Activities of Andrus ANSIP related to 2022/0277(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
European Media Freedom Act (debate)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on Establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU
Amendments (87)
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) On the other hand, providers of video-sharing platforms and other actors such as providers of social networks should be considered as online platforms or very large online platforms in the sense of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 provided that the provider does not play an active role of such kind as to give it knowledge of or control over the content uploaded to its platforms. Online platforms’ capacity to offer content without exercising editorial responsibility over it and market the ability to target users with advertising allows them to act as direct competitors to media service providers whose content they intermediate and distribute. Given the transfer of economic value in favour of online platforms, the audience measurement definition should take into account content consumed by users of media services and users of online platforms. This will ensure that all intermediaries involved in content distribution are transparent about their audience measurement methodologies so as to enable advertisers to make informed choices that drive competition.
Amendment 188 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards. Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the edin line with the media service providers' priorities and the overall editorial, the freedom of the editors-in-chief to take independent decisions in the course of their professional activity. The editor-in- chief oversees the editorial work and makes the editorial decisions. The publisher, owner, or other company management cannot interfere with the content by overriding the editor-in-chief. Any attempt by the publisher, owner, or other company management to limit ors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activ control the decisions of the editor-in-chief regarding the editorial content is considered inappropriate interference from the owner of the media service provider, which undermines editorial independence and integrity. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content as part of their everyday work contributes to ensuring a level playing field in the internal market for media services and the quality of such services. That objective is also in conformity with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients.
Amendment 192 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50 should be exempted from the requirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. Moreover, mMedia service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of that Article. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51 provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. __________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 195 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. NWhile national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU often do not have competencies related to the press sector, they are best placed to ensure the correct application of the requirements related to regulatory cooperation and a well- functioning market for media services, envisaged in Chapter III of this Regulation. In order to ensure a consistent application of this Regulation and other Union media law, it is necessary to set up an independent advisory body at Union level gathering such authorities or bodies and coordinating their actions. In the performance of its tasks and the exercise of its powers, this body should neither seek nor take instructions from any government, institution and public or private person or body. The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA), established by Directive 2010/13/EU, has been essential in promoting the consistent implementation of that Directive. The European Board for Media Services (‘the Board’) should therefore build on ERGA and replace it. This requires a targeted amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU to delete its Article 30b, which establishes ERGA, and to replace references to ERGA and its tasks as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observer, on a case-by-case basis, external experts to attend its meetings. The Board, in consultation with the Commission, should have the possibility to designate experts and observers, to attend its meetings, including in particular regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or to invite ad hoc delegates from other competent national authorities. Due to the sensitivity of the media sector and following the practice of ERGA decisions in accordance with its rules of procedure, the Board should adopt its decisions on the basis of a two-thirds majority of the votes.
Amendment 206 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rulmeasures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions ion agreement withits own initiative or upon the Commission or upon it's request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers originating from outside the Union (either established outside of the UnionEU, established outside of the EU but under jurisdiction of an EU Member State through the Directive 2010/13/EU satellite criteria or established in the EU), irrespective of the means of distribution or access, that target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries State authorities over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and de, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. In this regard, the coordinperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other meanMedia service providers must notify regulatory authorities or bodies in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ where they target or reach audiences about their operations, including specific information ofn the relevant national measir ownership structures, fin compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that mayancing sources, and editorial practices. This information should shall be madopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audie transparent and accessible to the public in order to promote accountability and confidences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, riskmedia industry. The Board shall monitor compliance with these requirements and offer comments on the efforts made by Member States to address threats to public security and defencse need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Unionpresented by such media services in collaboration with regulatory authorities or bodies.
Amendment 221 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) In the case of audiovisual media service providers under the jurisdiction of EU Member States pursuant to Article 2 of Directive 2010/13/EU, a mechanism of accelerated cooperation and assistance shall be available to ensure that audiovisual media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, in compliance with Union law. To guarantee the effectiveness of the relevant national measures, according to an opinion of the Board, a competent national authority or body could be invited by the opinion of the Board to undertake specific measures where the threats mentioned above are proven and are prejudicing or presenting a grave risk of prejudice for the several Member States or the Union. Risks to public security and defense need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements at national and European levels. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 b (new)
Recital 30 b (new)
(30b) To encourage the coherence of decisions and facilitate cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of fundamental requirements for the service provider and the service provided. The requirements shall be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies when a media service provider originating from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State. The requirements should, inter alia, cover content, ownership, economic and financial connections, editorial independence, or lack thereof from the third country state. They shall allow relevant authorities or bodies to identify and, if needed, prevent the entry into the EU market of media service providers which present a grave risk of prejudice to public security and defense, public health, or where their programs contain incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offense.
