169 Amendments of Ilana CICUREL related to 2022/0277(COD)
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1a) Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaties, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Recipients of media services in the Union (natural persons who are nationals of Member States or benefit from rights conferred upon them by Union law and legal persons established in the Union) should be able to effectively enjoy the freedom to receive free and pluralistic media services produced in accordance with editorial freedom in the internal market. In fosteracilitating the cross-border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipients should be ensured in the internal market. Thate rights of recipients of media services would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information and the requirement to respect media freedom and media pluralism pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’). It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers, and in compliance with Article 22 of the Charter that the Union shall respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity. It is thus necessary to harmonise certain aspects of national rules related to media services, also taking into consideration Article 167 of the TFEU on respecting the national and regional diversity of the Member States and the need of the general public to receive the content provided by media service providers also in official languages, when appropriate. In the final report of the Conference on the Future of Europe, citizens called on the EU to further promote media independence and pluralism, in particular by introducing legislation addressing threats to media independence through EU-wide minimum standards46. _________________ 46 Conference on the Future of Europe – Report on the Final Outcome, May 2022, in particular proposal 27 (1) and 37 (4).
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) For the purposes of this Regulation, the definition of a media service should be limited to services as defined by the Treaty and therefore should cover any form of economic activity, including also non- standard forms of employment. This definition should exclude user-generated content uploaded to an online platform unless it constitutes a professional activity normally provided for consideration (be it of financial or of other nature). It should also exclude purely private correspondence, such as e-mails, as well as all services that do not have the provision of audiovisual or audio programmes or press publications as their principal purpose, meaning where the content is merely incidental to the service and not its principal purpose, such as advertisements or information related to a product or a service provided by websites that do not offer media services. The definition of a media service should cover in particular television or radio broadcasts, on-demand audiovisual media services, audio podcasts or press publications. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.
Amendment 143 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In the digitalised media market, providers of video-sharing platforms or, very large online platforms or very large online search engines may fall under the definition of media service provider. In general, such providers play a key role in the content organisation, including by automated means or algorithms, but do not exercise editorial responsibility over the content to which they provide access. However, in the increasingly convergent media environment, some providers of video-sharing platforms or very large online platforms have started to exercise editorial control over a section or sections of their services. Therefore, such an entitwhen such entities exercise editorial control, they could be qualified both as a video-sharing platform provider or a very large online platform provider and as a media service provider.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of the internal media market, it is essential not only to guarantee the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic ethical and professional standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content of political or societal interest at local, national or international level without any interference by the public authority or influenced by commercial interests. Such right does not entail any correspondent obligation on any given media service provider to adhere to standards not set out explicitly by law. Such quality media services are also an antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference.
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. Therefore, the independence of public service media and autonomy in exercising their public service mission is in the public interest and necessary for ensuring democracy, pluralism, social cohesion and cultural and social diversity, including for participation of the public. Independence is particularly important during electoral periods to ensure citizens have access to impartial and quality information. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. Thise abovementioned risks can also materialise in politically appointed senior management who exerts pressure on the editorial independence of journalists and editors for partial political or commercial interests. These situations may lead to biased or partial media coverage, distort competition in the internal media market and negatively affect access to independent and impartial media services. It is thus necessary that public service media should have ensured independence and editorial autonomy from government, political or economic actors or any other vested interest. It is also necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. Public service media management should be independent, impartial and free from political or commercial interests, with clear rules for any conflict of interests, while the appointment and dismissal of the persons or bodies constituting the highest decision-making authority within the public service media provider should be made according to predictable, transparent, non-discriminatory and objective criteria taking into account the opinion of public media service employees, particularly editorial boards and journalists. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficientadequate, sustainable and stable funding to fulfil their mission that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on the basis of predictable, transparent, independent, impartial and non-discriminatory procedures, on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 209 #
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 Council50should be exempted from the requirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions.Moreover,media 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.TMedia service providers are encouraged to develop self-regulatory instruments in cooperation with relevant stakeholders, establishing the principles of independence, reliability and freedom of information. In this regard, the Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation 51provides 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 and ensuringeditorial 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, ame while recognising the need to follow the highest professional and ethical standards in the decision-making editorial process and ing 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).tegrity of media coverage of news and current affairs. _________________ 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 213 #
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. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU 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. 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. National regulatory authorities or bodies should have adequate financial and human resources proportional to the additional tasks conferred to them under this Regulation to perform necessary tasks necessary within Member States and enable the independent and effective functioning of the Board and application of this Regulation. National regulatory authorities should enjoy full operational autonomy and be independent of any political and commercial interference. The independence of national regulatory authorities participating in the activities of the Board is a necessary condition for effective performance of the Board’s tasks and credibility of the established advisory body on the European level. It is thus necessary that the Board includes, in the adoption of its rules of procedure, a possibility to temporarily suspend the participation of a member of the Board in a clear, transparent and non- discriminatory procedure, should this member have repeatedly failed to demonstrate its independence.
