Skip to content
DRAFT REPORT (COM(2022)0457 – C90309/2022 – 2022/0277(COD))

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

CULT-PR-746655

Committee on Culture and Education · Rapporteur: Sabine Verheyen

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull text
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 26 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

This is the Committee on Culture and Education's draft report on the proposed European Media Freedom Act, a regulation establishing a common framework for media services in the internal market and amending Directive 2010/13/EU. The rapporteur welcomes the proposal but proposes amendments to clarify it, including minimum standards for media services and journalists, safeguards for public service media, and rules on state advertising and audience measurement. The draft report also amends the rules on very large online platforms, media market concentrations, and the European Board for Media Services, which would replace the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services.

Committee position. The rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal but recommends amendments to clarify provisions, maintain the balance between national and Union competences, safeguard public service media independence, guarantee the independence of the European Board for Media Services, and clarify cooperation mechanisms and the relationship with very large online platforms.

Key points

  1. The regulation would lay down common rules for the internal market for media services and minimum standards for the safe operation of media services and journalists' activities.
  2. Member States would have to ensure that citizens and legal persons benefit from a plurality of news and current affairs content produced with editorial independence.
  3. Member States would have to ensure public service media providers provide a plurality of information and opinions impartially, with transparent appointment procedures and predictable, stable funding.
  4. Media service providers providing news and current affairs content would have to make certain information accessible and take measures to guarantee the independence of editorial decisions, with exemptions for micro and small undertakings.
  5. The European Board for Media Services would act independently, elect a Chair and two Vice-Chairs, and have an independent secretariat with sufficient resources.
  6. The Board would advise the Commission and issue opinions on regulatory matters, media market concentrations, and measures affecting the internal market, including on its own initiative.
  7. The Board would coordinate national measures on media services from outside the Union that pose risks to public security, defence or public health, and could form ad-hoc groups for urgent opinions.
  8. Very large online platforms would have to respect freedom of expression and media, provide explanations and a 48-hour reply opportunity before restricting content, and process complaints within 24 hours.
  9. The Board would organise a structured dialogue between very large online platforms, media service providers and civil society, and report on its results to the Commission and Member States.
  10. Users would have the right to easily change default settings of devices or user interfaces controlling access to audiovisual media services.
  11. Member States would have to assess media market concentrations that could significantly impact media pluralism, with objective criteria and involvement of national regulatory authorities.
  12. Providers of audience measurement systems would have to provide detailed methodology information and free audience measurements, with independent audits, and state advertising would have to follow transparent, objective and non-discriminatory criteria.

Who is affected

  • Media service providers, including public service media, news media and small undertakings, which would face new rules on editorial independence, funding and transparency.
  • Very large online platforms, which would have to respect media freedom, provide explanations before restricting content and process complaints quickly.
  • National regulatory authorities or bodies, which would gain new tasks in assessing media market concentrations and monitoring state advertising.
  • Member States, which would have to ensure plurality, safeguard public service media and establish rules on media market concentrations.
  • Users of audiovisual media services, who would gain the right to change default settings on devices and interfaces.

Figures and deadlines

  • 45 million average monthly active recipients in the Union, the threshold for a very large online platform.
  • 1 million inhabitants, the threshold for local governments covered by the definition of state advertising.
  • Three months, the deadline for an independent authority to issue an opinion on compliance with Article 4(2)(b) and (c).
  • 14 calendar days, the deadline for the Board to issue an opinion after a referral under Article 13(7).
  • 30 calendar days, the deadline for a requested authority to inform the Board of actions taken after an opinion under Article 14(4).
  • 48 hours, the period for a media service provider to reply to a statement of reasons before a restriction or suspension takes effect.
  • 24 hours, the deadline for very large online platforms to process and decide on complaints from media service providers.
  • Two years, the term of office of the Chair of the Board.

Legal basis: Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.