What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

7 unchanged paragraphs

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market (European Media Freedom Act) and amending Directive 2010/13/EU

(COM(2022)0457 – C90309/2022 – 2022/0277(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2022)0457),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C90309/2022),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Changed:– having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by the Danish Parliament, the German Bundesrat, the French Senate and the Hungarian Parliament, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,

5 unchanged paragraphs

– having regard to the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor of 11 November 2022,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 14 December 2022,

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 16 March 2023,

– having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection,

Changed:– having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A90000/2023),(A9-0264/2023),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Change 1

Removed:Recital 1 a (new): (1a) Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaties, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures.

Added:Recital 1: (1) Independent media services play a unique role for democracy, for ensuring the rule of law and for the functioning of the internal market. They are an indispensable factor in the public opinion-forming process, represent a fast-changing and economically important sector and at the same time provide access to a plurality of views and reliable sources of information to citizens and businesses alike, thereby fulfilling the general interest function of ‘public watchdog’. Media services are increasingly available online and across borders while they are not subject to the same rules and the same level of protection in different Member States.

Removed:Recital 2: (2) Given their unique role, special attention should be paid to the protection of media freedom and pluralism in the internal market for media services. 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 support 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.

Added:Recital 1 a (new): (1a) At the same time, media services are always either carriers of cultural forms of expression or directly represent a cultural form of expression themselves. This dual character must be respected throughout. Article 167(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires the Union to take cultural aspects into account in its action under other provisions of the Treaties, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity of its cultures.

Removed:Recital 3: (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. Therefore, global online platforms and search engines should be included in the scope of this Regulation 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 is particularly important.

Added:Recital 2: (2) Given their unique role and the fact that they are one of the main pillars of democracy, special attention should be paid to the protection of media freedom and media pluralism in the internal market for media services. 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 support the media sector so that it can 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.

Removed:Recital 4: (4) Well-working national rules, measures and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence should take into account the needs of national, regional and local levels. Common minimum standards for those rules, measures and approaches should be established, while respecting the competence of the Member States. That would be likely to promote a well-functioning internal media market. Cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies should also be improved. Opaque and unfair allocation of public and private economic resources can 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.

Added:Recital 3: (3) In the digital media space, citizens and businesses access and consume media content and services, 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 too often tend to disintermediate access to media services and amplify polarising content and disinformation. These platforms and search engines are also essential providers or facilitators of online advertising, which divert financial resources from the media sector, affecting its financial sustainability and journalistic work, and consequently the diversity of content on offer. Therefore, online platforms and search engines should be included in the scope of this Regulation in order to ensure the independence and diversity of the media. As media services are knowledge- and capital-intensive, their ability to reach their audiences needs 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.

Removed: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 continue to do so within their competence to adopt laws concerning media, with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market.

Added:Recital 4: (4) However, the internal market for media services is insufficiently integrated. 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. Furthermore, common minimum standards for national rules and approaches related to media pluralism and editorial independence should be established, while respecting the competence of the Member States.The establishment of such standards is a pre-condition to the functioning of the internal market.

Removed:Recital 6: (6) Union citizens or natural persons who 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 standards46 .

Added: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 continue to do so with a risk of furthering the divergence in national approaches and restrictions to free movement in the internal market.

Removed:Recital 10: (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 European, 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.

Added:Recital 5 a (new): (5a) A free and well-functioning internal market for media services is an essential pillar of a functioning democracy because it provides recipients with access to a plurality of views and trustworthy sources of information. The increased role of the online environment and its new functionalities have had a disruptive effect on the market for media services, rendering it increasingly cross-border and fostering a truly European market for media services. In such an environment, media services are not only available but also easily accessible to Union consumers, irrespective of their Member State of origin. Media services created for recipients in one Member State are able to reach far further than initially intended. Divergent approaches at national level can hamper the ability of media service providers to operate on a fair level-playing field in order to make media services, including news and current affairs information available. Such approaches have created market fragmentation, legal uncertainty and increasing compliance costs for media service providers and media professionals. Therefore, it is necessary to have a single legal framework that ensures a harmonised application of rules for media service providers throughout the Union, ensuring that Union recipients have access to a broad range of reliable sources of information and to quality journalism as public goods in order to make informed choices, including about the state of their democracies.

Removed:Recital 11: (11) It is essential to guarantee fundamental freedoms as enshrined in the TFEU, while preserving the cultural diversity of the Union and ensuring media pluralism. Therefore, Member States should ensure that national media systems follow common values. The Union can adopt measures concerning the media in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). Citizens 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 which, therefore, 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.

Added:Recital 5 b (new): (5b) The right to freedom of expression and information, enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the ‘Charter’) and in Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, encompasses the right to receive and impart information and media freedom and media pluralism without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. They also require that diversity is established in European communication spaces and require Member States to safeguard and foster media pluralism. Accordingly, this Regulation draws upon the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and builds upon the standards developed by the Council of Europe in that regard.