Amendment 220 #
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 and its Advisory Group should also have the possibility and are encouraged to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observers, including in particularexperts to seek additional information, explanation, research and expertise for particular regulatory matters or member states affected . The Board and its Advisory Group should also have a possibility to organise structured dialogue with experts and representatives of media sector, such as media policy experts, media service providers, journalistic organisations, self-regulatory bodies and media associations who may be invited to contribute in-depth analysis, research, on- ground information, providing valuable insights for the Board to effectively perform its tasks. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, should also be able to invite regulatory authorities or bodies from candidate countries, potential candidate countries, EEA countries, or 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 227 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23a) The Board members are national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU and have only competencies limited to matters related to audiovisual media services. However, the Board will need to address issues beyond its current remit, particularly on issues related to press publications, and it is therefore necessary to create an additional advisory body (“Advisory Group”) consisting of experts and representatives of the media sector to aid the Board, particularly on regulatory matters concerning media freedom, press freedom for press publications, assessing editorial independence of media service providers or media pluralism in the internal market in terms of market concentrations or where national measures affect media pluralism and editorial independence. Moreover, the Advisory Group and its wide range of stakeholders and representatives from media sector should be better placed to examine adherence of media service providers to ethical and professional standards in order to be designated as trustworthy vis-a-vie their position in the online environment. The Advisory Group should provide more inclusive and structured contributions to the tasks of the Board and be comprised of experts, media representatives of self-regulatory or co- regulatory organisations such as journalistic associations, media or press councils, and representatives of civil society to provide the necessary information, research, analysis, and recommendation to assist and advise the Board for it to be able to base its decisions or draw up its opinions. Such representatives should be widely recognised and accepted experts or media freedom watchdogs acting on behalf of media service providers within Member States or on a European level. Since provisions of this Regulation relates to an extremely sensitive matter concerning media freedom, and assessing editorial independence should not be limited only to regulators but include a wider range of stakeholders, and because Member states have diverging rules relating and different self-regulatory practices in force, it is necessary to have a sound, inclusive and comprehensive analysis and recommendations from the Advisory Group which can provide insight based on first-hand experience in Member States and according to a particular field of expertise to assess such matters. The Advisory Group should be appointed with transparent, non-discriminatory and objective criteria and be comprised of permanent employees who have sufficient expertise in media policy.
Amendment 228 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23 b (new)
Recital 23 b (new)
(23b) The Advisory Group to the Board should be positioned within the structure of the Board and advise the Board in performing its tasks while keeping necessary autonomy to act independently, including from the Board itself. The Advisory Group should have the possibility to invite additional experts and media representatives, whether in a structured dialogue or otherwise, to help them assess and contribute to their work based on their needs at their own discretion for the application of this Regulation. The Board should be able to request consultation or recommendation from the Advisory Group, while the Advisory Group should be empowered to issue recommendations and draw attention to possible breaches to the Board concerning the application of this Regulation at its own discretion or when requested by the Commission or European Parliament. Advisory Group should also make their recommendations or reports on the results from consultations with relevant stakeholders publicly available, independently from the Board. Such contributions of the Advisory Group should provide the Board with adequate information to base their decisions upon it while complementing and feeding into existing established mechanisms in the Union, such as annual Rule of Law reports or self-regulatory initiatives such as Media Pluralism Monitoring. Moreover, the Advisory Group and its work could also be useful for Member States, which can also request the Advisory Group to provide them assistance and rely on their expertise in the preparation of legislative, regulatory or administrative measures or how such measures taken might be liable to affect media pluralism and editorial independence of media service providers in the internal market in order to avoid possible market distortions and harmonise the rules in advance for the functioning of the internal market for media services. Additionally, the Advisory Group’s contributions should enable to Board to recognise outstanding issues, which the Board should take into consideration in preparation for its annual work programme and main deliverables to be comprehensive and responsive to the needs and challenges of the media sector and its stakeholders.
Amendment 230 #
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 rules 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 in agreement with the Commission or upon its requestor any other tasks in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively 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 task. The Commission should allocate adequate financial resources for effective and independent functioning of the Board’s secretariat and Advisory Group. The secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks. The Advisory body can be requested to advise the Board on regulatory matters concerning audiovisual regulatory matters and for coordination tasks for this Regulation, while for the press publications or press sector or examining adherence of media service providers to editorial standards and its independence it should be a necessary condition for the Board to consult the Advisory Group and include their view when taking any decisions or draw up opinions.
Amendment 251 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regarding this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission mayshould issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when neededcessary. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. This is the case in particular for national measures taken under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU on the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. In view of the abundance of information and the increasing use of digital means to access the media, it is important to ensure prominence for content of general interest, in order to help achieving a level playing field in the internal market and compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Given the possible impact of the national measures taken under Article 7a on the functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. It would also be useful to provide guidance on national measures taken under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU with a view to ensuring the public availability of accessible, accurate and up-to-date information related to media ownership. In the process of preparing its guidelines, the Commission should be assisted by the Board. The Board should in particular share with the Commission its regulatory, technical and practical expertise regarding the areas and topics covered by the respective guidelines.
Amendment 265 #
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 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 over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to national and public security and defence, public health, incite to violence, hatred or promote terrorist activities, including committing terrorist acts. In this regard, the coordination 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 means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter national and public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, at its own initiative or at the request of the national regulatory authority, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence 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 Union.
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms and very large online search engines 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. Providers or very large online platforms and very large online search engines should have clear mechanisms in place to ensure the right to the freedom and pluralism of media. This should apply in a non-discriminatory way to all Member States and languages throughout the Union, providing adequate human resources for the compliance of this Regulation in all geographical regions. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, 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 2634 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2065, 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 Regulations (EU) 2019/1150 and 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. 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 or otherwise suspensions taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2022/2065. 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]. _________________ 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)2065.
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) It is furthermore justified, in view of an expected positive impact on freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, that where media service providers adhere to certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their complaints against decisions of providers of very large online platforms and very large online search engines are treated with priority and without undue delay.
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms and very large online search engines should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that theybe designated as meeting 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 as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Providers of very large online platforms should rely on information on which media service providers are designated to comply with all conditions stated in this Regulation, received by the Board, regarding adherence to these requirements. The Commission should adopt a Delegated Act, where it should lay down in law transparent, non-discriminatory and objective mechanisms on the application of media service providers and on how the Board designates trustworthy media service providers and their adherence to these requirements without creating unnecessary burden to media service providers, or exclude smaller media service providers. Adherence to such requirements should be determined after assessments of media service providers on a case-by-case basis or automatically when media service providers are members of widely accepted self- regulatory body for media with confirmation by the Advisory Group. Adherence to such requirements should particularly rely on editorial independence from Member States, political parties and third countries, and be designated by the Board only after verification by the Board’s Advisory Group following a structured dialogue with relevant stakeholders, self-regulatory media bodies and civil society, which should be taken in account, and follow established and widely accepted practices such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. Very large online platforms and very large search engines shall accept the designated media service providers, while the Board should make its assessments publicly available. 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 declarsignations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 304 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 36
Recital 36
(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation. The Commission may, where relevant, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act] and may ask the Board2065 and may ask the Board and its Advisory Group to support it to this effect.
Amendment 306 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Recipients of audiovisual media services should be able to effectively choose the audiovisual content they want to watch according to their preferences. Their freedom in this area may however be constrained by commercial practices in the media sector, namely agreements for content prioritisation between manufacturers of devices or providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, such as connected televisions, and media service providers. Prioritisation can be implemented, for example, on the home screen of a device, through hardware or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user- friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface controlling and managing access to, and use of, audiovisual media services, without prejudice to measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations. Audiovisual media services of general interest, insofar as they are defined as meeting the objectives of media pluralism, freedom of expression, access to reliable information, social cohesion or cultural diversity, play a key role in the formation of public opinion and should, moreover, have a prominent presence by default on devices or user interfaces, prior to costumisation, in order to facilitate their access. Services or content of general interest should not be limited to public service media, but also include services or content provided by commercial media services providers, as they may represent a greater range of views on the political spectrum.
Amendment 321 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can negatively affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market. They include to provide access to a plurality of views and to reliable sources of information to citizens and businesses alike. Such measures can take various forms such as, for example, rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors; they also include decisions related to licensing, such as revoking or preventing from renewing licences or in any way unjustifiably blocking or limiting their ability to broadcast, print or otherwise disseminate content, authorisation or prior notification for media service providers. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty while ensuring the freedom to provide media services without distorting pluralistic media markets in the internal market, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non- discrimination and proportionality. Any measures that can negatively affect media pluralism and editorial independence or operations of media service providers, including when implementing EU legislation in the internal market, should be communicated well in advance in order to prevent possible disruptions and allow media service providers and relevant stakeholders enough time to assess the impact of such measures on media pluralism or editorial freedom.
Amendment 329 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38a) While this Regulation should not hamper the implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU, it should be recalled that the Commission has to initiate infringement proceedings against national implementations that are manifestly contrary to the spirit of the text of the Directive, and to the values of the EU as enshrined in Article 2 TEU and in the Charter.
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on the Commission’s request, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State, or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State. n order to adequately assess the possible impacts of such measures, the Advisory Group should be able to scrutinise and competently analyse them with the necessary expertise, taking into account the general situation of the media landscape in the concerned Member States and inputs from stakeholders, to provide sufficient insight to the Board. It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on its own initiative or on the request of the Commission, European Parliament or any legitimate entity, particularly affected media service providers, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to prevent possible abuses or misuses of administrative or legislative powers by the Member States to infringe on the freedom of media service providers providing services in the internal market. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State, or when the concerned media service provider has an influence on the formation of public opinion in a particular Member State. Member States may, if they wish to do so, request Advisory Group to assist them before adopting any administrative or legislative changes examining the impact of their proposed measures regarding the functioning of the internal market for media service providers. Such assistance should aim to achieve prior harmonization efforts of possible changes to the rules governing media markets, prevent distortion in the internal market, and promote clarity and predictability for cross-border conformity of the regulatory media environment throughout the Union.
