Agreement on a first European law on “media freedom”

The European Union reached agreement on Friday on a “media freedom law”, a first legislation of this type, which gave rise to intense discussions on the question of surveillance of journalists.

• Read also: Orban conditions aid to Ukraine on the release of all funds for Hungary

• Read also: The EU is reforming its electricity market to boost carbon-free energy

“For the first time at European level, we have legislation that guarantees media freedom, media independence and the protection of journalists,” rejoiced German MEP Sabine Verheyen (EPP, right), rapporteur of the text, following negotiations between the European Parliament and the Member States.

She welcomed a “historic breakthrough”.

This draft regulation was presented in September 2022 by the European Commission to protect the pluralism and independence of the media, in the face of a deterioration of the situation in EU countries such as Hungary and Poland, but also to software Pegasus or Predator type spies used against journalists.

The agreement reached on Friday will still have to be formally adopted by the European Parliament and the Council (representing the 27 member countries).

The text concerns in particular the respect of the secrecy of journalistic sources and the prohibition of deploying this spyware in devices used by journalists.

During the negotiations, France and several other member states insisted on including possibilities for exceptions “in the name of safeguarding national security”, arousing concern among the profession and defenders of press freedom.

“No blank check”

The compromise text found on Friday – which was not immediately available – “does not mention national security”, said Romanian MEP Ramona Strugariu (Renew Europe, centrists and liberals).

Surveillance, such as the use of spyware in devices used by journalists, is only possible if it is permitted by “a judicial authority or an independent authority,” Strugariu continued.

It can only be done in cases of “serious crimes”, clarified Ms. Verheyen.

“There can be no abuse of spyware to access journalists’ sources or put pressure on them,” declared the Vice-President of the European Commission in charge of Values ​​and Transparency, Vera Jourova.

“Any exception to the rule must be duly justified on a case-by-case basis, in compliance with the charter of fundamental rights and meet a series of strict conditions (…) There is no blank check,” a- she continued.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) congratulated itself on having “won a victory”. “Very great satisfaction (…) the mention on the national security exception clause has been deleted,” reacted its secretary general, Christophe Deloire, welcoming “significant progress in the fight against surveillance and protection of secrecy of the sources”.

“Fault”

Another crucial point of the legislation: the question of moderation of journalistic content by online platforms.

In order to prevent these platforms from arbitrarily deleting or restricting articles or video reports, the law provides for separate treatment for media that respect a certain number of independence conditions in particular.

If a platform considers that the content of such media violates its rules of use, it must warn it 24 hours before proceeding with a possible suspension, in order to give it time to defend itself. This period may be reduced in cases of serious threat to security or public health, for example.

One of the main tech lobbies, CCIA Europe, criticized this provision, saying it created “a loophole”. “Malicious actors posing as legitimate media outlets will now be able to abuse this mechanism to disseminate harmful content for 24 hours before action can be taken,” the organization worried.

The law also introduces transparency obligations on media ownership.

It also provides for the establishment of a new European Media Council, made up of representatives of the national regulatory authorities of the Twenty-Seven. This body will have to ensure stricter supervision of concentrations in this sector. It will be responsible for issuing a non-binding opinion on these operations from the point of view of their effect on pluralism.


source site-64