Removed:Recital 18: (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 a diverse content offer, including quality information and impartial media coverage, as part of their mission as defined at national level in accordance with Protocol No 29 on the system of public broadcasting in the Member States, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU (the ‘Amsterdam Protocol’). 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. It is thus necessary, building on the international standards developed by the Council of Europe in this regard, that Member States put in place legal safeguards for the independent functioning of public service media across the Union. It is also necessary to guarantee that, without prejudice to the application of the Union’s State aid rules, public service media providers benefit from sufficient and stable funding to fulfil their 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 negotiation…

Added:Recital 6: (6) Recipients of media services in the Union (natural persons who 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 have access to independent, 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, pursuant to Article 11 of the Charter. In accordance with Article 22 of the Charter, the Union is to respect cultural, religious and linguistic diversity. 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 standards46 .

Removed:Recital 20: (20) Media integrity also requires a proactive approach to promote journalistic standards across the Union and editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards in order to ensure that information is trustworthy. Media service providers should adopt proportionate measures to allow editorial staff to work and make decisions freely. However, that should be without prejudice to the existing legal and self-regulatory frameworks of Member States that govern liability rules applicable to the editorial content of media services, to the right of owners of media service providers to take managerial decisions, and to the right of such owners to assume a leading editorial role. Media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients.

Added:Recital 7: (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, for which normally remuneration is provided including non-standard forms of employment, such as free-lancing or independent journalism. 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. Corporate communication and distribution of informational or promotional materials for public or private entities should be excluded from the scope of this definition.

Removed:Recital 21: (21) To mitigate regulatory burdens, micro-undertakings and small undertakings within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council50 should be exempted from the requirements related to information and internal safeguards with a view to fostering the independence of individual editorial decisions. Moreover, media service providers should be free to tailor the internal safeguards to their needs. The Recommendation that accompanies this Regulation51a provides a catalogue of voluntary internal safeguards that can be adopted within media companies in this regard. This Regulation should not be construed to the effect of depriving the owners of private media service providers of their prerogative to exercise their editorial freedom and to take managing decisions, including 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.

Added:Recital 7 a (new): (7a) The media environment is undergoing major and rapid changes. While the role of the media in a democratic society has not changed, media have additional tools to facilitate interaction and engagement. It is important that media-related policy take those and future developments into account. Therefore, the notion of media used in this Regulation should be interpreted broadly to encompass all actors who are involved in the production and dissemination, to potentially large numbers of people, of content, who have editorial responsibility or who oversee content.

Removed:Recital 22: (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, designated by the Member States in accordance with the requirements set out in that Article 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.

Added:Recital 8: (8) In the digitalised media market, providers of video-sharing platforms or very large online platforms may fall under the definition of media service provider. In general, such providers play a key role in the content organisation, including by automated means or algorithms, but do not exercise editorial responsibility over the content to which they provide access. However, in the increasingly convergent media environment, some providers of video-sharing platforms or very large online platforms have started to exercise editorial control over a section or sections of their services. Therefore, when such entities exercise editorial control over a section or sections of their services, they could be qualified both as a video-sharing platform provider or a very large online platform provider and as a media service provider.

Removed:Recital 23: (23) The Board should bring together senior representatives of the national regulatory authorities or bodies established in accordance with the requirements set out in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU. 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 or, where applicable, a common representative of self-regulatory or co-regulatory systems to participate, as appropriate, in the meetings of the Board. 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.

Added:Recital 8 a (new): (8a) The capacity of online platforms to provide access to media services 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 media services they intermediate and distribute. Given the transfer of economic value in favour of online platforms, the definition of ‘audience measurement’ set out in this Regulation should be understood as including data on the media services consumed by recipients of media services and of online platforms. That 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, which should drive competition.

Removed:Recital 24: (24) The Board’s work should be independent from political or economic influence. 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 should be able to draw up opinions in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on an independent secretariat, which should be provided with sufficient budgetary and human resources. The secretariat should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.

Added: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, including online platforms, 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 which abide by commonly agreed industry standards should not be considered providers of proprietary audience measurement systems.

Removed:Recital 26: (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.

Added:Recital 10: (10) State advertising should be understood broadly as covering promotional or self-promotional activities, which include advertising and purchases undertaken by, for or on behalf of a wide range of public authorities or entities, including Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, governments, regulatory authorities or bodies as well as state-owned enterprises or other state-controlled entities in different sectors, at national, regional, or local level. For the purposes of allocation of state advertising and purchases including in cases of natural or sanitary disasters, accidents or other unforeseen, major incidents that can cause harm to significant portions of the population criteria should be laid down in advance by national law. Emergency messages by public authorities should be understood broadly as different from state advertising.

Removed:Recital 28: (28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regarding this Regulation and an effective application of Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to the consistent implementation of EU law concerning media services, the Commission may issue guidelines on regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. 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 compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Such guidelines should respect the Member States’ competence in cultural matters with a view to promoting media pluralism, be principle-based and without prejudice to existing national measures. 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.

Added:Recital 11: (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. Recipients of media services should have access to quality media services, which have been produced by journalists, editors, editors-in-chief and media workers in an independent manner and in line with ethical and professional journalistic standards and which, therefore, provide trustworthy information, of political or societal interest at local, national or international level without any interference by public authority or without being influenced by economic interests. Such quality media services are also an essential antidote against disinformation, including foreign information manipulation and interference.

Removed: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, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, where their programmes contain an incitement to hatred on the grounds of race, sex, religion or nationality, or where their programmes violate the human dignity of individual persons. In this regard, the coordination between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together 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…

Added:Recital 14: (14) The protection of editorial independence is a precondition for exercising the activity of media service providers and their professional integrity especially 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. Furthermore, in order to guarantee independent and pluralistic media, it is of key importance that the necessary measures be put in place to create a safe environment that allows journalists, editors, editors-in-chief and media workers to exercise their activities. To that end, in addition to safeguarding the freedom of the media, it is necessary to protect freedom within the media.

Removed:Recital 31: (31) Very large online platforms act for many users as a gateway for access to media services. Media service providers who exercise editorial responsibility over their content play an important role in the distribution of information and in the exercise of freedom of information online. When exercising such editorial responsibility, they are expected to act diligently and provide information that is trustworthy and respectful of fundamental rights, in line with the regulatory or self-regulatory requirements they are subject to in the Member States. Therefore, also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, while it is not contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act], they should respect freedom and pluralism of media and provide, as early as possible, the necessary explanations to media service providers as their business users in the statement of reasons under Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council54 . To minimise the impact of any restriction to that content on users’ freedom of information, very large online platforms should endeavour to submit the statement of reasons and to provide the media service provider with an opportunity to reply to the statement of reasons, within 48 hours, prior to the restriction taking eff…

Added:Recital 15: (15) Member States have taken different approaches to the protection of editorial independence, which is increasingly challenged across the Union. Because of growing interference with editorial decisions of media service providers in several Member States, legislative action is necessary. Such interference can represent a breach of principle of the rule of law, which can be direct or indirect, from the State or other actors, including public authorities, elected officials, government officials and politicians, for example to obtain a political advantage. Shareholders and other private parties who have a stake in media service providers may act in ways which go beyond the necessary balance between their own business freedom and freedom of expression, on the one hand, and editorial freedom of expression and the information rights of users, on the other hand, in pursuit of economic or other advantage This seems to be particularly the case where economic power generates a power to shape opinions that may interfere with the public opinion forming process. Moreover, recent trends in media distribution and consumption, including in particular in the online environment, have prompted Member States to consider laws aimed at regulating the provision of media content. Approaches taken by media service providers to guarantee editorial independence also vary. As a result of such interference and fragmentation of regulation and approaches, the conditions for the exercise of economic activi…

Removed:Recital 32: (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 and that very large online platforms do not block or delete, or otherwise restrict the distribution of, their content or services.

Added:Recital 16: (16) Journalists, editors, editors-in-chief and media workers are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media services. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially both in the offline and online world. In particular, media service providers, media workers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers and bloggers) should be able to rely on the most robust protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against arbitrary interferences and 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' and media workers’ freedom of expression and capacity 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 is a precondition for the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter and crucial for safeguarding the ‘watchdog’ role of investigative journalism in democratic societies.

Removed: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 for such self-declarations to be verified, for example by the Board, where they consider that these conditions are not met.

Added:Recital 16 a (new): (16a) Upholding the rule of law in the Union is essential for the functioning of democracies in the Member States. Union instruments for that purpose have expanded to include, in addition to procedure set out in Article 7 TEU, new frameworks such as the Commission’s annual rule of law report and Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a. The functionality of rule of law systems is directly interlinked with free and pluralistic media. Media freedom and media pluralism represent a central pillar of the Union framework for upholding the rule of law and the state of media freedom and media pluralism is examined annually through the Commission’s annual rule of law report. The protection of journalistic sources, guarantees for editorial independence and a robust protection system against the abusive use of certain measures and technologies are essential for upholding the Union’s rule of law framework. Actions that put the freedom and pluralism of the media at risk, such as the detention, sanctioning, search, seizure or inspection of media service providers, severely damage the rule of law and therefore should be considered breaches of the principle of the rule of law, thus triggering sanctioning mechanisms provided for by Article 7 TEU and Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092. / 1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the…

Removed:Recital 35: (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. Where the provider of a very large online platform and a media service provider fail to find an amicable solution, it should be possible to refer the matter to the Board. The Board should be able to issue an opinion on such matters and recommend measures to be taken.

Added:Recital 16 b (new): (16b) Surveillance methods deployed against journalists and media workers are varied and include the interception of electronic communications and metadata, device or software hacking, including denial of service attacks, wiretapping, bugging, videotaping, geolocation tracking via radio-frequency identification, the global positioning system or cell-site data, data mining and social media monitoring. Such methods could gravely impact journalists’ and media workers’ rights to privacy, to the protection of their data and to the freedom of expression. The protections afforded by this Regulation, therefore, encompass both current forms of digital surveillance and future technologies that might appear as a result of technological innovation. Those protections are without prejudice to the application of existing and future Union law that restricts or prohibits the development and use of, and trade in, specific surveillance technologies deemed too invasive. Spyware that grants full unlimited access to personal data, including sensitive data, on a device could affect the very essence of the right to privacy and should, therefore, under no circumstance be considered necessary and proportionate under Union law.