Amendment 338 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helpenabling citizens to access relevant information for participateion in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systemsnational law to ensurable assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact onor already have an impact on media pluralism or editorial independence. The assessment should allow for addressing non- economic sensitivities pertinent to media pluralism orand editorial independence of media service providers within Member State’s media ecosystems. 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. To ensure citizens the ability to form their own opinion and bring clarity to media market players, it is necessary to provide them with adequate information and objective overview regarding the structure of media market, including the diversity of media ownership, existing market concentration in Member States, and its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of media service providers. 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 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. Moreover, local and regional media market players play a key role in shaping public opinion. It is, therefore, necessary to take into account the sustainability of a strong, pluralistic and well-funded local and regional media ecosystem, especially when assessing concentrations in the media market. When conducting this assessment, national regulatory authorities or bodies should indeed pay particular attention to the geographical reach of the media service providers involved so as to ensure that all recipients of media service can access pluralistic news and current affairs when accessing local and regional media.
Amendment 342 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralismin consultation with relevant stakeholders, particularly media experts and journalistic associations, as well as other self-regulatory media bodies organised by the Advisory Group, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, and act as watchdogs of editorial independence of media service providers, should be involved in the assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence, including where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. The consultation should be inclusive and reported by the Advisory Group, and it should be taken into account by national regulatory authorities or bodies when drafting assessments of media market concentration's impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. National regulatory authorities or bodies, when setting procedural rules in their national law that will allow for an assessment of media market concentrations, should examine the overall level of existing media market concentrations and its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence within six months of the application of this Regulation. The examination should focus on the current structure of the media market, such as the diversity of media players on the market, the impact of concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, and the possible influence on the formation of public opinion. The Board, assisted by its Advisory Group and in consultation with the Commission, should help regulatory authorities or bodies by providing guidance on factors and criteria taken into account and organise consultations in a structured dialogue with relevant stakeholders. In order to foster legal certainty and ensure that the rules and procedures are genuinely geared at protecting media pluralism and editorial independence, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance, while ensuring the conformity of procedural rules for such criteria with this Regulation.
Amendment 351 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinion, assisted by the Advisory Group, should be empowered to provide guidance and organise consultation or structured dialogue with relevant stakeholders in Member State on the criteria used for the draft assessments on media market concentrations’ impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to a national regulator or bodies and provide opinions on draft decisions or draft assessments by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentraexisting concentration or notifiable concentrations relating to mergers and acqusitions may affect the functioning of the internal media market. This would be the case, for example, where such concentrations involve at least one undertaking established in another Member State or operating in more than one Member State or result in media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion in a given media market. Moreover, where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, t. The Board should be able to provide an opinion, on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to or European Parliament on the assessment or decision taken by national regulatory authorities or bodies, considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or impacting media pluralism and editorial independence. The Board should, where applicable, base its opinions on the results of consultation and opinions of its own expert Advisory Group. The Commission should issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.
Amendment 358 #
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 accountThe editorial independence of media is crucial for well-functioning media markets where quality media content, namely content produced independently and in line with deontological standards, can freely flow across borders without interference from both public authorities and private owners. Such interference also discourages media companies from expanding their services to other markets due to the high risk of interference and, subsequently, distortion of the market. The preservation of editorial independence in the media is essential for ensuring the continued growth and vitality of the internal market and for upholding the broader democratic values and principles upon which the European Union was founded. With a view to ensuring the editorial independence of media service providers, it is necessary to assess current state of market structure, adherence of media service providers to ethical and professional standards, their editorial independence and safeguards within media service providers. 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. Furthermore, the results of the annual Commission Rule of Law report presented in the chapters on press freedom as well as the risk assessment made annually by the Media Pluralism Monitor or independent external assessments such as World Press Freedom Index or other widely accepted non-governmental organisations, should be considered in determining the overall climate for media and the effects of the concentrations in question over media pluralism and editorial independence, under these specific conditions. 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.
Amendment 363 #
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 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 incomparable measurement systems and information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market. Such providers of proprietary audience measurement systems developed without market governance or outside of European or national industry standards agreed by the relevant national self-regulatory bodies shall provide the same information on methodologies as the one published by self-regulatory bodies that govern the agreed industry standards on audience measurement.
Amendment 376 #
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]2065, including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 380 #
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 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 390 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market for media services, including as regards the degree of existing concentration of the media market at national and regional level and risks of foreignsuch concentration poses on the editorial independence and media pluralism. Moreover, such monitoring should aim to assess the risks of foreign and domestic information manipulation and interference. It should be conducted independently, on the basis of a robust list of key performance indicators, developed and regularly updated by the Commission, in consultation with the Board. Additionally, for the purposes of facilitating effective application of this Regulation, the Commission should establish a user-friendly alert mechanism for media service providers or any relevant interested party to report any issues they encounter or detect risks concerning the application of this Regulation, which will also help the Commission identify and address potential violations more quickly. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market, to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence, and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment, regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environmentthe position of media service providers in a digital environment and adherence to obligations and implementation of such obligation on the very large online platforms and search engines, as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation. In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved, while the results of such monitoring exercises should be presented annually to the European Parliament. The Commission, as prescribed by the treaties of the European Union, specifically where uniform conditions for implementing legally binding Union acts are needed to confer implementing powers on the Commission and where the Commission promotes the general interest of the Union, should take appropriate initiatives to that end, which in the case of this Regulation means taking legal action when the Board issues opinion that show a breach of the rules laid out in this Regulation.
Amendment 415 #
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 or stricter 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 441 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9a) ‘online platform’ means a service as defined in Article 3, point (i) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;
Amendment 443 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
(10) ‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article 25(4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act]2065;
Amendment 444 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)
(10a) ‘provider of a very large online search engine’ means a provider of an online search engine that has been designated as a very large online search engine pursuant to Article 33(4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act];
Amendment 453 #
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 of users of online platforms to determine the audience size, reach and frequency for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, production or distribution of content;
Amendment 489 #
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, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers without any interference, to the benefit of the public discourse.
Amendment 524 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Public service media providers shall be editorially independent, and their autonomy guaranteed to provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission.
Amendment 531 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
The duration of their term of office shall be established by national law, and be adequate and sufficient to ensure effective independence of the public media service provider. They may be dismissed before the end of their term of office only exceptionally where they no longer fulfil the legally predefined conditions required for the performance of their duties laid down in advance by national law or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance byat national lawevel.
Amendment 535 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate, sustainable and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resources shall be to meet the objectives therein. Those resources and the processes by which they are allocated shall be transparent and such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 547 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall put in place a mechanism or designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3.
Amendment 553 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – title
Article 6 – title
6 Duties of media service providers providing news and current affairsexercising editorial responsibility over content
Amendment 554 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Media service providers providing news and current affairsexercising editorial responsibility over content shall make easily and directly accessible in a user-friendly format to the recipients of their services the following information:
Amendment 562 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) their legal name and contact(s), contact and registration details;
Amendment 573 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning ofas defined in Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council.;
Amendment 574 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the interests, links or activities of their direct, indirect, and beneficial owners in other businesses, including to politically exposed persons(s) and their close associates as defined in Article 3 points 9 and 11, respectively, of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 590 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. In the event of any changes, media service providers shall make information in accordance with paragraph 1 publicly available as soon as possible and no later than within 30 days of such changes.
Amendment 600 #
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, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a viewshall put in place measures to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. In particular, such measures shall aim to:
Amendment 618 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) guarantee that editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activityial decisions can be taken freely within the editorial line of the media service provider; and
Amendment 629 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers shall disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision or influence editorial decisions of news and current affairs, and disclose any attempts to interfere in their editorial independence regardless of ownership or any formal or informal connection to the media service provider.
Amendment 630 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Member States shall entrust a relevant national regulatory authority or body with developing and maintaining a dedicated online media ownership database and monitor the adherence of media service providers to obligations from paragraph 1. Such the national regulatory authority or body may request additional information from media service providers to assess the accuracy of the information.
Amendment 633 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 647 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member states shall ensure that national regulatory authorities or bodies responsible for the application of this Regulation shall be independent and guarantee their full organisational and functional autonomy.
Amendment 654 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the national regulatory authorities or bodies have adequate financial, human and technical resources and expertise to carry out their tasks under this Regulation. Allocation of such resources by the Member States shall be adequate and increased proportionally to the additional tasks conferred upon them under this Regulation.
Amendment 666 #
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 691 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair and its Vice-Chairs. The Board shall elect a Chair and four Vice-Chairs from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair and the Vice-Chairs shall be two years.
Amendment 699 #
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 and the European Parliament informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 702 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. The Board shall have its own Advisory Group consisting of media policy experts and representatives from self- regulatory bodies such as press or media councils, journalistic associations, civil society or representatives from media service providers.
Amendment 705 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings and the Advisory Group may invite experts established in the Member States to attend its meetings and contribute to the tasks of the Board.
Amendment 719 #
6a. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers established outside the Union to attend its meetings.
Amendment 720 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 7
Article 10 – paragraph 7
7. The Board shall take decisions by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights.
Amendment 722 #
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 Commissconsultation with the Commission. The Board shall inform the European Parliament of the rules of procedures it adopts or any substantial changes it makes to it. Its rules of procedures shall include mechanisms to temporarily suspend the voting rights of members by a two-thirds majority of its members, should the independence of national regulator or body be in question.
Amendment 741 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission.
Amendment 748 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Commission shall allocate adequate financial and human resources for the effective functioning of the secretariat.
