Activities of Petra KAMMEREVERT related to 2022/0277(COD)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU
Amendments (195)
Amendment 121 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Independent media services play a unique role in the internal market. Theyfor democracy, for ensuring the rule of law and for the operation of the internal market. They are an indispensable factor in the public opinion forming process, represent a fast-changing and economically important sector and at the same time provide access to a plurality of views and reliable sources of information to citizens and businesses alike, thereby fulfilling the general interest function of ‘public watchdog’. Media services are increasingly available online and across borders while they are not subject to the same rules and the same level of protection in different Member States.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media contentservices, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross- border setting. GlobalVery large online platforms and very large online search engines, often originating outside the Union, act as gateways to media contentservices, with business models that too often tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms or search engines are also essential providers or facilitators of online advertising, which has diverteds financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of contentmedia services on offer. As media services are knowledge- and capital- intensive, they require scaleneed reach among their respective target audiences to remain competitive and to thrive in the internal market. To that effect, the possibility to offer services across borders and obtain investment including from or in other Member States is particularly important.
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) However, the internal market for media services is insufficiently integrated. A number of national restrictions hamper free movement within the internal market. In particular, different national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence, insufficient cooperation between competent national regulatory authorities or bodies as well as opaque and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources make it difficult for media market players to operate and expand across borders and lead to an uneven level playing field across the Union. The integrity of the internal market for media services may also be challenged by providers that systematically engage in disinformation, including information manipulation and interference, and abuse the internal market freedoms, including by state-controlled media serviceofferings providers financed by certain third countries.
Amendment 138 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) RecipientUsers 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 in the internal market. In fostering the cross-border flow of media services, a minimum level of protection of service recipientusers should be ensured in the internal market. That would be in compliance with the right to receive and impart information 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. 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 142 #
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. 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 or parts thereof. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.
Amendment 148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The definition of audience measurement should cover measurement systems developed as agreed by industry standards within self-regulatory organisations, like the Joint Industry Committees, and measurement systems developed outside such self-regulatory approaches. The latter tend to be deployed by certain online players who self-measure or provide their proprietary audience measurement systems to the market, which do not necessarily abide by the commonly agreed industry standards. Given the significant impact that such audience measurement systems have on the advertising and media markets, they should be covered by this Regulation. Media service providers that comply with commonly agreed industry standards should not be regarded as providers of proprietary audience measurement systems.
Amendment 154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including Union institutions, authorities and bodies, governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants. However, the definition of state advertising should not include emergency messages by public authorities which are necessary, for example, in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other sudden incidents that can cause harm to individuals.
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of tha diverse internal media market, it is essential not only to guarantee the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipientusers of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipientusers should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists and editors in an independent manner and in line with journalistic standards and hence provide trustworthy information, including news and current affairs content. 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 interferencequality media services and free access to such services are an elementary antidote against disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference. Diverse media contribute to a plurality of opinions, which is an indispensable, constitutive prerequisite for any democratic state and fosters equality of communication opportunities. Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 11(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union require that balanced diversity be established in European communication spaces and require Member States to safeguard and foster media pluralism.
Amendment 167 #
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 isBecause of growing interference with editorial decisions of media service providers in several Member States, legislative action is necessary. Such interference can be direct or indirect, from the State or other actors, including public authorities, elected officials, government officials and politicians, for example to obtain a political advantage. Shareholders and other private parties who have a stake in media service providers may act in ways which go beyond the necessary balance between their own business freedom and freedom of expression, on the one hand, and editorial freedom of expression and the information rights of users, on the other hand, in pursuit of economic or other advantage. This seems to be particularly the case where economic power generates a power to shape opinions that may interfere with the public opinion forming process. 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 contentservices. 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 contentmedia services across borders and uservice recipients can receive such contents can access such media services.
Amendment 174 #
(16) Journalists and editors are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially. In particular, media service providers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers) should be able to rely on a robustbsolute protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against deployment of surveillance technologies, since without such protection sources may be deterred from assisting the media in informing the public on matters of public interest. As a result, journalists’ freedom to exercise their economic activity and fulfil their vital ‘public watchdog’ role may be undermined, thus affecting negatively access to quality media services. The protection of journalistic sources contributes to the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter.
Amendment 180 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The protection of journalistic sources is currently regulated heterogeneously in the Member States. Some Member States provide an absolute protection against coercing journalists to disclose information that identify their source in criminal and administrative proceedings. Other Member States provide a qualified protection confined to judicial proceedings based on certain criminal charges, while others provide protection in the form of a general principle. This leads to fragmentation in the internal media market. As a result, journalists, which work increasingly on cross-border projects and provide their services to cross-border audiences, and by extension providers of media services, are likely to face barriers, legal uncertainty and uneven conditions of competition. Therefore, the protection of journalistic sources and communications needs harmonisation and further strengtheningto be strengthened as comprehensively and as extensively as possible at Union level.
Amendment 184 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media services established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to diverse, representative and comprehensive offerings, including quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission, which private media service providers alone cannot compensate for with a view to ensuring the opinion-forming process. However, public service media service providers 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 service providers across the Union. This situation 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, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, for Member States to put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media service providers across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media service providers benefit from sufficientappropriate and stable funding toso that they can fulfil their mission that enables, have predictability in their planning. Preferably, s, at the same time develop offerings for new areas of interest to the public or new content and forms, and evolve technically. Such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media service 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 thprocedures for determining what is appropriate funding ofor 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 Unionservice providers to fulfil their mission should be independent and allow for judicial review.
Amendment 198 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) It is crucial for the recipientusers of media services to know with certainty who owns and is behind the news media so that they can identify and understand potential conflicts of interest which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in a democracy. Such transparency is also an effective tool to limit risks of interference with editorial independence. It is thus necessary to introduce common information requirements for all relevant media service providers across the Union that should include proportionate requirements to disclose ownership information. In this context, the measures taken by Member States under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/84949should not be affected. The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible. _________________ 49 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73-117).
Amendment 205 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companiesmedia service providers offering news and current affairs content, 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-in-chief, the freedom of the editors-in-chief to take individueditorial decisions on the basis of that line and in the course of their professional activity. The objective to shield editors-in- chief from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of contentmedia services as part of their everyday work contributes to ensuring a level playing field in the internal market for media services and the quality of such services. That objective is also in conformity with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipientusers.
Amendment 208 #
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 theadopt internal safeguards to their needs, in particular if they are small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of that Articlein line with their structures and needs. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adoptould be consideredwithin 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 the editorial line of their media servicesand to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of private media owners. _________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. 1 OJ C , , p ....
Amendment 214 #
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. NCompetent 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 implementationGiven the importance and scale of the new tasks conferred on the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies by this Regulation, it is therefore of the utmost importance that the financial, human and technical resources of the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies should be appropriate and adequate. Member States should provide the Commission with all relevant information on the increase in financial, human and technical resources. Moreover, as part of the applicable public-service remit and in accordance with budgetary regulations, competent national regulatory autorities or bodies should be empowered to recruit and manage staff in accordance with clear and transparent rules. Staff management authority should include autonomy to take decisions, independently of othat 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 Arter public bodies, on the profiles required, qualifications, specialist knowledge and other staff-related matters, including pay. Competent national regulatory authorities and bodies should also have autonomy in managing internal structures, organisational arrangements and procedures for the effective performance of their tasks and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudicle 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 Unionto national budgetary rules and procedures, competent national regulatory authorities or bodies should have their own, separate annual budget. Member States should ensure that competent national regulatory authorities or bodies have full autonomy in making use of the budget funding allocation in order to discharge their duties. Any oversight over the budget of competent national regulatory authorities or bodies should be exercised in a transparent manner. The annual accounts of competent national regulatory authorities or bodies should be subject to ex post control by an independent auditor and should be published.
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) 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 competent national regulatory 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 by the Board as a consequence. The amendment of Directive 2010/13/EU by this Regulation is justified in this case as it is limited to a provision which does not need to be transposed by Member States and is addressed to the institutions of the Union.
Amendment 222 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite external experts to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observer on a case-by- case basis. The Board should also have the possibility, by arrangement with the Commission, to designate permanent observers to attend its meetings, including in particular 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 unless otherwise required by this Regulation in specific cases.
Amendment 231 #
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, and provide it with expert advice, 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 ion agreement withits own initiative or upon the Commission or upon it’s request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariatn independent Bureau with its own legal personality ('Bureau'). The Bureau should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks and should act only on the Board's instructions. To ensure that the Board is independent, the Bureau's budget should be funded from a heading within the Union general budget.
Amendment 239 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) Regulatory cooperation between independent media regulatory authorities or bodies is essential to make the internal market for media services function properly. However, Directive 2010/13/EU does not provide for a structured cooperation framework for competent national regulatory authorities or bodies. Since the revision of the EU framework for audiovisual media services by Directive 2018/1808/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council52, which extended its scope to video-sharing platforms, there has been an ever-increasing need for close cooperation among competentnational regulatory authorities or bodies, in particular to resolve cross-border cases. Such a need is also justified in view of the new challenges in the EU media environment that this Regulation seeks to address, including by entrusting competentnational regulatory authorities or bodies with new tasks. _________________ 52 Directive (EU) 2018/1808 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November 2018 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in view of changing market realities (OJ L 303, 28.11.2018, p. 69-92).
Amendment 242 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) To ensure theBuilding on the voluntary framework of the ERGA Memorandum of Understanding, in order to ensure the comprehensive and effective enforcement of Union media law, to prevent the possible circumvention of the applicable media rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid the raising of additional barriers in the internal market for media services, it is essential to provide for a clear, legally binding framework for competent national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.
Amendment 245 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Due to the pan-European natureactions of video-sharing platforms, competent national regulatory authorities or bodies need to have a dedicated tool to protect viewusers of video-sharing platform services from certain illegal and harmful content, including commercial communications. In particular, a mechanism is needed to allow any relevant national regulatory authority or body to request its peers to take necessary and proportionate actions to ensure enforcement of obligations under this Article by video-sharing platform providers. In case the use of such mechanism does not lead to an amicable solution, the freedom to provide information society services from another Member State can only be restricted if the conditions set out in Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council53are met and following the procedure set out therein. _________________ 53 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('‘Directive on electronic commerce'’) (OJ L 178, 17.7.2000, p. 1-16).
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regardingcoherent application of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and tTo contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. 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 funcThose guidelines should respect Member States’ competence in cultural matters with regard to the promotioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this fieldmedia pluralism, be principle-based and have no impact on existing national measures to ensure prominence. 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 260 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29
Recital 29
(29) In order to ensure a level playing field in the provision of diverse audiovisual media services in the face of technological developments in the internal market, it is necessary to find common technical prescriptionEurope-wide harmonised standards for devices controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services or carrying digital signals conveying the audiovisual contentmedia services from source to destination. In this context, it is important to avoid diverging technical standards creating barriers and additional costs for the industry and consumers while encouraging solutions to implement existing obligations concerning audiovisual media services.
