7 Amendments of Kinga GÁL related to 2011/2246(INI)
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that media pluralism is a pillar of media freedom, in terms of ensuring that media are diversified, ensure access to different social and political actors, opinions and viewpoints (including NGOs, citizens’ associations, minorities, etc), and offer a wide range of views; considers that the provision of varied and objective information to the public is vital in order to create and maintain democratic public opinion; in addition to the existing regulations, thought should be given, with regard to the requirement for the provision of balanced information (and the right of reply), to ways in which other joint European minimum regulations can be laid down and how their implementation can be made compulsory for online content;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the important role of the public service media, funded by citizens through the State, and their institutional duties to provide high quality and accurate and reliable information; stresses that the private media have similar duties in relation to information, notably of institutional and political nature, in particular on the occasion of elections, referenda, etc; finds that free market entry is leading to a rapid rise in the number of commercial media providers, so that further requirements may have to be laid down for these providers with regard to public access to value-sustaining and value-creating content;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the importance of ensuring the independence of journalists, both from internal pressures from editors or owners and externally from political or economic lobbies or other interest groups; highlights the fact that the right of access to documents and information is fundamental and calls for the full protection of the confidentiality of sources principle and for the strict application of the European Court of Human Rights case-law in this area, including in relation to whistle-blowing; calls for journalists to be protected from threats and violence, as investigative journalists are often threatened as a result of their activities; highlights the need to support and promote investigative journalism and to promote ethical journalism in the media by developing professional standards and appropriate redress procedures; points out in addition that the immunity of investigative journalists from prosecution (including under criminal law) must be guaranteed if they commit infringements in the course of acquiring information in the public good which they would have been able to obtain either not at all or only with undue difficulty by other means; proposes as a further condition for immunity that infringements committed by journalists should cause no disproportionate or serious injury and that the acquisition of information should not involve any breach of the provisions on the protection of classified information;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. stresses the need for more legal harmonisation measures to protect minors, primarily with regard to online content; proposes in addition the formulation of detailed regulations and more European standards banning hate speech and ensuring respect for human dignity, such as the restrictions on freedom of expression which are enshrined in the constitution;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Stresses that dealing with the question of cross-border media provision is vital with regard to jurisdiction issues; takes the view that discrepancies between the regulations and practices of the authorities in individual Member States make it very difficult to take effective, substantive action against providers established in another Member State, and that media organisations thus have the opportunity to evade liability through their choice of the location of their seat or of the jurisdiction; therefore proposes that the solution to this problem, in addition to more detailed joint regulations than exist at present, would be to make it possible to take effective action against cross-border providers;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Emphasises that the most comprehensive possible involvement of co-regulatory organisations in mass media monitoring is indispensable; recalls that self-regulation which is completely independent of the state does not make this possible, since the differing constitutional and public administration systems in the Member States mean that it cannot be made subject to common uniform rules;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Stresses that another important part of joint media regulation is harmonisation of certain issues surrounding market entry rules, including standardising media provision fees payable to the media authority (to cover linear media services provided via cable, satellite and the internet);