Amendment 749 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The Advisory Group shall be appointed in a transparent, objective, and non-discriminatory procedure.
Amendment 758 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Article11a Advisory Group of the Board
Amendment 759 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 b (new)
Article 11 b (new)
Article11b The European Advisory Group to the Board for Media Services is established.
Amendment 760 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 c (new)
Article 11 c (new)
Article11c The Advisory Group shall be a body consisting of representatives of media sector, such as experts on media policy and media regulatory matters, and representatives of media sector from self- regulatory bodies such as journalistic associations, media or press councils, non-governmental organisations and civil society.
Amendment 761 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 d (new)
Article 11 d (new)
Article11d The Advisory Group shall provide independent expertise and draw up recommendations to the Board that should be taken into account in their work programme, as well as provide assistance and advice to the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 762 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 e (new)
Article 11 e (new)
Article11e The Advisory Group may draft a recommendation, on its own initiative or upon request by the Board, Commission, or European Parliament, to the Board regarding the effective and consistent application of this Regulation relating to media pluralism, editorial independence and media freedom. It shall make such recommendations publicly available.
Amendment 790 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreementconsultation with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 802 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) at its own initiative, or upon request of the Commission or the European Parliament or, where applicable, any party with a legitimate interest, following the advice of the Advisory Group, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 812 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i
(i) national measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or impacting media pluralism or editorial independence of media service providers, in accordance with Article 20(4) of this Regulation, and 20 (2a) when requested by the Member States;
Amendment 815 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) existing media market concentrations whichand those that are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, or on decisions related to it, and its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 825 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) draw up guidelines, with assistance from the Advisory Group and in consultation with the Commission, on factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation;
Amendment 829 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) draw up criteria, with the assistance of Advisory Group, for assessment upon which to designate trustworthy media service providers in accordance with rules laid down in Delegated Act, and assess adherence of media service providers to those criteria and designate them, in accordance with Article 17 (5 new);
Amendment 831 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point h – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point h – point ii
Amendment 839 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l
(l) organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and of civil society, and report on its results to the Commission and the European Parliament, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation;
Amendment 843 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m
(m) fosacilitater the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems, in accordance with Article 23(5) of this Regulation.
Amendment 861 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
When drawing up its opinions as envisaged in paragraph 1, the Board may seek advice from the Advisory Group. The Board shall consult the Advisory Group when opinions relate to the press sector.
Amendment 863 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation, such as exchange of information or mutual assistance, at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 867 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation, such as exchange of information or mutual assistance, including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it and shall be specified in the Board’s Rules of procedure.
Amendment 876 #
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.
Amendment 879 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority shall provide intermediary results within the period of 14 calendar days from the receipt of the request, with subsequent regular updates on the progress of execution of the request. In case of requests for accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, the requested authority shall address and reply to the request within 14 calendar daysFurther details on the procedure of the structured cooperation shall be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure.
Amendment 884 #
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 daysa time period to be defined in the Board’s rules of procedure 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 892 #
1. Without prejudice to Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, a national regulatory authority or body may request another national regulatory authority or body to take necessary and proportionate actions for the effective enforcement of the obligations imposed on video-sharing platforms under Article 28b of Directive 2010/13/EU or national law in Member States concerning obligations imposed on video-sharing platforms.
Amendment 897 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1 or justify the reasons for which actions were not taken.
Amendment 902 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken, or a refusal to take action pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 904 #
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 923 #
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 and parent companies.
Amendment 927 #
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 932 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall fosacilitater cooperation between media service providers, standardisation bodies or any other relevant stakeholders in order to facilitapromote the development of technicalEU-wide harmonised standards related to digital signals or design of devices or user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services.
Amendment 933 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providers established or originating from outside the Union
Amendment 938 #
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 the Unionr originating from outside the Union, irrespective of their means of distribution, that target audiences 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 national and public security and defence public health, or where they incite to violence, hatred or promote terrorist activities, including committing terrorist acts.
Amendment 951 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. National regulatory authorities or bodies of a country of destination may request the Board to issue an opinion advising the competent national authorities to take appropriate measures against the media service provider established or originating from outside the Union. The Board shall issue guidelines on the format of such requests. When the request is formulated by a minimum number of Board members, defined in the Board’s rules of procedure, the Board shall be automatically triggered to issue an opinion. The Board may consult the Commission in issuing such opinions, where deemed appropriate. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.
Amendment 961 #
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:
Amendment 964 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. (i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State;
Amendment 965 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. (ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article.
Amendment 966 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Amendment 969 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – title
Article 17 – title
Content of media service providers on very large online platforms and very large online search engines providing access to news and current affairs information
Amendment 972 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:and very large online platforms and very large online search engines shall ensure that their terms and conditions, content moderation decisions or any other actions do not infringe on the rights of media service providers to provide news and current affairs information or negatively impact on media pluralism. They shall ensure that their content moderation and monitoring processes have adequate human resources to cover all languages and geographical regions in the Union and provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to be designated as editorially independent media service providers.