Amendment 261 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) RCompetent 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 recipientusers of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression and safeguarding and promoting media diversity. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiencewhose media offerings are targeted at users 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 public security and defencerepresent a manifestly, serious and grave incitement to commit a terrorist offence as referred to in Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 or constitute a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and to the safeguarding of national security and defence. Providers established outside the Union and wishing to benefit from the free movement of media services for their media offerings, as one of the advantages of the European internal market, should be subject to the same conditions and requirements as media service providers established within the Union. In this regard, the coordination between competent national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media servithreats stemming from media offerings that clearly, seriously and gravely contain an incitement to commit a terrorist offence as referred to in Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 or constitute a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and to the safeguarding of national security and defences 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 public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiencethe abovementioned threats by providers established outside of the Union whose media offerings are targeted at users in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, the risks to public security and defencereferred to 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 274 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms and very large 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 and access to 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, coregulatory or legally recognised self- regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. At the same time, providers of very large online platforms and of very large online search engines should abide by the right to freedom of expression and media freedom and contribute appropriately to the promotion of media pluralism. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that contentor of very large search engines consider that media services provided by such media service providers isare incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it isthey are 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 media freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]2065, and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54. To minimise the impact of any suspension of or restriction ton that contentose media services on users’ freedom of information, providers of very large online platforms should endeavour tosubmit theor of very large search engines should submit a statement of reasons, in accordance with their obligations under Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, containing the specific clause in their terms and conditions for such acceptance and give recognised media service providers 24 hours in which to respond to that statement of reasons pribefore to thehe suspension or restriction can takingeffect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act].In particular, te effect. Where a provider of a very large online platform or of a very large online search engine still intends to apply the suspension or restriction, the competent regulatory authority or body or the self- regulatory or coregulatory mechanism body should decide whether the intended suspension or restriction is warranted in view of the specific clause in the terms and conditions and, in particular, taking into account fundamental communication freedoms. The Board shall act as the final decision-taking body. This Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform or of a very large online search engine 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 285 #
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 or very large online search engines are treated with priority and without undue delay.
Amendment 290 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they cumulatively meet certain requirements, while at the same time retaining the possibility not to accept such self-declaration where they consider that these conditions are not met. In such cases, a final decision should be taken by the competent national regulatory authority or body or the agency representing the self- or co-regulatory mechanism, as appropriate. If confirmed in this manner, media service providers should be deemed recognised media service providers. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as, in particular, the machine- readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or other relevant codes of conduct. This mechanism shall not prevent very large online platforms or very large online search engines from signing up to voluntary commitment No 22 of the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation and from taking the necessary measures to foster the visibility, discoverability and prominence of media services in their recommendation systems provided by media service providers that demonstrably comply with professional and ethical standards for journalism. Certification to ISO standards for professional and ethical journalism, such as the Journalism Trust Initiative developed under the aegis of the European Committee for Standardisation, could serve as a benchmark in this regard. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities ofarrangements governing the involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality.
Amendment 295 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) This Regulation recognises the importance of co-regulatory and self- regulatory mechanisms that are legally recognised in one or more Member State(s) in the context of the provision of media services on very large online platforms or very large online search engines. They represent a type of voluntary initiatives, for instance in a form of codes of conduct, which enable media service providers or their representatives to adopt common guidelines, including on ethical standards, correction of errors or complaint handling, amongst themselves and for themselves. Robust, inclusive and widely- recognised media co-regulation and self- regulation represents an effective guarantee of quality and professionalism of media services and is key for safeguarding editorial integrity.
Amendment 298 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that restrictions on their content are frequently imposed by providers of very large online platforms without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for terminating any unjustified restrictions and avoiding them in the future. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.
Amendment 301 #
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 or very large online search engines, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms or very large online search engines, 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]2065 and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.
Amendment 307 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) RecipientUsers 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, including remote controls, or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipientusers’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipientUsers should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user- friendly manner, the default settings of a device orlayout of audiovisual media services, or of applications enabling users to access such services, on a user interface or on devices 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.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Users of media services often face difficulties in identifying who bears editorial responsibility for the media services they consume, in particular when they access media services through online platforms or user interfaces. Where editorial responsibility for media services is not clearly identifiable, for instance owing to missing or incorrectly attributed logos, trademarks or other distinctive features, it becomes difficult for users of media services to categorise the information they receive correctly. Media service users should therefore be able to clearly and consistently identify, on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services, the media service provider bearing editorial responsibility for any given media service.
Amendment 320 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 b (new)
Recital 37 b (new)
(37b) Numeric keypads should be mandatory on remote controls as standard to ensure that general-interest audiovisual media services can be viewed and found on televisions in the future by selecting a channel number. This configuration should make it easy for users to adapt their consumption as they fit. The removal of this numeric keypad, which has occasionally happened, could cause users to become unjustifiably dependent on user interfaces designed by equipment manufacturers.
Amendment 335 #
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on its own initiative or at 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.
Amendment 341 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. This is why Member States should provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of media market concentrationsrgers in the media market that could hagive a significant impactrise to the curtailing onf media pluralism or editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory. Media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood, for example, 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.
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) NThe competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should be significantly involved in the assessment of the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. 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 appropriate deadlines and objective, non- discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism andor editorial independence are set out in advance.
