11 Amendments of Lukas MANDL related to 2022/0277(COD)
Amendment 182 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to universal and varied offers including quality information, and balanced and impartial media coverage, as part of their missionremit. However, public service media can be particularly exposed to the risk of interference, given their institutional proximity to the State and the public funding they receive. This risk may be exacerbated by uneven safeguards related to independent governance and balanced coverage by public service media across the Union. 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, tohat Member States put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media 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 providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their missionremit that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, sSuch funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi- year basis, in line with the public service missionremit of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States toapplication of the State aid rules as applied on a case-by-case basis or the competence of Member States to define a broad and dynamic remit, organise and provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self- regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act] 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 restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour tosubmit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under in accordance with Article 4(1) ofRegulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065[the Digital Services Act] and grant the affected media service a right to reply to this statement of reasons prior to the suspension or restriction taking effect. In particular, this Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service, or in order to mitigate systemic risks posed by dissemination of certain content through its service, in compliance with Union law, in particular pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065[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).
Amendment 263 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or online platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services.
Amendment 420 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. PMember States shall ensure in their national legal framework and conduct that public service media providers shall provide independently and in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission. remit.
Amendment 439 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resourcesremit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources and the process by which they are allocated shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.
Amendment 446 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Article5a Prominence for audiovisual and audio media services of general interest Member States shall take measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of audiovisual and audio media services of general interest. This Regulation, Directives 2010/13/EU and 2000/31/EC and Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 shall not affect the competence of Member States and shall be without effect to existing prominence measures. References to Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/1808 shall be read as references to Article 5a of this Regulation.
Amendment 755 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to restrict or suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content or services provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content or services is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, includingcommunicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX2065 [Digital Services Act], to communicate toand provide 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 suspenwith an opportunity to reply to the statement of reasons prior to the suspension or restriction taking effect. If the provider of a very large online platform subsequently decides to suspend or restrict content or services, it shall give detailed reasons in writing why it rejects the media service provider’s objections at the time the decision takinges effect.
Amendment 763 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3
Article 17 – paragraph 3
3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and/or Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act] by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and no later than 24 hours after submission of the complaint. If the very large online platform fails to adhere to this time limit, it shall reinstate the content or service without undue delay.
Amendment 770 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a 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 or services provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board. If no amicable solution is found, the media service provider may lodge a complaint before a certified out-of-court dispute settlement body in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation 2022/2065 without prejudice and in addition to its right to effective judicial protection.
Amendment 778 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content or service provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 799 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 a (new)
Article 19 a (new)
Article19a Right to identify the provider of a media service 1. Recipients of media services shall have a right to easily identify the media service provider on any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of media services. 2. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered.