Activities of Gianantonio DA RE related to 2022/0277(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
European Media Freedom Act (debate)
Amendments (66)
Amendment 130 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Moreover, in response to challenges to media pluralism and media freedom online, some Member States have taken regulatory measures and other Member States are likely to do so within their national competence, with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market.
Amendment 173 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(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 robust 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.Does not affect the English version.)
Amendment 178 #
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 abide by commonly agreed industry standards shall not be considered as providers of proprietary audience measurement systems.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Online platforms’ capacity to offer content without exercising editorial responsibility over it and to market the ability to target users with advertising allows them to act as direct competitors to media service providers whose content they intermediate and distribute. The audience measurement definition should therefore also take into account content consumed both by users of media services and users of online platforms. This will ensure that all intermediaries involved in content distribution are transparent about their audience measurement methodologies so as to enable advertisers to make informed choices that drive competition.
Amendment 187 #
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 varied offers including quality information, balanced and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. 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, to 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 mission that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 191 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards. Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the editors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activity. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content as part of their everyday 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 recipients. This is without prejudice to existing legal and self- regulatory frameworks of Member States that govern liability rules applicable to the editorial content of media services.
Amendment 191 #
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 marketmedia diversity, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. 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, to 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 mission that enables predictability in their planning. Preferably, such funding should be decided and appropriated on a multi-year basis, in line with the public service mission of public service media providers, to avoid potential for undue influence from yearly budget negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the competence of Member States to provide for the funding of public service media as enshrined in Protocol 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22 a (new)
Recital 22 a (new)
(22a) Directive 2010/13/EU and this Regulation are different legislative instruments, inasmuch they have different scopes, the tasks, conferred by them should be treated separately in order to avoid overlap in their implementation.
Amendment 197 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) It is crucial for the recipients 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 within the limits of the editorial line set by the owner. 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 200 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU, appointed by such authorities or bodies. In cases where Member States have several relevant regulatory authorities or bodies, including at regional level, a joint representative should be chosen through appropriate procedures and the voting right should remain limited to one representative per Member State. This should not affect the possibility for the other national regulatory authorities or bodies to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings, in agreement with the Commission, experts and observers, 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.
Amendment 204 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards. Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, once the overall editorial line has been agreed between their owners and editors, the freedom of the editors to take individual decisions in the course of their professional activityprotect the editorial freedom of the media in the course of their professional activity, in particular by appointing publishing directors with legal responsibility for the publication of content. The objective to shield editors from undue interference in their decisions taken on specific pieces of content 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 recipients.
Amendment 207 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, it is essential that the Commission and the Board work and cooperate closely. In particular, the Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the consistent application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. For that purpose, the Board should in particular advise and assist the Commission on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices and draw up opinions in agreement with the Commission or upon its request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The Commission secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.
Amendment 210 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50should be exempted from the requirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs or to their particular editorial line, in particular if they are small and medium- sized enterprises within the meaning of that Article. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. The present Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to set strategic or general goals and to foster the growth and financial viability of their undertakings. In this respect, this Regulation recognises that the goal of fostering editorial independence needs to be reconciled with the legitimate rights and interests of privatemedia owners and with the exercise of responsibility of the publishing director. _________________ 50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76). 51 OJ C , , p. .
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regarding this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission 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 functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. Such guidelines should respect the Member States’ competence in cultural matters with a view to promoting media pluralism. 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 219 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 244 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can negatively affect the operations of news and current affairs programs of media service providers in the internal market. They include, for example, rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors; they also include decisions related to licensing, authorisation or prior notification for media service providers. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non- discrimination and proportionality.
Amendment 249 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on the Commission’s request, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to a media service provider providing its services towards more than one Member State, or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State.
Amendment 257 #
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 th, meaning on the diversity of media services, should be conline environmentsidered. 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. Consideration should also be given to whether concentration would stimulate investments and a vital media market. The assessment should also take into account competition with online platforms and publicly funded public service broadcasters.
Amendment 262 #
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 buying, selling and production of content. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers, right holders and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in incomparable measurement systems and information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market. In order to ensure impartiality in measurement, audience measurement should be carried out by independent third parties or self- regulatory bodies.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) In order to enhance the verifiability, comparability 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. As such, for the purpose of this Regulation, systems developed without market governance, outside European or national standards agreed by the relevant national regulatory bodies or by independent providers appointed by relevant bodies should be considered proprietary measurement systems. 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. The information must be as granular as the information on methodologies published by self- regulatory bodies that govern the agreed industry standards on audience measurement. 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. 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], including those concerning ranking or self- preferencing.