Amendment 227 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self- regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, and without prejudice to the obligations pursuant to Articles 34 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2065 and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54 and Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2065. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2065. __________________ 54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).
Amendment 230 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31 a (new)
Recital 31 a (new)
(31a) Very large online platforms shall be responsible for the content that media service providers from outside the EU publish on their platforms, targeting audiences in Member States. The responsibility of very large online platforms includes determining whether such media services prejudice or present a grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence. To that end, the platforms shall take all necessary technical and organisational measures to prevent such content from being disseminated on their platforms, in compliance with Union law, in particular according to Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. In coordination with national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board may issue opinions on appropriate measures to address such risks, and the platforms shall consider such opinions. In addition, the platforms shall provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in case their content is restricted or suspended on the platforms. The platforms shall also endeavor to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction or suspension taking effect, without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, to minimize the impact of any restriction on users’ freedom of information.
Amendment 232 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility not to accept such self-declaration where they consider that these conditions are not met. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such asshall verify the declarations submitted, notably regarding adherence to the requirements as mentioned above, with the supervising or monitoring entity. For audiovisual media services, the supervisory authority shall be the national authority or body in charge of media regulation pursuant to Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU. For other media outlets, the verification could be done with a press council, where relevant, or through the consultation of the machine- readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 235 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33 a (new)
Recital 33 a (new)
(33a) To avoid an eventual abuse of the declaration system by media service providers which do not effectively comply with the requirements stipulated in Article 17(1) of this Regulation, in case of repeated violation of the law or breach of terms and conditions, the provider of a very large online platform should invalidate a declaration of a media service provider and should inform the supervising or regulatory entity about the invalidation of such declaration. If a media service provider is operating in more than one Member State and is violating the law or breaching terms and conditions in one Member State, the provider of a very large online platform shall inform the Board, which will have to notify the regulatory authorities and bodies in the other states where the media service provider operates about the situation created by the respective media service provider.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 a (new)
Recital 36 a (new)
(36a) To ensure that the Board’s involvement and contribution to the relationship between providers of very large online platforms or search engines and media service providers in the online environment is as effective and valuable as possible, the Board should be entitled, upon request, to receive all the necessary information from the providers of very large online platforms and search engines, including the exchange of information between the providers of very large online platforms and search engines and the media service providers.
Amendment 240 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36 b (new)
Recital 36 b (new)
(36b) In collaboration with national regulatory agencies or bodies, the Board should issue an annual report on media freedom in each Member State. The report must include a transparency index and other criteria deemed necessary to assess the state of media freedom, such as the independence of media outlets, the level of media pluralism, journalists' access to information, journalists' safety, the level of media ownership concentration, the effectiveness of media self-regulation, public trust in the media, the existence of public funding for media, and the level of media literacy among the general public. The report should also include suggestions for each Member State based on the study cases chosen in consultation with national regulatory authorities or bodies to improve cooperation among national regulatory authorities or bodies and promote media freedom and plurality in the Union. The Commission should consider the report and suggestions when reviewing systematic and emergent concerns across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and may request Board cooperation in this regard.
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism or editorial independence. Such rules should take into account sectoral specificities, including the economic sustainability of the sector as a whole. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in media services which have substantial influence on the formation of public opinion or very large online platforms carrying content provided by media service providers and very large online search engines which control access and visibility to the content of media service providers, in a given media market, within a media sub- sector or across different media sectors in one or more Member States. An important criterion to be taken into account is the reduction of competing views within that market as a result of the concentration.
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria. In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment. Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market. Consideration should also be given to whether concentration would stimulate investments for a vital media market.
Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production of content. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers, rights holders and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries and incomparable measurement systems among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market. Besides media market players, right holders and advertisers, all the parties involved in producing media content, and other relevant stakeholders, should have access to audience measurement data transparently and by request where necessary. Such access will allow a more accurate understanding of audience preferences and behaviour and help inform future content production decisions. Audience measurement data should be made available in a standardized and accessible format, considering the need for confidentiality and data protection.
Amendment 267 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period and the coverage of measurement. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX [Digital Markets Act]1925, including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, cantogether with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers and independent third-party audience measurement providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers and independent third-party audience measurement providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market for media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while preserving the quality of media services and ensuring the cultural and linguistic diversity and a high level of consumer protection.
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) Directive 2001/29/EC;
Amendment 278 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
(ab) Directive 2010/13/EU and Directive (EU) 2018/1808, with the exception of Article 27 of this Regulation;
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and, Section 5 of Chapter III and Article 24, provided that those rules comply with Union law.
