(2)

Given their unique role, the protection of media freedom and pluralism is an essential feature of a well-functioning internal market for media services (or ‘internal media market’). This market has substantially changed since the beginning of the new century, becoming increasingly digital and international. It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges. The Union should help the media sector seize those opportunities within the internal market, while at the same time protecting the values, such as the protection of the fundamental rights, that are common to the Union and to its Member States.

(2)

In view of their unique role, special attention must be paid to protecting media freedom and media pluralism in the internal market concerning media services. The internal market for media services has changed fundamentally in recent decades and has become increasingly digital and international. It offers many economic opportunities but also faces a number of challenges. The Union should support the media sector in taking advantage of these opportunities in the internal market, while working to ensure that the common values of the Union and the Member States, such as fundamental rights, are protected.

(3)

In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer. As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale 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 .

(3)

In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content, immediately available on their personal devices, increasingly in a cross-border setting. Global online platforms and search engines act as gateways to media content, with business models that tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms are also essential providers of online advertising, which has diverted financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability, and consequently the diversity of content on offer. These market participants must therefore be appropriately involved in order to ensure the independence and diversity of the media. As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, they require scale 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 can be of particular importance .

At the same time, however, corporate growth can have the effect of limiting the diversity of content and offerings in the domestic market and further increase the pressure on local or regionally active market players.

(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 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 service providers financed by certain third countries.

(4)

Functioning national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence take into account the needs at national, regional and local level, in accordance with the Member States’ fundamental duty to take adequate measures to ensure media pluralism. Common minimum standards for the development of these measures, set while respecting the cultural sovereignty of the Member States, are likely to promote the internal market and prevent inappropriate national restrictions on free movement within the internal market. For this purpose, cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies should also be improved. Opaque and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources lead to an uneven level playing field which can also impair competition in the publishing sector . 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 service providers financed by certain third countries.

(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, with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market.

(6)

Recipients 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 recipients 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 standards.

(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. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.

(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 cross-border 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. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.

(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 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.

(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 governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at Union, national or regional level, or local governments of territorial entities of more than 100 000 inhabitants , with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold . 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 , provided that this does not involve more than reimbursement of the expenses incurred by the media service provider .

(11)

In order to ensure that society reaps the benefits of the internal media market, it is essential not only to guarantee the fundamental freedoms under the Treaty, but also the legal certainty which the recipients of media services need for the enjoyment of the corresponding benefits. Such recipients 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 interference.

(11)

In order to take adequate account of media services in their role as cultural goods in the internal market, it is essential to guarantee the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Treaty while preserving the cultural diversity of the Union in the light of the obligation under fundamental law to ensure diversity of the media and to protect users’ freedom of information. To this end, the Member States’ responsibility for shaping their respective national media systems must be emphasised and guided by common values, while respecting the cultural sovereignty and different constitutional traditions of the Member States.

(13)

The free flow of trustworthy information is essential in a well-functioning internal market for media services. Therefore, the provision of media services should not be subject to any restrictions contrary to this Regulation or other rules of Union law, such as Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council providing for measures necessary to protect users from illegal and harmful content. Restrictions could also derive from measures applied by national public authorities in compliance with Union law.

(13)

The free flow of trustworthy information should be guaranteed as far as possible. It must therefore be the duty of the Member States, along the lines of their national constitutions, in accordance with Article 11 and other fundamental rights, particularly of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, namely freedom of expression and entrepreneurial freedoms, and respecting the fundamental freedoms of the internal market, to ensure an appropriate legal and administrative framework in which pluralism and the independence of the media are guaranteed in an effective and adequate manner. The provision of media services should not be subject to restrictions that violate these fundamental principles and are not in compliance with Union law. Restrictions could also result from measures applied by national authorities in accordance with Union law.

(14)

The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity. Editorial independence is especially important for media service providers providing news and current affairs content given its societal role as a public good. Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities freely in the internal market and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders.