Amendment 266 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) Regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU have specific practical expertise that allows them to effectively balance the interests of the providers and recipients of media services while ensuring the respect for the freedom of expression. This is key in particular when it comes to protecting the internal market from activities of media service providers established outside the Union that target audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, they may prejudice or pose risks of prejudice to public security and defence. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible public security and defence threats stemming from such media services needs to be strengthened and given a legal framework to ensure the effectiveness and possible coordination of the national measures adopted in line with Union media legislation. In order to ensure that media services suspended in certain Member States under Article 3(3) and 3(5) of Directive 2010/13/EU do not continue to be provided via satellite or other means in those Member States, a mechanism of accelerated mutual cooperation and assistance should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Additionally, it is necessary to coordinate the national measures that may be adopted to counter public security and defence threats by media services established outside of the Union and targeting audiences in the Union, including the possibility for the Board, in agreement with the Commission, to issue opinions on such measures, as appropriate. In this regard, risks to public security and defence need to be assessed with a view to all relevant factual and legal elements, at national and European level. This is without prejudice to the competence of the Union under Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Amendment 276 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) Directive 2001/29/EU;
Amendment 283 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Directive 2010/13/EU and Directive (EU) 2018/1808 with the exception of Article 27 of this Regulation;
Amendment 284 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Directive (EU) 2019/789;
Amendment 285 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 3
Article 1 – paragraph 3
3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III and of Article 24, provided that those rules comply with Union law.
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘media service’ means a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty, where the principal purpose of the service or a dissociable section thereof consists in providing programmes or press publications to the general public, by any means, in order to inform, entertain or educate, under the editorial responsibility of a media service provideras defined into Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 292 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) To this end, providers of very large online platforms should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they 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, on the basis of transparent, objective and non-discriminatory criteria. Providers of very large online platforms may rely on information regarding adherence to these requirements, such as the machine-readable standard of the Journalism Trust Initiative or the recognition of press publication status as used by media service providers in certain Member States or other relevant codes of conduct. Guidelines by the Commission may be useful to facilitate an effective implementation of such functionality, including on modalities of involvement of relevant civil society organisations in the review of the declarations, on consultation of the regulator of the country of establishment, where relevant, and address any potential abuse of the functionality to address any potential abuse in its implementation by very large online platforms.
Amendment 316 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14
(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services and of users of online platforms, to determine the audience size, reach and frequency for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, buying, selling, production or distribution of content;
Amendment 337 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion, on the Commission’s request, where national measures are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for audiovisual media services. This is, for example, the case when a national administrative measure is addressed to an audiovisual 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 340 #
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 audiovisual media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on audiovisual media pluralism or editorial independence. Such rules and procedures can have an impact on the freedom to provide audiovisual media services in the internal market and need to be properly framed and be transparent, objective, proportionate and non- discriminatory. MAudiovisual media market concentrations subject to such rules should be understood as covering those which could result in a single entity controlling or having significant interests in audiovisual 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. Where effective national measures exist, they should not be amended for the sake of European harmonisation.
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of audiovisual media pluralism, should be involved in the assessment of the impact of audiovisual media market concentrations on audiovisual 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 audiovisual media pluralism and editorial independence, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of audiovisual media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.
Amendment 349 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) When an audiovisual media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200455, the application of this Regulation or of any rules and procedures adopted by Member States on the basis of this Regulation should not affect the application of Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. Any measures taken by the designated or involved national regulatory authorities or bodies based on their assessment of the impact of audiovisualmedia market concentrations on audiovisualmedia pluralism and editorial independence should therefore be aimed at protecting legitimate interests within the meaning of Article 21(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004, and should be in line with the general principles and other provisions of Union law. _________________ 55 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1-22).
Amendment 353 #
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 audiovisual 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 audiovisual media service providers having a significant influence on formation of public opinion in a given audiovisual media market. Moreover, where the concentration has not been assessed for its impact on audiovisual media pluralism and editorial independence by the relevant national authorities or bodies, or where the national regulatory authorities or bodies have not consulted the Board regarding a given audiovisual media market concentration, but that media market concentration is considered likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for audiovisual media services, the Board should be able to provide an opinion, 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 361 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) With a view to ensuring pluralistic audiovisual media markets, the national authorities or bodies and the Board should take account ofMember States should lay down a set of criteria. In particular, impact on audiovisual 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 audiovisual 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, once the owner has set the editorial line, or the 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 audiovisual 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 audiovisual media services in the market.
