Activities of Axel VOSS related to 2022/0277(COD)
Legal basis opinions (0)
Amendments (14)
Amendment 165 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) Member States have taken different approaches to the protection of editorial independence, which is increasingly challenged across the Union. In particular, there is growing interference with editorial decisions of media service providers in several Member States. Such interference can be direct or indirect, from the State or other actors, including public authorities, elected officials, government officials and politicians, for example to obtain a political advantage. Such direct and indirect interference may also come from the Union and its institutions and agencies. Shareholders and other private parties who have a stake in media service providers may act in ways which go beyond the necessary balance between their own business freedom and freedom of expression, on the one hand, and editorial freedom of expression and the information rights of users, on the other hand, in pursuit of economic or other advantage. Moreover, recent trends in media distribution and consumption, including in particular in the online environment, have prompted Member States to consider laws aimed at regulating the provision of media content. Approaches taken by media service providers to guarantee editorial independence also vary. As a result of such interference and fragmentation of regulation and approaches, the conditions for the exercise of economic activities by media service providers and, ultimately, the quality of media services received by citizens and businesses are negatively affected in the internal market. It is thus necessary to put in place effective safeguards enabling the exercise of editorial freedom across the Union so that media service providers can independently produce and distribute their content across borders and service recipients can receive such content.
Amendment 193 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards. Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the editors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activity. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content as part of their everyday workdependence., The objective to shield editorial decisions from undue interference contributes to ensuring a level playing field in the internal market for media services and the quality of such services. That objective is also in conformity with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients. This should not affect the right of the owner to also hold a controlling editorial position, to set and change an editorial line and to determine the staffing and organisation of editorial teams.
Amendment 195 #
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 decisionsof Article 6. 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. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51provides 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 take decisions in the interest of their media service, including toset strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings, nor to deprive the owners of their editorial freedom.. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. _________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 200 #
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. Considering that press publications are traditionally not subject to regulatory oversight, for the purpose of Chapter III, Section 2 of this Regulation, “media service” shall be understood as any media service with the exception of media services providing press publications, unless otherwise specified.
Amendment 370 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Union and Member States shall respect effective editorial freedom of media service providers. Member States, including their national regulatory authorities and bodies and the Union’s institutions and agencies , shall not:
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Without prejudice to national constituconstitutional or other national laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shallare encouraged to take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing theeditorial independence of individual editorial decisions. In particular, such measures shall aim to:. The owner shall maintain the right to hold a controlling editorial position, to set and change an editorial line and to determine the staffing and organisation of editorial teams.
Amendment 499 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 505 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 547 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Board’s competence shall be limited to the audiovisual media services, unless otherwise specified in this Regulation.
Amendment 738 #
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
Amendment 741 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large online search engines shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:
Amendment 749 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Very large online platforms and very large online search engines which allow for the dissemination of media services shall respect the right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media and shall ensure the fair and nondiscriminatory distribution on their services of media services provided by media service providers.
Amendment 754 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where aA provider of very large online platform decides toand a provider of very large online search engine shall not restrict or suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content or services provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content or service is incompatible with its terms and conditions, wunless the content or services in question is not in accordance with the national law of the Member State concerned. Without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with theirits obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], 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 and to provide the media service provider concerned with an opportunity to reply to the statement of reasons within 48 hours prior to the restriction or suspension taking effect.
Amendment 765 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms and providers of very large 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 service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.