(14)

Media service providers should be able to exercise their economic activities as freely as possible in the internal market , maintaining to this effect their editorial independence, and compete on equal footing in an increasingly online environment where information flows across borders.

(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 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.

(18)

Public service media established by the Member States play a particular role in securing media pluralism , by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission. However, public service media may have an impact on the provision of private media services in the internal market due to their institutional proximity to the state and the public funding they receive. It is therefore necessary, taking into account the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, to support the establishment of public service media by the Member States, but at the same time to define common minimum standards for this purpose which take into account the principles of the internal market, while respecting Protocol 29 annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 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.

(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. 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) 2015/849 should 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.

(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. 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. This should be in line with the requirements applicable in principle to audiovisual media services under Article 30(9) of Directive (EU) 2015/849, but without prejudice to the measures taken by Member States in other respects. The required information should be disclosed by the relevant providers on their websites or other medium that is easily and directly accessible.

(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.

(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 consider measures that allow editorial staff to operate freely in an appropriate manner. These measures can help to improve competitive conditions in the internal market and improve the quality of services. This objective is also consistent with the fundamental right to receive and impart information under Article 11 of the Charter.

(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 Council (50) should 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, in particular if they are small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of that Article. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides 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 private media owners.

(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 Council (50) should be exempted from the requirements related to information and measures with a view to fostering the independence of individual editorial decisions. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation provides 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 private media owners.

(22)

Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. 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 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 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.

(22)

Independent national regulatory authorities or bodies are key for the proper application of media law across the Union. National regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU or other regulatory authorities designated by the Member States in accordance with the requirements set out 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 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 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.

(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.

(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 and systems of self- or co-regulation , a common representative should be selected by means of appropriate procedures, and, if necessary, supplementary procedures for the involvement of regulatory bodies, especially those of self-regulation or co-regulation, should be established. The voting rights of the designated representative should be limited to one representative per Member State . The Board should also have the possibility to invite to attend its meetings 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.

(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.

(24)

The Board’s work should be independent and remote from political influence. The Commission should therefore not have any determining influence on the work of the Board, outside its power to consult the Board or to perform its role as ‘guardian of the Treaties’. The Board should actively support the Commission in its tasks of ensuring the uniform application of this Regulation and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU. To that end, the Board should advise and assist the Commission, in particular on technical or practical aspects relevant to the application of Union law, promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices, and prepare opinions in the cases provided for in this Regulation. In order to carry out its tasks effectively, the Board should be able to draw on the expertise and human resources of a secretariat provided by the Commission. The secretariat provided by the Commission should support the Board both administratively and organisationally and in the performance of its tasks. To ensure the independence and non-governmental nature of the Board’s work, the secretariat should have sufficient financial and human resources. In its substantive work, the secretariat should be independent of the Commission and subject only to the leadership of the Board, namely its Chair or vice-Chair.

(26)

To ensure the 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 national regulatory authorities or bodies to cooperate effectively and efficiently.

(26)

In order to ensure the effective enforcement of Union measures concerning the media, to prevent possible circumvention of the applicable rules by rogue media service providers and to avoid additional barriers to the provision of media services in the internal market, effective and efficient cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies is essential.

(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.

(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. 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.

(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 Council. To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act]. 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/XXX [the Digital Services Act].

(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 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, providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines also have to take due account of users’ freedom of information, freedom and media pluralism in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation]. This Regulation should not prevent a provider of a very large online platform or a very large search engine from taking immediate action, in accordance with Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [the Digital Services Regulation], to address illegal content distributed through its service or to mitigate systemic risks posed by the distribution of certain content through its service.

(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 are treated with priority and without undue delay.

(32)

Given the expected positive impact on the freedom to provide services and freedom of expression, it is also justified that in cases where media service providers comply with certain regulatory or self-regulatory standards, their content or offerings are not readily blocked, deleted or otherwise excluded from distribution or publication by the platform provider or search engine.