Amendment 978 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 982 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 987 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1006 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspendithout prejudice to its obligations pursuant to Articles 24 and 35 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, where a provider of very large online platform or of a very large online search engine decides to suspend or otherwise restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content or services provided by a designated media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of thiswithin a meaning of Article 2(2), on the grounds that such content or servicesis incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 2634 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act]2065, 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, prior to the suspens and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, and provide the media service provider with an opportunity to reply to the statement of reasons, prior to the suspension or otherwise restriction taking effect.
Amendment 1023 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms and very large online search engines shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media servand Article providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Art20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 by designated media servicle are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay. The media service provider may also be represented by a body as pursuant to Article 86 of Regulation (EU)2022/2065.
Amendment 1036 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a designated media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform or of a very large online search engine frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.
Amendment 1044 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a designated media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 1053 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 1054 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);
Amendment 1055 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 c (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. editorially independent from Member States, political parties and third countries;
Amendment 1056 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. subjected to the supervision of an independent regulatory authority or body for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, and/or adheres to a co-regulatory or self- regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States;
Amendment 1057 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 e (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. adhering to ethical and professional standards of journalism;
Amendment 1058 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 f (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. it does not provide content generated by an artificial intelligence system as defined by Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) 2023/XXX [AI Act] without human overview and editorial control over such content;
Amendment 1059 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 g (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 5 g (new)
5g. included in one or more publicly available registries, databases or lists published by an entity which can confirm the adherence of designated media service providers to the regulations and/or codes of practices or any other self or co- regulatory bodies.
Amendment 1064 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission mayshall issue guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1facilitate the effective application of this Article.
Amendment 1065 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Amendment 1066 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large online search engines shall provide the Board with all the necessary information, when requested, for the purpose of the involvement of the Board pursuant to paragraph 4.
Amendment 1067 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6 c (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. The very large online platforms and very large online search engines shall establish a transparent and accountable process for reporting on their compliance with the Regulation.
Amendment 1068 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6 d (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Media service providers, adhering to criteria pursuant to this Article and mechanism established through a delegated act, and designated by the Board shall transmit information to the national Digital Services Coordinators and European Board for Digital Services established under Regulation (EU)2022/2065.
Amendment 1071 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1
Article 18 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large online search engines, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference.in order to:
Amendment 1075 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a (new)
(a) to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and very large online search engines;
Amendment 1076 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point b (new)
(b) monitor adherence to self- regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference;
Amendment 1077 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point c (new)
(c) examine the impact of content moderation processes and decisions by providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large online search engines on the freedom and pluralism of media.
Amendment 1079 #
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 and the European Parliament.
Amendment 1082 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily changa functionality allowing them to easily customise the default layout or settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affectlead to the circumvention of national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU. This right does not apply to audiovisual media services regarding users’ content choices.
Amendment 1093 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2
Article 19 – paragraph 2
2. When placing the devices and user interfaces referred to in paragraph 1 on the market, manufacturers and developers shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change the default layout or settings controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered.
Amendment 1097 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Device manufacturers and user interface developers should ensure that the default settings of their products, before customisation by the user, display a variety of audiovisual media services of general interest.
Amendment 1098 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 1108 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market shall be duly and objectively justified and proportionate. SAny such measures shall not unjustifiably infringe on the right of media service providers to provide service and minimise disruptions in their operations, and shall be reasoned, transparent, objective and non- discriminatory.
Amendment 1114 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. This article does not apply to national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU, taken pursuant to Article 167 TFEU and for the purpose of cultural diversity, nor where the national measure is otherwise governed by State aid rules.
Amendment 1117 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
2. Any national procedure used for the purposes of the preparation or the adoption of a regulatory or administrative measure as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to clear timeframes set out in advance to provide sufficient time to reflect on such measures and their consequences, and allow media service providers directly affected to provide feedback on such measures.
Amendment 1118 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 20 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Member States may seek assistance from and rely on the expertise of the Advisory Group in preparation of the legislative, regulatory or administrative measures referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Amendment 1123 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, following a recommendation by the Advisory Group, on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, European Parliament or media service provider considered to be directly affected by such measures, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or impacting media pluralism within Member State or editorial freedom of media service providers. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission mayshall issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. Where a national authority or body adopts a measure that affects individually and directly a media service provider and is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services or media pluralism within a Member State or editorial freedom of media service provider, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concerned.
Amendment 1149 #
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 systemsaw, substantive and procedural rules which ensureallow for an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significantn impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 1151 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significantn impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;
Amendment 1155 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) designate theone or several national regulatory authorityies or bodyies as responsible for the assessment of the impact of a notifiable concentrationmedia market concentration and its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence or ensure the involvement of the national regulatory authority or body in such assessment;
Amendment 1158 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d
(d) set out in advance objective, non- discriminatory, inclusive and proportionate criteria for notifying such media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media market concentrationsand for assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence.