Amendment 288 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘media service’ means a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty, where the principal purpose of the service or a dissociable section thereof consists in providing programmes or press publications to the general public, by any means, in order to inform, entertain or educate, under the editorial responsibility of a media service provideras defined in Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘media service provider’ means a natural or legal person whose professional activity is to provide a media service and who has editorial responsibility for the cho; such as press publications within the meaning of Article of the content of the media service and determines2(4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, and audiovisual media services within the meanner in which it is organised;ing of Article 1(1) point (a) of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 299 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(7) ‘editor-in-chief’ means a natural person or a number of natural persons possibly grouped in a body, regardless of its legal form, status and composition, that takes or supervises editorial decisions within a media service provider;, who takes or supervises editorial decisions within a media service provider. The term 'editor-in-chief' includes any natural person who exercises editorial control over the content produced by the media service provider, regardless of their job title. Any person who exercises editorial control over the content produced by the media service provider, regardless of their job title or role, shall be subject to the same obligations and responsibilities as an 'editor-in-chief' under this regulation. Media service providers are restricted from creating new job titles or roles with similar functions to 'editor-in-chief' to circumvent this regulation's provisions.
Amendment 310 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12
(12) ‘national regulatory authority or body’ means theany authority or body designated by Member States pursuant to Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
(13) ‘media market concentration significantly impacting media pluralism’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service provider;, one provider of very large online platform or one provider of very large online search engine, and which has a significant impact on the structure of the media market.
Amendment 319 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting orand otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services and users of online platforms, to determine the audience size, reach and frequency for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the relatedbuying, planning, productionselling or distribution of content;
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
(15) ‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any national or regional public authority, such as national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 1 million inhabitants;
Amendment 328 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content in their own language and related to their own cultural references, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse.
Amendment 344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Public service media providers shall provide independently in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission.
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resources and the process by which they are allocated shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, mthe editor-in-chief must, within the framework of the medium's fundamental principles and purpose set by the publisher, manage the editorial work and make decisions on editorial issues. The publisher, owner, or other company management must refrain from instructing or overruling the editor-in- chief on editorial matters, nor can they demand to see print, text, or pictures or demand to see or hear program material before it is made available to the public. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. In particular, such measures shall aim to:
Amendment 380 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 385 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EUas defined in Article 2(12) shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation.
Amendment 391 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Those powers shall include in particular the power to request such persons to provide, within a reasonable time period, information and data that is proportionate and necessary for carrying out the tasks under Chapter III; the request can also be addressed to any other person that, for purposes related to their trade, business or profession, may reasonably be in possession of the information needed.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EUas defined in Article 2(12).
Amendment 406 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consultseek the views of the Commission in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables. The Board may seek the views of other interested parties.
Amendment 412 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, ion agreement with the Commission case-by-case basis, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 418 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission.
Amendment 433 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of national rulmeasures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall:
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on its own initiative or where requested by it, on regulatorythe Commission, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence. Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 440 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) on its own initiative, or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 465 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) In so far as necessary to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation with the Commission, may cooperate with competent Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organizations. To that end, the Board may establish working arrangements subject to prior approval by the Commission.
Amendment 472 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) the request was not duly justified and proportionate.
Amendment 475 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, where deemed relevant, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 482 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, where deemed relevant, without undue delay.
Amendment 489 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU, as well as their subsidiaries, sister companies and parent companies.
Amendment 491 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. TAssisted by the Board, the Commission may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.
Amendment 495 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Board shall assess the state of media freedom in each Member State and issue an annual report. The Board shall consult with relevant stakeholders, including media organizations and civil society groups, to develop the criteria necessary for the report, such as the state of the independence of media outlets, the level of media pluralism, journalists' access to information, journalists' safety, the level of media ownership concentration, the effectiveness of media self-regulation, public trust in the media, the existence of public funding for media, and the level of media literacy among the general public. The transparency index and other criteria should reflect the concerns and priorities of these stakeholders and be reviewed annually to ensure they remain relevant and effective in promoting media freedom and plurality.
Amendment 496 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Amendment 497 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers established or media services originating outside the Union
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shallWithout prejudice to Article 3 of Directive 2010/13/EU, the Board shall, upon request of the national regulatory authorities or bodies from at least two Member States, coordinate relevant measures by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned, related to the dissemination of or access by any technical means to media services provided by media service providers established outside of the Union that target audiences in the Union or media services originating from outside the Union but distributed by providers established in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, or public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence, hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreementconsultation with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. AllWithout prejudice to their powers under national law, the competent national authorities concerned, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.