(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. 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 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.

(33)

To this end, providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines should provide a functionality on their online interface to enable media service providers to declare that they meet certain requirements and which supervision they are subject to , while at the same time retaining the possibility to have such a self-declaration verified where they consider that these conditions are not met. 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 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.

(35)

Providers of very large online platforms 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 should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.

(35)

Providers of very large online platforms should engage with media service providers that respect standards of credibility and transparency and that consider that their content is frequently objected to by providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines without sufficient grounds, in order to find an amicable solution for avoiding claims in the future. Providers of very large online platforms should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information.

(37)

Recipients 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 or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface 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.

(37)

Recipients 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 or software shortcuts, applications and search areas, which have implications on the recipients’ viewing behaviour, who may be unduly incentivised to choose certain audiovisual media offers over others. Service recipients should have the possibility to change, in a simple and user-friendly manner, the default settings of a device or user interface 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, in particular but not only implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EC, taken in the pursuit of legitimate public policy considerations.

(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 .

(39)

It is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion where national measures regarding media services are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market. 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.

(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 concentrations that could have a significant impact on 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 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.

(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 concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism , including 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 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.

(41)

National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should be 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 objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.

(41)

National regulatory authorities or bodies, who have specific expertise in the area of media pluralism, should assess the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism where they are not the designated authorities or bodies themselves. In order to genuinely protect media pluralism, it is essential that objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying and assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism are set out in advance.

(42)

When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), 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 media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence should therefore be aimed at 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.

(42)

When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (55), 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 media market concentrations on media pluralism should therefore be aimed at protecting freedom and pluralism of the media, taking into account the importance of editorial independence, as 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.

(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 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 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, 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.

(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 . The Commission should be able to issue its own opinions following the opinions of the Board.

(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.

(44)

In order to ensure pluralistic media markets, Member States should define a number of relevant criteria to be taken into account. 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. In deciding whether a merger is permissible, consideration should be given to whether the acquiring and acquired entities would remain economically viable without the merger, whether there are alternatives to ensure their economic viability, and whether measures are possible and effective to continue to ensure media plurality despite a merger.

(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.

(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 regarding media services. Developments at the level of the Member States should also be included, in particular to take account of the interaction between the internal market and national markets and the impact on the freedom and plurality of the media at the various levels . 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 and to help efforts to improve governance, data quality and risk management. In particular, the level of cross-border activity and investment 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 . 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.

(51)

To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions concerning independent media authorities, the Board and the required amendments to Directive 2010/13/EU (Articles 7 to 12 and 27 of this Regulation) should apply 3 months after the entry into force of the Act , while all other provisions of this Regulation will apply 6 months after the entry into force of this Regulation. In particular, this is needed to ensure that the Board will be established in time to ensure a successful implementation of the Regulation .

(51)

To prepare the ground for a correct implementation of this Regulation, its provisions should essentially apply 20 months after the entry into force of the Act.

(a)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

( b )

Directive 2019/790/EU;

(a)

Directive 2000/31/EC;

(b)

Directive 2010/13/EU, with the exception of the amendments made by Article 27 of this Regulation;

( c )

Directive 2019/790/EU;

(3)

‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission under national law or receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission;

(3)

‘public service media provider’ means a media service provider which is entrusted with a public service mission and receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a mission;

(10)

‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article 25 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/ XXX [Digital Services Act];

(10)

‘provider of very large online platform’ means a provider of an online platform that has been designated as a very large online platform pursuant to Article 33 (4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 [Digital Services Act];

(11)

(15)

‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any national or regional public authority, such as national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 1 million inhabitants;

(15)

‘State advertising’ means the placement, publication or dissemination, in any media service, of a promotional or self-promotional message, normally in return for payment or for any other consideration, by, for or on behalf of any public authority, such as EU, national, federal or regional governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities at the national or regional level, or any local government of a territorial entity of more than 100 000 inhabitants, with the population criterion to be considered in conjunction with the definition of a minimum annual spending threshold ;