Amendment 1163 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The assessment referred to in this paragraph shall be distinct from the competition law assessments including those provided for under merger control rules. It shall entail consultation in a structured dialogue organised by the Advisory Group with civil society, relevant stakeholders, such as media experts and journalistic associations, as well as other self-regulatory media bodies or non- governmental organisations. The Advisory Group shall report on the results of a consultation in structured dialogue and on the conformity of procedural rules applied with this Regulation. It shall be without prejudice to Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, where applicable.
Amendment 1167 #
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 its effects on the formation of public opinion, and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into accountincluding considering the impact of the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non- media businesses;
Amendment 1170 #
(aa) adherence by media service providers to ethical and professional standards, including co-regulatory or self- regulatory mechanisms governing editorial standards;
Amendment 1174 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) theeditorial independence and existing safeguards for editorial independence of media service providers, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures taken by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions;
Amendment 1179 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) where applicable, the geographical reach and distribution area of the media service providers involved in the media market concentration, and the impact of such concentration on media pluralism and public opinion forming at local or regional level;
Amendment 1182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
(cb) the results of the risk assessment made by the annual Commission Rule of Law Report and Media Pluralism Monitor to identify, analyse and assess any systemic risks to media freedom and media pluralism in a particular Member State.
Amendment 1184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The CommissionBoard, assisted by the Board, mayAdvisory Group and in consultation with the Commission, shall issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies.
Amendment 1189 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4
Article 21 – paragraph 4
4. The national regulatory authority or body shall consult the Board in advance on any opiniondraft assessment or decision it aims to adopt assessconcerning the impact of market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, including of a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect or are affecting the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 1193 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 5
Article 21 – paragraph 5
5. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of the consultation referred to in paragraph 4, the Board shall draw up an opinion on the draft national opinionassessment or decision referred to it, taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission.
Amendment 1199 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The national regulatory authority or bodies shall, within 6 months from the application of this Regulation, draft an examination of existing media market concentration and its impact on media pluralism and editorial independence based on the elements referred to in paragraph 2. While preparing such examination, the national regulatory authority may seek assistance from the Advisory Group. The results from such examination shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1204 #
1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board, at its own initiative or upon request of the Commission or the European Parliament, 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)assessment of national regulatory authority or body or decisions related to it referred to in Article 21. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2), in consultation with the Advisory Group and take into account the risk assessment made by the annual Commission Rule of Law Report. The Board mayshall bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.
Amendment 1213 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 22 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The Board may draw up an opinion on the impact of market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence brought to its attention by the Advisory Group.
Amendment 1220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
2. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission mayshall issue its own opinion on the matter.
Amendment 1223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 3
Article 22 – paragraph 3
3. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1231 #
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 1233 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ business secrets and intellectual property rights, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers, rightsholders, national regulatory authorities or bodies, and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. The methodology and its application shall be verified at least once a year by an independent body. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 1248 #
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 systeProviders of audience measurement systems, including providers of 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 1256 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, assisted by the Board, mayshall issue guidelines on the practical application of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article.
Amendment 1274 #
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 1295 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Paragraph 2 does not apply to contracting authorities as defined in Directive 2014/24/EU for spendings which value is equal or inferior to 25 000 EUR net of value-added tax.
Amendment 1296 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 24 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. State-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, when the expenditure allocated to media service providers exceeds 10% of their total advertising budget.That information should at least include: (a) the legal names of media service providers from which advertising services were purchased; (b) the amounts spent per media service provider.
Amendment 1320 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. The monitoring exercise shall include at least:
Amendment 1324 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level existing of media concentration and risks of foreignit poses to media pluralism and editorial independence of media services providers, including of foreign or domestic information manipulation and interference;
Amendment 1330 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c a (new)
(ca) reviewing adherence to criteria for awarding allocations of state expenditures for media service providers and providers of online platforms, and scrutinising yearly reports on the allocations of state expenditure by national regulatory authorities or bodies monitoring the allocation of state expenditures;
Amendment 1334 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c b (new)
(cb) an overview of national measures affecting media pluralism and editorial independence of media service providers;
Amendment 1338 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c c (new)
(cc) implementation of the functionality of very large online platforms and search engines for designated editorial independent media service providers, and adherence of very large online platforms and search engines to the rights of media service providers and impact on media pluralism;
Amendment 1341 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c d (new)
(cd) the independence and full autonomy of national authorities and bodies referred to in this Regulation.
Amendment 1343 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The Commission shall establish an easy-to-use and publicly available alert mechanism to detect alleged risks for this Regulation.
Amendment 1344 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
4. The monitoring shall be carried out and presented in the European Parliament annually, and its results shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission shall, as prescribed by Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 291(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), supervise the implementation and application of this Regulation and in consultation with the Board, following the Board’s opinion, take legal action against those who fail to comply with their obligations.
Amendment 1353 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
However, Articles 7 to 12 and 27 shall apply from [3 months after the entry into force] and Article 19(2) and 19 (2a (new)) shall apply from [48 months after the entry into force].