Amendment 346 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘spyware’ means any product with digital elements specially designed to exploit vulnerabilities in other products with digital elements that enablesurveillance technology’ means any digital, mechanical or other instrument that enables the acquisition of information and the covert surveillance of natural or legal persons by intercepting, monitoring, extracting, collecting or analysing data from such products or from theof any information and communication technology or of natural or legal persons using such productsit, in particular by secretly recording calls or otherwise using the microphone of an end-user device, filming natural persons, machines or their surroundings, copying messages, photographing, tracking browsing activity, tracking geolocation, collecting other sensor data or tracking activities across multiple end-user deviceterminal equipments, without the natural or legal person concerned being made aware in a specific manner and having given their express specific consentconsent as defined under Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in that regard;
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) The Board should be empowered to provide opinions on draft decisions or opinions by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies, where the notifiable concentrations 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 andor 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, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, at its own initiative or upon request of the Commission. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43 a (new)
Recital 43 a (new)
(43a) The Commission's opinion pursuant to Article 21(6) or Article 22(2) could propose measures drawing on the Commission's decision-making powers under Article 8 of Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004. This should be understood as a reference to legal consequences, and in particular not to the thresholds listed in Article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004.
Amendment 362 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) With a view to ensuring pluralistic media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account of a set of criteria. In particular, impact on media pluralism should be considered, including notably the effect on the formation of public opinion, taking into account of the online environment. Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the media market concentration in question. Assessment of safeguards for editorial independence should include the examination of potential risks of undue interference by the prospective owner, management or governance structure in the individual editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the individual editorial decisions within the media undertakings involved should also be taken into account. In assessing the potential impacts, the effects of the concentration in question on the economic sustainability of the entity or entities subject to the concentration should also be considered and whether, in the absence of the concentration, they would be economically sustainable, in the sense that they would be able in the medium term to continue to provide and further develop financially viable, adequately resourced and technologically adapted quality media services in the market.
Amendment 367 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. Media service providers shall have the right to exercise their economic activities in the internal market without restrictions other than those allowed under Union law.
Amendment 369 #
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 and comparable audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their ownproprietary measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in 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.
Amendment 371 #
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. In principle, audience measurement should be carried out in accordance with widely accepted industry self-regulatory mechanisms. 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. Furthermore, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems should provide media service providers with anonymised data, including non- aggregated data, which should be at least as granular as data from the industry's recognised self-regulatory mechanisms, in an industry-standard and comparable form. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX [Digital Markets Act]1925, including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 371 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Member States and private entities shall respect effective editorial freedom of media service providers. Member States, including their national regulatory authorities and bodies, as well as private entities, shall not:
Amendment 377 #
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, , together with media service providers, their representative organisations and other relevant stakeholders, can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self- regulation hasory mechanisms widely recognised in the media industry have already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further developmentMoreover, these widely recognised self-regulatory mechanisms, known as joint industry committees, are able to ensure that audience measurement is impartial and audience measurement data are comparable. Its further development, including with the assistance of the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, 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, 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 387 #
(49) In order to ensure undistorted competition between media service providers and to avoid the risk of covert subsidies and of undue political influence on the media, it is necessary to establish common requirements of transparency, objectivity, proportionality and non- discrimination in the allocation of state advertising and of state resources to media service providers, as well as to online platforms or online search engines in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising, including the requirement to publish information on the beneficiaries of state advertising expenditure and the amounts spent. It is important that Member States make the necessary information related to state advertising publicly accessible in an electronic format that is easy to view, access and download, in compliance with Union and national rules on commercial confidentiality. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the State aid rules, which are applied on a case-by-case basis.
Amendment 388 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) order to disclose, detain, sanction, intercept, subject to surveillance monitor, search and seizure, or inspect media service providers or, if applicable their employees, their family members, family members of their employees or any otheir family membersperson professionally or privately associated with them, or their corporate and private premises, on the ground that they refuse to disclose information on their sources, unless this is justified by an overriding requirement in the public interest, in accordance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and in compliance with o or with the aim of coercing the disclosure of information about their Union lawsources;
Amendment 393 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitorobserved as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoringobservation 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 concentration of the market at national and regional level and risks of foreign 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. Given the rapidly evolving nature of risks and technological developments in the internal media market, the monitoringobservation 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 environment, as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoringobservation. 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 monitoringobservation 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 monitoringobservation, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.
Amendment 394 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50 a (new)
Recital 50 a (new)
(50a) The European Centre for Press and Media Freedom (ECPMF) in Leipzig and the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) at the European University Institute in Florence should be considered first and foremost as European institutions with the relevant expertise in media freedom and pluralism, while European instruments such as the Euromedia Ownership Monitor should also be taken into account.
Amendment 395 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) deploy spyware in any device or machine used by mediameasures for surveillance and the use of seurvice providerseillance technologies, or, if applicable, their family members, or their employees or their family members, unless the deployment is justified, onnstruct private entities to use surveillance technologies, as well as case-by-case basis, on grounds of national security and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charter and other Union law or the deployment occurs in serious crimes investigations of one of the aforementioned persons, it is provided for under national law and is in compliance with Article 52(1) of the Charteoerce, create, or force access to encrypted or non-encrypted communications and information in any item, device or machine used by media service providers or their employees, their family members, the family members of their employees, or and y other Union law, and measures adopted pursuant to sub-paragraph (b) would be inadequate and insufficient to obtain the information soughtperson professionally or privately associated with them.
Amendment 396 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) European and national competition rules, including Regulation (EC) No 139/2004;
Amendment 401 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Without prejudice and in addition to the right to effective judicial protection guaranteed to each natural and legal person, Member States shall designate an independent authority or body to handle complaints lodged by media service providers or, if applicable their employees, their family members, their family members, of their employees, or any otheir family members,person professionally or privately associated with them regarding breaches of paragraph 2, points (b) and (c). Media service providers shall have the right to request that authority or body to issue, within three months of the request, an opinion regarding compliance with paragraph 2, points (b) and (c).
Amendment 414 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Amendment 417 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3a) The requirements laid down in this Regulation shall not affect the implementation of the state aid rules applicable on a case-by-case basis or the competence of Member States to define the remit of, and the power to finance, public service broadcasting as laid down in the Treaty on European Union and Protocol No 29 annexed to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 421 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Amendment 431 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Amendment 436 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Amendment 442 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Amendment 445 #
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;
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
12a. 'user interface' means a service that provides an overview of media services provided by individual or multiple media service providers and which enables the selection of media services or applications that essentially serve to access media services and to control or manage access to and use of audiovisual media services;
Amendment 447 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Amendment 452 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Amendment 463 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14 a (new)
14a. 'proprietary audience measurement systems means audience measurement systems used outside the scope of industry standards agreed by self-regulatory mechanisms covering media service providers so as to collect, analyse or otherwise process data on the number and characteristics of users of media services or users of online platforms, as defined in point (i) of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, for the purposes of making decisions on the allocation of advertising or on prices or the purchase, scheduling, sale or distribution of media services.
Amendment 465 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15
Amendment 475 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 16
(16) ‘spyware’ means any product with digital elements specially designed to exploit vulnerabilities in other products with digital elements that enablesurveillance technology’ means any digital, mechanical or other instrument that enables the acquisition of information and the covert surveillance of natural or legal persons by intercepting, monitoring, extracting, collecting or analysing data from such products or from theof any information and communication technology or of natural or legal persons using such productsit, in particular by secretly recording calls or otherwise using the microphone of an end-user device, filming natural persons, machines or their surroundings, copying messages, photographing, tracking browsing activity, tracking geolocation, collecting other sensor data or tracking activities across multiple end-user deviceterminal equipments, without the natural or legal person concerned being made aware in a specific manner and having given their express specific consentconsent as defined under Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 in that regard;
Amendment 479 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Amendment 483 #
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter II – title
Chapter II – title
II Rights and duties of media service providers and recipientmedia service providers, rights of users of media services and safeguards applicable to public service media service providers
Amendment 485 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Amendment 486 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Media pluralism allows for a variety of voices, analyses and opinions in public discourse, including minority positions and opinions, whose dissemination across different media channels and media genres is potentially unimpeded, with media service providers in the hands of many different owners, each independent of one another. Media pluralism recognises the co-existence of private commercial and public service media providers, with a public service media provider ensuring this diversity within its overall range of services in each case.
Amendment 493 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 519 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. PMember States shall ensure in their legal frameworks and in their actions that public service media providers shall provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission and in full editorial independence from governmental and other political, personal and commercial interests.
Amendment 529 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 530 #
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 bethe laws of the Member States, and be commensurate with their tasks, 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 lawthe law of the Member States or for specific reasons of illegal conduct or serious misconduct as defined in advance by national lawthe law of the Member States.
Amendment 533 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Dismissal decisions shall be duly justified on the basis of a pre-established law of the Member States, subject to prior notification to the person concerned, and include the possibility for judicial review. The grounds for dismissal shall be made available to the public.
Amendment 534 #
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and s, stable and predictable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service missioremit and to meet the objectives therein. Thoese resources shalland the process by which they are allocated must be such that editorial independence is safeguarded while allowing for the development of media services for new audience interests or new content and forms, as well as for technical development.
Amendment 544 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall designate one or more independent authorities or bodies in order to monitor compliance with paragraphs 1 to 3establish a procedure, which must in particular be independent of government influence, to monitor the proper application of this article. Member States shall also establish an independent procedure for determining the financial needs appropriate for public service media providers to be able to fulfil their tasks and ensure that the possibility of independent judicial review is guaranteed.
Amendment 555 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall make easily, permanently and directly accessible to the recipientusers of their services the following up-to-date information:
Amendment 570 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the name(s) and contact details of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making;
Amendment 571 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the name(s) and contact details of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council.
Amendment 575 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) the name and contact details of the natural person who bears editorial responsibility in accordance with the law of the relevant Member State. If the details of more than one person are given, the part of the media service for which each person is responsible shall be indicated.
Amendment 587 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
(1a) Media service providers shall be required to make readily, permanently and directly available to their users any private or public shareholding in their own undertaking of 25 % or more and to inform the competent national regulatory authority or body of any such shareholding. The media service provider shall, in any event, be deemed to be not independent from the point at which another undertaking, whose corporate purpose is not the provision of media services, holds the majority of shares or voting rights or otherwise exercises a dominant influence over the media service provider.
Amendment 596 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
(1b) In the event of any changes to the information provided under paragraph 1, media service providers shall update that information without undue delay and at the latest within 30 days.
Amendment 602 #
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 view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions within the editorial line of the media service provider. In particular, such measures shall aim to:
Amendment 619 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) guarantee that the editors are-in-chief is free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of this or heir professional activity; and
Amendment 632 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Amendment 646 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – title
Article 7 – title
Amendment 648 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. The competent national regulatory authorities or bodies shall be subject to the requirements set out in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU in relation to the exercise of the tasks assigned to them by this Regulation.
Amendment 650 #
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 to carry out their additional tasks under this Regulation. Member States shall ensure that they are legally distinct from the government and functionally independent of their respective governments and of any other public or private body. No later than [12 months after the entry into force of this Regulation] and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate the implementation of this article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.
Amendment 663 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 671 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Amendment 674 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, the Commission, national or European institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the, pursuant to Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union, or the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.
Amendment 682 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall be composed of high-level representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 690 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. The Bboard shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a the Chair and a Vice-Chair from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two yearsBoard shall also elect a Steering Group from among its members, consisting of the Chair and Vice-Chair and three other members. Everything else, in particular the tasks and the term of office of the Chair, the Vice-Chair and the members of the steering group, shall be regulated by the rules of procedure.
Amendment 694 #
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 abe entitled to attend meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 707 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Amendment 721 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Amendment 731 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title
Article 11 – title
Amendment 735 #
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 Commissionbe assisted by a separate and independent Bureau ('the Bureau'), which shall be subject only to instructions from the Board.
Amendment 745 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
The Bureau shall be a body of the Union with legal personality.
Amendment 751 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2
Article 11 – paragraph 2
2. The main task of the secretariatBureau shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 756 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3
3. The secretariatBureau shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariatBureau shall also assist the Board substantively in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 757 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 a (new)
Article 11 a (new)
Amendment 764 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 768 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) support and consult the Commission, through technicalits expertise, in ensuring the correct application of this Regulation and the consistent implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU across all Member States, without prejudice to the tasks of the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies;
Amendment 772 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union and national rules applicable to media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive;
Amendment 778 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) advise the Commission, on its own initiative or where requested by it, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to media services within its competence.; Where the Commission requests advice or opinions from the Board, it may indicate a time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter;
Amendment 783 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) on its own initiative, or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 788 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) take decisions in relation to Article 17 by a majority of its voting members;
Amendment 791 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 799 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point i
(i) requests for cooperation and mutual assistance between competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 13(7) of this Regulation;
Amendment 803 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part
(f) on its own initiative, or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:
Amendment 816 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii
(ii) media market concentrations in the media market which are likely to affect media pluralism or editorial independence or which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 823 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) draw up opinions on draft national opinions or decisions assessing the impact on media pluralism andor editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such a concentration may affect the functioning of the internal market, in accordance with Article 21(5) of this Regulation;
Amendment 834 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point i
(i) upon request of at least one of the concerned authorities or bodies, mediate in the case of disagreements between competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, in accordance with Article 14(3) of this Regulation;
Amendment 835 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) foster cooperation on technicalharmonised European standards related to digital signals and the design of devices or user interfaces, in accordance with Article 15(4) of this Regulation;
Amendment 836 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point k
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point k
(k) coordinate national measures related to the dissemination of or access to media content of media servicefrom providers established outside of the Union that target audienceusers in the Union, where their activities prejudicemanifestly, seriously and gravely advocate the commission of a terrorist offence in accordance with Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and to the safeguarding of national security and defence, in accordance with Article 16(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 838 #
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, providers of very large online search engines and representatives of media service providers and of civil society, and report on its results to the Commission, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation;
Amendment 845 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)
(ma) To the extent necessary to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and to carry out its tasks, the Board may, without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union and in coordination with the Commission, cooperate with competent Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory bodies, with competent authorities in third countries and with international organisations. For this purpose, the Board may, in agreement with the Commission, enter into general working arrangements;
Amendment 851 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m b (new)
(mb) shall carry out, in cooperation with the Commission, the annual monitoring referred to in Article 25.
Amendment 862 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. A competent national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority or body’) cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) at any time from one or more competent national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities or bodies’) 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 865 #
2. Where a competent national regulatory authority or body considers that there is amedia content manifestly, seriously and grave risk of prejudice to the functioning of the internal market for media services orly advocates the commission of a terrorist offence in accordance with Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 or presents a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and to the safeguarding of national security and defence, it may request other competent national regulatory authorities or bodies to provide accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, while ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression.
Amendment 868 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance), including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it, as specified in the Board’s Rules of procedure.
Amendment 871 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
The requested authority or body may refuse to address the request only in the following cases:
Amendment 872 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) execution of the request would infringe this Regulation, Directive 2010/13/EU or other Union legislation or Member State law compliant with Union law to which the requested authority or body is subject.
Amendment 873 #
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 sufficiently substantiated.
Amendment 877 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The requested authority or body shall provide reasons for any refusal to address a request.
Amendment 878 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. The requested authority or body shall inform the requesting authority or body of the results achieved or of the progress of the measures taken in response to the request.
Amendment 883 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. The requested authority or body shall do its utmost to address and reply to the request without undue delay. The requested authority or body 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 or body shall address and conclusively reply to the request within 14 calendar days.
Amendment 887 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority or body does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority or body to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority or body without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority or body does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s or body’s reaction is missing, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority or body shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 893 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to Article 3 of Directive 2000/31/EC, a competent national regulatory authority or body may request another competent 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.
Amendment 898 #
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 action was not taken.
Amendment 899 #
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 pursuant to paragraph 1, or a refusal to take action, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.
Amendment 909 #
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 or body has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreement with the Commission, without undue delay.
Amendment 916 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices among the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, consulting stakeholders, where appropriate, and in close cooperation with the Commission, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent and effective application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 930 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
4. The Board shall foster cooperation between media service providers, standardisation bodies or any other relevant stakeholders in order to facilitate 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 servi, including their remote controls or user interfaces.
Amendment 936 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title
Article 16 – title
Coordination of measures concerning media service providproviders of media offers established outside the Union
Amendment 941 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 1
1. The Board shall coordinate measures by competent national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media serviceoffers provided by media service providproviders of media offers established outside the Union that target audienceusers in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, suchthose media services prejudoffers manifestly, seriously and gravely: a) contain public provocation to commit a terrorist offence as set out in Article or5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541; b) present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security, the preservation of national security and defence.
Amendment 952 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commissionthe context of a procedure laid down in the rules of procedure, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. Where a provider referred to in paragraph 1 targets users in the territory of a Member State with its media offers, the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies of that Member State may also request that the Board deliver an opinion requiring the competent authorities or bodies of the state within whose jurisdiction the provider falls to take appropriate measures against that provider. All competent national authorities or bodies, including the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.
Amendment 968 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – title
Article 17 – title
17 Content ofMedia services of recognised media service providers on very large online platforms and very large online search engines that allow for the dissemination of media services
Amendment 974 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services tomedia service providers to claim or declare that:
Amendment 980 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it isthat they are a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);
Amendment 984 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it isthat they are editorially independent from the EU and its institutions, from Member States and third countries;, and functionally independent from private entities whose corporate purpose is not related to the creation or dissemination of media services;
Amendment 990 #
(c) it isthat they are subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility and oversight by a competent national regulatory authority or body in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, wide that is transparent and legally recognised and widely accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States.; and
Amendment 993 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) their name and the name of their managing director, the geographical address at which they are established and contact details, including an email address, website and telephone number. This information shall also be provided through the competent national regulatory authority or body or the co- regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism to which the relevant media service provider is subject.
Amendment 995 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines shall acknowledge receipt of the information and immediately communicate the acknowledgement of receipt to the media service provider and the competent national regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism, indicating a competent contact person or body via which the media service providers can communicate directly and quickly with the provider of the very large online platform or very large online search engine. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines may, in case of reasonable doubt, request that the competent national regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism confirm the information provided by the media service provider. In the event that the competent national regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism refuses to provide such confirmation for the media service provider, the media service provider shall have the right to appeal to the Board, which shall take a decision without delay by a majority of its voting members. If the information is confirmed, the competent national regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism or else the Board shall ask the provider of the very large online platform or very large online search engine to forward the confirmation to the media service provider, indicating its contact details. Once this confirmation has been received, the media service provider shall be deemed a recognised media service provider.
Amendment 996 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines may annul the declaration of a recognised media service provider if the media service provider has repeatedly infringed national or European law or if its media services have been frequently suspended or restricted in accordance with the procedure referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. A media service provider whose declaration to a provider of a very large online platform or a very large online search engine has been rejected from the outset in accordance with paragraph 1 or annulled after confirmation in accordance with paragraph 1a shall have the possibility to appeal against that decision to the competent regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism designated in paragraph 1c or to the Board, which shall take a decision without delay.
Amendment 1000 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. The Board and the national digital services coordinator shall be notified of any rejection of a declaration, annulment or complaints under paragraphs 1 and 1a.
Amendment 1002 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspendor a very large online search engine intends to suspend or restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to contenta media service provided by a recognised media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such contentbecause that media service is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that conten or because it contributinges to a systemic risk referred to in Article 2634 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, 2065, it shall communicate to the recognised media service provider concerned and the competent regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 1(c) or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism, the Board and the national digital services coordinator the extent consistent wclear and specific reasons for that decision and the specific clause in iths their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [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 suspension taking effecterms and conditions, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065, prior to the suspension or restriction taking effect. The provider of a very large online platform or a very large online search engine shall give the recognised media service provider the opportunity to respond to the statement of reasons within 24 hours prior to the suspension or restriction taking effect and shall not implement the suspension or blocking of the media service within this time window or until the final conclusion of further proceedings.
Amendment 1017 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. ProvidersWithin this period, the recognised media service provider may demonstrate to the provider of a very large online platforms shall take all the necess or very large online search engine, with sufficient reasons, that the basis for the intended suspension or restriction has not been clearly identified and/or that the media service complained of is compatible with the terms and conditions. If the provider of a very large online platform or very large online search engine still considers the media service concerned to be incompatible with its terms and conditions after due consideration of this justification from the recognised media service provider and after the expiry of the 24-hour period, it may refer the case to the competent regulatory authority or body referred to in 1(c) or the body of the self- or co- regulatory mechanism, which shall decide without delay whether the intended suspension or restriction is justified in view of the specific clause in its terms and conditions and in particular taking into account fundamental communicative freedoms. If the provider of the very large online platform or very large online search engine does not accept this decision, the competent regulatory authority or body or the body of the self- or co-regulatory mechanism shall transmit this case to the Board. The Board shall take a decision within 7 days of having consulted the competent regulatory authority or body to whose jurisdiction the provider of a very large online platform or very large online search engine is subject. Providers of very large online platforms or 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 service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.
Amendment 1033 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a recognised media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content provided by theor very large online search engine frequently complains about its media service providers without sufficient grounds as referred to in paragraph 2, the provider of very large online platform shallor very large online search engine shall, at the request of the recognised media service provider, 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 suspensionshe future and avoiding themcomplaints in the future. The media service provider mayshould notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board and the national digital services coordinator.
Amendment 1040 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Providers of very large online platforms or very large online search engines shall make publicly available on an annual basis information on:
Amendment 1049 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they intended to impose or imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media services provider that submittedd by a dreclaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article isognised media service provider are incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 1050 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) the grounds for imposing such restric, including the specific clause in the terms and conditions.
Amendment 1070 #
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, 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 very large online search engines and to monitor adherence to self- regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference. The structured dialogue should also address risks based on the design or functioning of very large online platforms or very large online search engines, as well as their respective recommendation systems, including actual or potential negative impacts on fundamental rights, social discourse, media freedom or media pluralism.
Amendment 1083 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1
Article 19 – paragraph 1
1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interfaceconfiguration of audiovisual media services or of applications allowing users to access such services, on a user interface or on devices, including remote controls, 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 affect national measures implementing Article 7a and 7b of Directive 2010/13/EU.