Amendment 510 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States shall ensure that when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have a legal basis to take into account at least one of the following conditions: (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article
Amendment 513 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Very large online platforms shall find a solution to monitor and assess media services published by providers from outside the EU and targeting audiences in the Member States. They shall find the necessary expertise and resources to identify and evaluate content that may present a risk to public security and defence and shall work in close coordination with national regulatory authorities or bodies and the Board to ensure that such content does not pose a threat to the safety and well-being of EU citizens.
Amendment 515 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. The platforms shall regularly review and update their technical and organisational measures to prevent such content from being disseminated on their platforms in compliance with the EU legislation and the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. These measures should be designed to be effective, proportionate, and transparent.
Amendment 516 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. The platforms shall establish a transparent and accountable process for reporting on their compliance with the Regulation, including the measures taken to prevent the dissemination of content coming from media service providers from outside the EU, that may present a risk to public security and defence. These reports shall be made publicly available on the platforms' websites and shall include the following: (i) Information on the number of media services assessed; (ii) The number of content items restricted or suspended; (iii) The reasons for such restrictions or suspensions. The reports shall also include information on the measures taken to ensure compliance with the Regulation, including any changes to the technical or organizational measures used to prevent the dissemination of such content.
Amendment 517 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 e (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. The platforms shall cooperate fully with any investigations or inquiries conducted by regulatory authorities or bodies on media service providers from outside the EU, that may present a risk to public security and defence, and shall provide all required information and data to support such investigations or inquiries.
Amendment 533 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body and/or to a self- or co- regulatory mechanism, of which name and contact details shall be stated. The provider of the very large online platform shall ask the respective supervising or monitoring entity to confirm the information given by the declarant. The declaration of a media service provider shall only be deemed valid if the supervising or monitoring entities exist and can confirm the declarant's adherence to the regulations and/or codes of practice.
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In order to prevent the misuse of the declaration system, a very large online platform may invalidate the declaration of a media service provider if the media service provider has repeatedly violated national or European law or if its content has been frequently suspended or restricted on the basis of a breach of the terms and conditions following the procedure referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. The provider of a very large online platform or search engine shall inform the supervising or regulatory entity and the Board about the invalidation of the declaration.
Amendment 549 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to its obligations pursuant to Articles 24 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act]2065, to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, prior to the suspension taking effect.
Amendment 553 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.
Amendment 580 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogue to the Commission. The Commission shall take this report into account for its assessment of the compliance of the very large online platforms with their obligations relating to systemic risks mitigation pursuant to Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065.
Amendment 601 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – title
Article 21 – title
Assessment of media market concentrations significantly impacting media pluralism
Amendment 606 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significantly impact oning media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 612 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) take into account the media market in its entirety, including the online environment and very large online platforms.
Amendment 614 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. In the assessment referred to in paragraph 1, the following elements shallmay be taken into account:
Amendment 619 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the impact of the concentration on media pluralism, including a risk assessment to identify any systemic risks to media freedom and pluralism in the particular Member State, and its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non- media businesses;
Amendment 625 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, in line with national media laws and self-regulation;
Amendment 631 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability concentration would stimulate investments.
Amendment 639 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authority or body shallmay consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration significantly impacting media pluralism, where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 643 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board, on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2) and its risk assessment concerning systemic risks to media freedom and media pluralism in the particular Member State. The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.
Amendment 650 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1
1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, comparability, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination and verifiability.
Amendment 651 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Undertakings that draw revenues from advertising on the media market must delegate the measurement of audiences to independent third parties to ensure neutrality for advertising related transactions. The aggregate audience reports produced by independent third parties shall be made available upon request to relevant market operators and public authorities subject to appropriate compensation and in accordance with competition rules.
Amendment 655 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Amendment 663 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, including online platforms, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 664 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by pProviders of audience measurement systems, including online platforms, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties, shall draw up codes of conduct, with the support of national regulatory authorities or bodies, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 675 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1
1. Public funds or any other consideration or advantage granted by public authorities to media service providers and online platforms for the purposes of advertising shall be awarded according to transparent, objective, proportionate and non- discriminatory criteria and through open, proportionate and non-discriminatory procedures. This Article shall not affect public procurement rules.
Amendment 677 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Public authorities, including national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state- controlled entities at the national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:
Amendment 699 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24 a (new)
Article 24a Allocation of public funding from third countries Any media service provider or online platform which receives public funds or any other consideration or advantage for the purposes of advertising from third- countries shall annually submit a report to the national regulatory authority or body which shall include at least the following details: (a) the legal names of the entities granting public funds or other consideration or advantage; (b) the total annual amount of the public funds granted by each such entity; (c) a description and estimated value of each public funding or any other consideration or advantage. The information reported according to this paragraph shall be made publicly available.