(a)

interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers;

(a)

interfere in or try to influence in any way, directly or indirectly, editorial policies and decisions by media service providers; this shall be without prejudice to legal requirements and their enforcement pursuing general interest objectives, in particular with regard to diversity, illegal content or the protection of minors in the media, or the definition of the public service mission of public service media ;

(a)

their legal name and contact details;

(a)

their legal name, the geographical address at which they are established and contact details, at least their email address or website, which allow them to be contacted rapidly in a direct and effective manner ;

(b)

the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making;

(b)

the name(s) of their direct or indirect owner(s) with shareholdings enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision making;

(c)

the name(s) 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.

(c)

the name(s) of their beneficial owners within the meaning of Article 3, point 6 of Directive (EU) 2015/849.

(b)

promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the 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;

(b)

promote cooperation and the effective exchange of information, experience and best practices between the national regulatory authorities or bodies on the application of the Union 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;

(c)

advise the Commission , 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;

(c)

advise the Commission on 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 reasonable time limit, taking into account the urgency of the matter. Where they are of general interest, Board findings should be made available by the Board to the Member States;

(e)

in agreement with the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:

(e)

draw up opinions with respect to:

(f)

upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:

(f)

upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to measures of national authorities or bodies which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20 (2 ) of this Regulation;

(h)

assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to:

(h)

assist the Commission in drawing up guidelines with respect to the application of Articles 23(1), (2) and (3) pursuant to Article 23(4) of this Regulation.

(a)

it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take;

(a)

it is not competent for the subject matter of the request or for the measures it is requested to take;

(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 is subject.

(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 is subject.

(a)

the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU;

(b)

making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) of Directive 2010/13/EU.

(a)

it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);

(b)

it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries; and

(c)

it is 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.

(a)

it is a media service provider within the meaning of Article 2(2);

(b)

it is editorially independent from Member States and third countries;

(c)

it is 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; and

(d)

it is subject to the supervision of an independent national regulatory authority or body or to the supervision of a self- or co-regulatory mechanism, stating its name and contact details. The provider of the very large online platform or the provider of the very large search engine may ask the respective supervisor to confirm the information given by the media services provider.

(a)

the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the service or content 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

(b)

the grounds for imposing such restrictions.

(b)

require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;

(b)

require the parties to a media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism, including editorial independence, to notify that concentration in advance to the relevant national authorities or bodies;

(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 and editorial independence and for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence.

(d)

set out in advance criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism, including editorial independence;

(e)

provide, in advance and in accordance with the principles set out in Article 3, criteria or benchmarks for the identification and setting of criteria by the competent national regulatory authority or body against which the admissibility of a merger is to be assessed. In determining whether a merger is admissible, consideration shall also be given to whether the acquiring entity and the acquired entity would remain economically viable absent the merger, whether alternatives exist to ensure their economic viability, and the possibility and effectiveness of actions under subsection f;

(f)

provide in advance for measures or benchmarks for identifying and determining measures that may in accordance with Article 3 be imposed on the entity in question in the event of a merger in order to ensure and maintain and promote media pluralism and editorial independence.

(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;

(a)

the impact of the concentration on media pluralism at European, national, regional and local level , in particular its effects on the free formation of public opinion, on the diversity of media players and content on the market, including the economic and editorial independence and diversity of service providers, and the availability of services and content taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;

(c)

whether, in the absence of the concentration, the acquiring and acquired entity would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure its economic sustainability.

(a)

a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration and risks of foreign information manipulation and interference;

(a)

a detailed analysis of the resilience of media markets of all Member States, including as regards the level of media concentration;

(b)

an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole;

(b)

an overview and forward-looking assessment of the resilience of the internal market for media services as a whole.

(c)

an overview of measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions .