MEPs call for European media freedoms law
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 14 February 2011
Members of the European Parliament are calling for the Commission to draft a new directive on media freedoms and pluralism. If taken forward, the idea is that the directive would set out the minimum requirements for all EU countries, to guarantee freedom of expression and media pluralism.
---Update - the joint motion has been published - see link below ---
The call has been issued by the Socialist, Liberal and Left groups. It comes in the context of internal European Parliament negotiations regarding a Resolution on the Hungarian Media Law. This is the controversial Hungarian law which threatens to censor all media, including the Internet and websites.
The European Parliament Resolution is effectively a political statement which will send a message from Brussels to the Hungarian government, thus its content must reconcile the views of the different Party groups. As I write this, they are haggling over
the exact wording.
Most of the Party groups (all except UKIP) have proposed texts for the Resolution on the Hungarian Media Law. There are three clearly different positions.
The Socialists , Liberals, Left and Green groups are highlight the criticism of the Hungarian Media Law, from, among others, the OSCE. They call on the Hungarian authorities to review the law in an open and transparent manner, following up the Commission's critique of the law from January.
The ECR group ( British Conservatives) takes a diplomatic middle path, and stresses the requirement for Hungary to ensure that its law protects the right to freedom of expression and democratic values. The ECR position is in keeping with traditional British free speech values (although arguably it could go further on that basis).
The EPP takes an unusually non-diplomatic stance, defensive of the Hungarian government's position. Indeed, it tries to dig the knife into those who have criticised the law:
5. Expresses therefore disappointment as to the manipulative and politically motivated comments often out of content on the Hungarian Media Law and the Hungarian government, and considers that this unfounded criticism aims to weaken the Hungarian Presidency this way do harm to EU as a whole facing its biggest challenges since its creation; (sic)
Much criticism of the Hungarian Media Law has focussed on the obligation for all media, including websites, to be registered with an overseeing authority, which has the power to fine or ban media that fail to comply with rules on balanced coverage. One of it sharpest critics is the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe - an international organisation which monitors security and other issues in the former Eastern bloc.
By Hungarian government's own admission (in its reply to EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes, a copy of which has been seen by iptegrity) the law does indeed apply to websites, and specifically to on-demand, web-based video services. And the Hungarian government says that the registration requirement can be applied in the context of copyright.
However, there is also a lot which is not clear about where the law applies and what its effect could be. This is why the European Commission is analysing it, and in this context, an EU directive which clearly sets out what is required for protection of free speech and democratic values would appear to be a positive idea.
The exact text of the S&D call for a Media Freedoms directive is:
5. Calls the Commission, on the basis of Article 265 TFEU, to issue a proposal for a directive on media freedom and pluralism before the end of the year, hereby overcoming the inadequate EU legislative framework on media, making use of its competences in the fields of the internal market, audiovisual policy, competition, telecommunications, state subsidies, public service obligation and fundamental rights of citizens, in order to define at least the minimum essential conditions that all Member states must respect to ensure, guarantee and promote freedom of information and an adequate level of media pluralism;
The Parliament will vote on the Resolution on Wednesday.
Joint Motion for a Resolution on Media Law in Hungary - S & D, ALDE, Greens, GUE/NGL
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2011), MEPs call for European media freedoms law http://www.iptegrity.com 14 February 2011
- Article Views: 11077
IPtegrity politics
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- 2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill