Singer Aleksandra Mladenović has recently spoken in detail about her long struggle with anxiety and panic attacks, describing episodes so intense that she believed she was dying. In interviews recounting the period starting from her participation in the television singing competition "Zvezde Granda," she explains that she suffered symptoms such as tunnel or reduced vision, racing heart, severe restlessness, and an overwhelming, recurrent fear of death, which led her to seek medical help and take prescribed medication. Both opposition and pro-government outlets depict this as a prolonged and serious mental health challenge rather than a passing phase, and they agree that these experiences pushed her into regular contact with doctors and therapists.
Across the spectrum, media note that Mladenović eventually turned to psychotherapy and learned strategies to cope with anxiety by accepting and enduring the attacks rather than constantly trying to escape them. There is broad agreement that her case illustrates the pressures associated with reality talent shows and the broader music industry, where sudden exposure, public scrutiny, and performance demands can aggravate underlying mental health vulnerabilities. Both sides frame her story as part of a wider social conversation about anxiety, panic disorders, and the importance of professional psychological support, highlighting that her recovery is ongoing but that she now reports feeling significantly better and more in control of her life.
Areas of disagreement
Framing of her struggle. Opposition-aligned outlets tend to frame Mladenović’s anxiety as a revealing symptom of a broader social and economic climate marked by precarity, overwork, and media exploitation, using her story to underline how ordinary citizens share similar pressures. Pro-government outlets emphasize the personal, almost heroic dimension of her journey, stressing her individual resilience, decision to seek help, and eventual improvement, while treating the wider environment as background rather than central cause. While opposition sources often underscore the chronic nature of her struggles to suggest systemic failure, pro-government narratives focus on the fact that the worst episodes are now behind her, implying the system provides adequate avenues for recovery.
Role of institutions and experts. Opposition media, where they comment, present medical and psychological institutions as overburdened and sometimes inaccessible, using Mladenović’s reliance on medication and frequent doctor visits to hint at gaps in early mental-health support and prevention. Pro-government outlets highlight that she was able to obtain medication, regular psychotherapy, and ongoing professional care, presenting this as evidence that the healthcare and mental-health system can successfully respond when needed. In opposition narratives, therapists and doctors are sometimes portrayed as last-resort fixes after institutional neglect, while in pro-government coverage they are framed as timely and effective partners in her recovery.
Societal and media responsibility. Opposition-aligned sources are more likely to stress the responsibility of television formats such as "Zvezde Granda," broader entertainment media, and a toxic celebrity culture in creating the extreme stress that triggered her anxiety, seeing her case as part of a pattern of systemic emotional exploitation. Pro-government coverage largely avoids attributing blame to major broadcasters or production houses, instead describing the show as a demanding but legitimate career springboard that simply revealed pre-existing vulnerabilities. Where opposition narratives talk about the duty of the media industry and state regulators to protect young performers, pro-government narratives focus on individual coping mechanisms and personal choices in navigating fame.
Interpretation of the public confession. Opposition outlets present her public confession as an act of social criticism and awareness-raising, suggesting that by speaking out she implicitly challenges a system that glamorizes success while hiding its psychological costs. Pro-government media cast the confession primarily as a personal, emotional testimony meant to inspire others to seek help and trust experts, emphasizing catharsis and self-help over any institutional critique. As a result, opposition coverage reads her openness as a call for collective change, whereas pro-government coverage interprets it mainly as a motivational example within an essentially functional system.
In summary, opposition coverage tends to use Aleksandra Mladenović’s story to highlight systemic pressures, institutional shortcomings, and media responsibility for widespread anxiety, while pro-government coverage tends to frame it as a deeply personal ordeal overcome through individual strength and accessible professional help, downplaying broader structural critique.