Amendment 392 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) Risks to the functioning and resilience of the internal media market should be regularly monitored as part of the efforts to improve the functioning of the internal market for media services. Such monitoring should aim at providing detailed data and qualitative assessments on the resilience of the internal market for media services, including as regards the degree of 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 monitoring should include forward-looking exercises such as stress tests to assess the prospective resilience of the internal media market, to alert about vulnerabilities around media pluralism and editorial independence, and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment, regulatory cooperation and convergence in media regulation, obstacles to the provision of media services, including in a digital environment, as well as transparency and fairness of allocation of economic resources in the internal media market should be covered by the monitoring. It should also consider broader trends in the internal media market and national media markets as well as national legislation affecting media service providers. In addition, the monitoring should provide an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions, including those proposed in the accompanying Recommendation. In order to ensure the highest standards of such monitoring, the Board, as it gathers entities with a specialised media market expertise, should be duly involved.
Amendment 407 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 5
Article 10 – paragraph 5
5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consultadditionally keep the Commission in preparationformed ofn its work programme and main deliverables.
Amendment 411 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 6
Article 10 – paragraph 6
6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.
Amendment 417 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 8
Article 10 – paragraph 8
8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission.
Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall keep a separate agenda for its responsibilities and activities relating to Directive 2010/13/EU. Additionally, it shall not intervene neither in national media markets nor for matters relating to the sole and exclusive competence of national authorities. The Board shall:
Amendment 435 #
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 442 #
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 445 #
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 478 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar 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 shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.
Amendment 483 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 4
Article 14 – paragraph 4
4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreement with the Commission, without undue delay.
Amendment 488 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a and of Article 13(1) of Directive 2010/13/EU;
Amendment 492 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3
Article 15 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.
Amendment 508 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.
Amendment 520 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare thatThe national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall maintain a list of service providers who are established in that Member State and who have demonstrated to that regulatory authority that they:
Amendment 523 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it isare a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);
Amendment 526 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it isare editorially independent from Member States and third countries; and
Amendment 531 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it isare subject to regulatory requirements for the exercise of editorial responsibility in one or more Member States, or adheres to a co-regulatory or self-regulatory mechanism governing editorial standards, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States.
Amendment 534 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 17 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Member States shall communicate the list, including any updates thereto, to the Commission. The Commission shall maintain a centralised database of these lists and make this database available to very large online platforms in a standardised, machine-readable format, including through application programming interfaces.
Amendment 545 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
2. Where a provider of a very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declarationis listed in the Commission database established pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content 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, 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 effect.
Amendment 554 #
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 by media service providers that submitted a declarationthat are listed in the Commission database established pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.
Amendment 563 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 4
Article 17 – paragraph 4
4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declarationis listed in the Commission database 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 the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of or where the 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 Boardidentifies a media service provider that frequently violates the platform’s terms of service, either party may request to engage in a dialogue with the aim to come to a mutual understanding of content moderation practices. Both parties may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board and request the Board to publish the outcome of the dialogue.
Amendment 572 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a
(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declarationin the Commission database in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article is incompatible with their terms and conditions; and
Amendment 576 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6
Article 17 – paragraph 6
6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission may issue guidelines before the Regulation gets adopted to establish the form and details of the declarationlists and database set out in paragraph 1.
Amendment 590 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 1
1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect the operations of news and current affairs media service providers in the internal market shall be duly justified and proportionate. Such measures shall be reasoned, transparent, objective and non- discriminatory.
Amendment 591 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 597 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the funcoperationings of the internal market fornews and current affairs media service providers. 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 600 #
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 funcoperationings of the internal market fornews and current affairs media service providers, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concerned.
Amendment 622 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the impact of the concentration on media pluralism, including its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media players on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non- media businesses;
Amendment 627 #
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, in line with national laws and self-regulation;
Amendment 634 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) competition with very large online platforms and publicly funded public service broadcasters.
Amendment 659 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’s business secrets, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems, developed without market governance or outside of European or national industry standards agree by the relevant national self- regulatory bodies, shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers, right holders 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 data collected and on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.
Amendment 667 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 4
Article 23 – paragraph 4
4. The Commission, assisted by the Board and the relevant experts from media service providers such as Joint Industry Committees providing audience measurements, may issue guidelines on the practical application of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of this Article.