspaper (71:41). On the other hand, the positive finding is that the official website of the Museum is in the second place of importance in terms of the number of respondents who follow the Museum’s work via Internet. Of course, the first place, predictably, belongs to the most popular Internet platform in this part of the world,  Facebook.
The conclusion that arises from the analysis of the obtained results consists of the following two theses:
1) the current Internet presence of the Museum of Genocide Victims is not at a satisfactory level;
2) the current presence of the Museum of Genocide Victims, however, is a good starting point from which, with the appropriate approach, it can reach a much larger number of Internet / social network users. 
It is precisely from this conclusions that the need for a quantitative analysis of the presence of the Museum on the Internet / social networks to be supplemented by a qualitative analysis. More importantly, there is a need to give appropriate recommendations in order to improve the existing practice of the Museum when it comes to social networks. For these reasons, we consulted with an expert in the field of advertising via the Internet / social networks.
Stefan Radojković, historian and PhD student at the Faculty of Political Sciences, University of Belgrade
 The Internet Survey (Google) started on Saturday, February 17th at 16:00 CET and ended on Saturday, February 24, 2018 at 16:00 CET.
 Ipsos Strategic Marketing, Research on Youth and New Media in Serbia, Belgrade, 2010, p. 7; For more information, see: http://www.mc.rs/upload/documents/presentations/Mladi-i-novi-mediji.pps. (Retrieved, March 21, 2018).
[3 M. Kovačević, K. Pavlović i V. Šutić, Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Serbia, 2017, Republic Institute for Statistics, Belgrade, 2017, p. 18 and 23.
 The question was: "Before this survey,did you know of the existence of a specialized institution for investigating the suffering in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, i.e. Museum of Genocide Victims“?
 R. Laćarak, "The Most Popular Social Network in Serbia", IT Magazine, for more information go to: https://itmagazin.info/najpopularnije-drustvene-mreze-u-srbiji/ (Retrieved, March 29, 2018)
 Current following of the Facebook page and Youtube channels of the Museum of Genocide Victims is rather modest, according to digital marketing criteria, with 833 and 90 followers respectively.