[ParlTrack]

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1

~~Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,~~deleted

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)

(1a) However, the EU’s role is only supportive, so consideration should be given to possibly harmonising legislation and the degree to which it should be harmonised.

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

Annika BRUNA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)

(2a) The linguistic and cultural foundations underpinning the diversity of European democratic life cannot be understood solely in terms of the unity of the internal market because diversity of opinion cannot be based on economic criteria.

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

Annika BRUNA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4

(4) However, the internal market for media services is insufficiently integrated. A number of national restrictions hamper free movement within the internal market. In particular, different national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence, insufficient cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies as well as opaque and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources make it difficult for media market players to operate and expand across borders and lead to an uneven level playing field across the Union. The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state- controlled media service providers financed by certain third countries.deleted

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

Annika BRUNA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14 a (new)

(14a) In any event, the principle of editorial freedom of media service providers must be preserved and the protection of journalistic sources reinforced.

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

Annika BRUNA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) Member States have taken different approaches to the protection of editorial independence, which is increasingly challenged across the Union. In particular, there is growing interference with editorial decisions of media service providers in several Member States. Such interference can be direct or indirect, from the State or other actors, including public authorities, elected officials, government officials and politicians, for example to obtain a political advantage. Shareholders and other private parties who have a stake in media service providers may act in ways which go beyond the necessary balance between their own business freedom and freedom of expression, on the one hand, and editorial freedom of expression and the information rights of users, on the other hand, in pursuit of economic or other advantage. Moreover, recent trends in media distribution and consumption, including in particular in the online environment, have prompted Member States to consider laws aimed at regulating the provision of media content. Approaches taken by media service providers to guarantee editorial independence also vary. As a result of such interference and fragmentation of regulation and approaches, the conditions for the exercise of economic activities by media service providers and, ultimately, the quality of media services received by citizens and businesses are negatively affected in the internal market. It is thus necessary to put in place effective safeguards enabling the exercise of editorial freedom across the Union so that media service providers can independently produce and distribute their content across borders and service recipients can receive such content.deleted

2023/05/09
Committee: LIBE

6 Amendments of Annika BRUNA related to 2022/0277(COD)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024