Amendment 1090 #
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 settingAny person who places on the market user interfaces, devices or remote controls as referred to in paragraph 1 shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change, at any time, the configuration of audiovisual media services or of applications allowing users to access such services controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered. The provisions of Article 25 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment 1096 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Any person operating the devices or user interfaces referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider who has editorial responsibility for a media service is consistently and clearly visible and identifiable.
Amendment 1127 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, upon its own initiative or request of the Commission, 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. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 1143 #
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, 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 or bodies concerned.
Amendment 1148 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact onaffect media pluralism andor editorial independence. These rules shall:
Amendment 1152 #
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 significant impact onaffect media pluralism andor editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;
Amendment 1154 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) designate the national regulatory authority or body as responsible for the assessment of the impact of a notifiable concentration on media pluralism andor editorial independence or ensure theprovide for the substantial involvement of the national regulatory authority or body in such assessment;
Amendment 1160 #
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 and proportionate criteria for notifying media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism andor editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism andor editorial independence.
Amendment 1161 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) specify in advance a reasonable period of time by which the evaluation shall be completed to be observed by the authority or body conducting the procedure, taking into account the period of time required for the involvement of the Board and/or the Commission in accordance with paragraphs 4 and 5. Furthermore, the legal consequence of not having completed the assessment by the end of that period shall be specified.
Amendment 1177 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions;
Amendment 1186 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3
Article 21 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria forby national authorities or bodies in assessing theany impact of media market concentrationsirment onf media pluralism andor editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodiescaused by a concentration in the media market.
Amendment 1188 #
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 opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentrationbefore conducting the assessment where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 1194 #
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 opinion or decision referred to iassessment, taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority or body and the Commission.
Amendment 1196 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 6
Article 21 – paragraph 6
6. The national regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 4 shall take utmost account of the opinion referred to in paragraph 5. Where that authority does not follow the opinion, fully or partially, it shall provide the Board and the Commission with a reasoned justification explaining its position within 30 calendar days from the receipt of that opinion. Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. The Commission's opinion may propose measures drawing on the Commission's decision-making powers under Article 8 of Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004. The competent authority or body shall, within four weeks of receipt of the Commission’s opinion, initiate the enforcement of the proposed measures or give reasons to the Commission for not taking all or part of the proposed measures.
Amendment 1207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1
Article 22 – paragraph 1
1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board, at its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where, according to its own or the Commission's preliminary assessment, such a media market concentration affects or 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). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.
Amendment 1218 #
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 may issue its own opinion on the matter. The Commission's opinion may propose measures drawing on the Commission's decision-making powers under Article 8 of Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004. The competent authority or body shall, within four weeks of receipt of the Commission’s opinion, initiate the enforcement of the proposed measures or give reasons to the Commission for not taking all or part of the proposed measures.
Amendment 1227 #
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, inclusiveness, proportionality, non- discrimination, comparability and verifiability. To ensure impartiality in measurement, audience measurement shall be conducted in accordance with self-regulatory mechanisms widely accepted within the industry.
Amendment 1232 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ business secrets, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers 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 and the anonymised data obtained by means of or within the framework of these proprietary audience measurement systems in an industry- standard and comparable form. Providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall commission an independent audit of the methodology used and its application once a year. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 1242 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Audience measurement data provided to media service providers shall be as granular as the information provided by industry self-regulatory mechanisms, including non-aggregated data.
Amendment 1250 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. NThe competent national regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage and support the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.
Amendment 1254 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the practical application of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article, taking account of the codes of conduct.
Amendment 1258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. The Board shall foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems through a regular dialogue between representatives of the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies, representatives of providers of audience measurement systems, media service providers and other interested parties.
Amendment 1277 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Public authorities, including European, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies, as well as state-owned enterprises or other state- controlled entities at the European, 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, online platforms or online search engines which shall include at least the following details:
Amendment 1301 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
3. NThe competent national regulatory authorities or bodies shall monitor the allocation of state advertising in media markets. In order to assess the accuracy of the information on state advertising made available pursuant to paragraph 2, the competent national regulatory authorities or bodies may request from the entities referred to in paragraph 2 further information, including information on the application of criteria referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 1314 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – title
Article 25 – title
Amendment 1315 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
1. The Board, in cooperation with the Commission, shall ensure an independent monitoring of the internal market for media services, including risks to and progress in its functioning and resilience. The findings of the monitoring exercise shall be subject to consultation with the Boardits functioning and resilience, and continuous monitoring of risks and progress in the area of media freedom and pluralism. To this end, the Board and the Commission may involve European bodies with the relevant expertise in media freedom and pluralism.
Amendment 1317 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. The CommissionBoard shall define key performance indicators to be used for the monitoring referred in paragraph 1, in consultoperation with the BoardCommission.
Amendment 1321 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Amendment 1327 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) a continuous and detailed assessment of the implementation of Articles 3 and 4 of this Regulation;
Amendment 1328 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b b (new)
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point b b (new)
(bb) a complex mapping of the elements positively or negatively affecting media freedom and pluralism, in particular their fundamental protection as well as political independence and social inclusion;
Amendment 1329 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions.
Amendment 1345 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Article 25 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1348 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. By [fourthree years after the entry into force of this Regulation] at the latest, and every fourthree years thereafter, the Commission shall evaluate this Regulation and report to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 1349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 26 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) findings of the monitoring exercise referred to in Article 25.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 1354 #
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) shall apply from [248 months after the entry into force].