The EU has shown that it can act when faced with an emergency. This is what he did when he banned the Kremlin’s main propaganda organs, preventing them from poisoning the European information space with their disinformation. According to an EUObserver editorial used by Rador, it was a show of strength and at the same time a message that emphasized the importance of a free press ecosystem.

The EU must now act with equal vigor against threats to press freedom that emanate from within itself.

A new report by the Union for Civil Liberties for Europe shows that media freedom and pluralism continue to erode in the EU. In some Member States, where press freedom has long been taken for granted, it is being threatened by new trends; in others, free and independent journalism is about to take its last breath.

The EU should use the upcoming Press Freedom Act as well as existing tools to reverse this trend.

Less focus, more transparency

The atrophy of media pluralism is one of the biggest threats facing the European media landscape. Access to a variety of sources of news and editorial analysis gives people the opportunity to weigh many ideas and opinions and make up their own minds about matters of public interest.

Due to the concentration of ownership in the media, there is a risk that publications are used to promote a particular agenda, political vision or business interests, often serving as a tool of the owners.

In many EU countries, such as the Czech Republic and France, the media is largely concentrated in the hands of a small group of influential people. In Hungary, the situation remains unchanged, the media landscape is controlled by the government directly or through oligarchs close to the government.

This is why media ownership transparency is important. The public must be able to know who owns the news sources they rely on and what forces – political, economic or otherwise – have the power to select and shape the news they consume.

Governments are pulling strings

Whether the press can have a free and supportive environment often depends on who holds the power. In Slovenia, press freedom suffered significantly under the previous government led by Janez Janša, who did everything possible to control the State Press Service (PSM). In November 2022, the new government passed amendments to depoliticize PSM, raising hopes for the restoration of editorial independence.

In Sweden, however, the change in the political wind looks ominous, as the new right-wing government has stepped up pressure on the PSM, accusing them of bias in their work and threatening budget cuts.

There are also fears that the new law targeting foreign spies could negatively affect the work of investigative journalists.

There are many other tactics that governments use to control the media landscape, such as the use of government advertising. In several Member States, the allocation of public advertising is unfair and not independently accepted. Public funds are directed to pro-government media, while independent media are deprived of access to this vital source of income.

In Poland and Hungary, there is absolutely no rule that would guarantee a fair distribution of state advertising. Pro-government media outlets have been receiving significantly more financial support for years, a trend that continued in 2022. The European Commission has rejected complaints that state advertising is used in bad faith in Hungary.

You write an article, you read a lawsuit

As media companies face economic and political pressures, journalists also face physical or verbal attacks, harassment, intimidation, hate speech and smear campaigns. Violence is particularly pronounced during protests and online, and women are disproportionately victims.

It is an increasingly common practice for influential politicians, companies, judges and others to use abusive lawsuits, also known as “sluggish anti-public participation” (SLAPP) lawsuits, to silence their critics.

In Croatia alone, in 2022, the Association of Croatian Journalists registered more than 950 ongoing lawsuits against publications and journalists, the total amount of compensation of which exceeds EUR 10 million. Like most EU countries, Croatia has no laws to prevent this prosecution.

How can we right the ship?

Freedom of the press is too important for elections [sau pentru a lăsa ca soarta ei să fie decisă de alegeri; exprimare neclară – n.trad.]. This is a prerequisite for a stable democracy, and it is no coincidence that in those countries where a free press faces existential threats, democracy also faces the same danger.

The EU has a variety of tools with which it can build the foundations of a truly free and diverse press. The European Press Freedom Act (EMFA) is currently undergoing a legislative procedure. Decision-makers in the EU must be courageous and adopt EMFA in its strongest form. In this way, the law can help PSM fulfill its mission, protect editorial independence and ensure transparency about who controls the news we consume.

At the same time, the EU should use its existing tools to initiate investigations against member states where media freedom and pluralism are threatened.

The commission should speed up investigations into state subsidies and merger complaints, instead of reacting years and years later. These delays have a negative impact on democracy and the rule of law in member states. Complaints about state subsidies and media concentration should be a priority.

A strong EMFA will also protect journalists from espionage and abuse, as the Anti-SLAPP Directive can. The EU has the means to reconfigure the European media landscape. And this is also an urgent need to do.

Article by Jaša Galaski and Jonathan Day (activists from the European Union for Civil Liberties) -EUOBSERVER (Rador Takeover)