Sittings · Document

DRAFT OPINION (COM(2022)0457 – C90309/2022 – 2022/0277(COD)) 2023-03-03

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

Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection · Rapporteur: Geoffroy Didier

PA_Legam

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The EMFA aims to recognize the crucial importance of the media in the European Union, considering that their plurality and independence are necessary for the proper functioning of democracy. In recent years, the European Union has seen a decline in the independence and pluralism of the audiovisual and press media in a certain number of its Member States. The objective of this proposal is therefore to guarantee the independence and pluralism of the media and to ensure their proper functioning in the internal market, particularly in the light of the digital transition and emergence of new actors.

It is important to keep in mind the fact that online platforms, social networks and search engines have a massive impact on the way the information is processed and shared. Studies have shown that the vast majority of consumers now receive their information from the internet, and more particularly from social networks. This development has a profound effect on the way media consumption and the media market is structured and the way citizens receive and perceive information. It is a matter of fact that some of these actors are important sources of disinformation and fake news, remaining partly unregulated. Moreover, these new actors must be considered as direct competitors to the traditional media (written press and audio-visual media). It is therefore of utmost importance to establish rules which allow finding a certain equality of conduct. It is essential to better include those players in the scope of the Regulation, in the sense that clearer obligations regarding the management and moderation of content provided by media services on very large online platforms and search engines are necessary. Clarifying the obligations regarding audience measurement, which must be based on common standards, must also encompass online platforms, so that actors such as VLOPs, very large search engines, video-sharing platforms or social networks also adhere to the highest standards of audience measurement.

The EMFA is currently not in line with the institutional, legal and economic framework of the media, which differs widely across the EU. Considering that, the Rapporteur proposes several modifications to better fit with EU law and especially the current ecosystem in place in many EU countries. It is important to remind that the press and audiovisual sectors are distinct, do not operate in the same way, operate in different markets and are regulated by different systems. It is necessary to separate them in order to take account of their specificities and to adapt the requirements of the text in the light of the press regulation in the Member States, which already guarantees a high level of protection of media pluralism.

More specifically, on the press, the EMFA gives the editor exclusive control over all editorial decisions, thus depriving the publisher of any capacity to direct his publication, even though he is legally and financially responsible for the content on it. There is a risk that journalists will themselves become primarily criminally liable for their writings, which could only restrict their capacity for initiative and encourage self-censorship. Editorial freedom is primarily the responsibility of the publisher and editorial authority and responsibility cannot be dissociated. In addition, freedom, independence and pluralism of the media should be reinforced by creating the obligation for newsrooms to adopt an ethical charter. This charter would be negotiated between the publisher and the journalists and established with reference to the main ethical principles specific to the journalistic profession.

Finally, the EMFA proposes changes to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, replacing the ERGA with a new structure (the "Board"). Incidentally, these provisions risk undermining the cultural exception protections, offering a better choice to consumers, laid down in the AVMSD. Therefore, the Rapporteur proposes to clarify the scope to ensure the consistency with relevant legislation. The provisions of the EMFA should offer maximum guarantees for the independence and decision-making of the Board and mainly focus on the audiovisual sector and digital services. Also, it is crucial that the EMFA emphasises stronger and more binding provisions for Member States to ensure an effective and adequate level of resources for the National Regulatory Autorities to carry out all their new tasks.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection calls on the Committee on Culture and Education, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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. 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. 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.

Or. en

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, such an entity could be qualified both as a video-sharing platform provider or a very large online platform provider and as a media service provider.

(8) In the digitalised media market, providers of video-sharing platforms or hosting services in general 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, such an entity could be qualified both as a video-sharing platform provider or a very large online platform provider and as a media service provider.

Or. en

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 a) Online platforms’ capacity to offer content without exercising editorial responsibility over it and market the ability to target users with advertising allows them to act as direct competitors to media service providers whose content they intermediate and distribute. Given the transfer of economic value in favour of online platforms, the audience measurement definition should take into account content consumed by users of media services and users of online platforms. This 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 that drive competition.

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 funding should be understood broadly as also 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 However, the definition of state funding 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.

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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 editorial managers 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.

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 12 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12 a) Media services of general interest play a unique role in the internal market by providing access to a plurality of views and reliable sources of information to consumers. However, the internal media market is not sufficiently integrated. Member States have adopted various national rules related to the prominence of media services of general interest, while others have no rules at all. However, divergent approaches at national level, tailored only to local contexts, have created fragmentation in the internal market, causing legal uncertainty, market fragmentation, an unfair level-playing field and increasing compliance costs for media companies. In addition, the internal media market has become increasingly digital as media services are provided and accessed through the internet, which is by nature cross-border. In the last decade, European media companies have faced fierce competition from global online platforms. While such platforms have become gateways to media content, their business models tend to amplify content that provides the best economic outcome, and is thus often to the detriment of media content of general interest providing reliable information to consumers. The corresponding shift of advertising revenues online has drained financial resources from the traditional media sector affecting its financial sustainability, and in turn the quality and diversity of content on offer. This trend indicates how the market is failing to provide sustainable returns for media content of general interest and quality journalism, which are public goods, provide for reliable information sources and help counter disinformation. In order to prevent market fragmentation, ensure technological neutrality and consumer protection and guarantee consumers to have access to a broad range of reliable information sources, it is necessary to have a single legal framework that ensures harmonized application of prominence rules for general interest content. In order to prevent legal fragmentation, the functional prominence requirements for user interfaces and devices should be harmonized, allowing for harmonized product design for the European single market and at the same time ensure access to general interest content. This is without prejudice to Member States competences to define at national level what content offers qualify as general interest content. To ensure that prominence rules are adaptable to technological progress and changes in user behaviour, they should be based on general principles, determined at national level, taking into account the structure of the national market and involving all relevant stakeholders.

Or. en

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) 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. Without affecting the rules of Directive 2010/13/EU and their implementation by the Member States, 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.

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(16) Journalists and editors are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially. In particular, media service providers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers) should be able to rely on a robust protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against 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’ freedom 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 contributes to the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter.

(16) Journalists and editorial managers are the main actors in the production and provision of trustworthy media content, in particular by reporting on news or current affairs. It is essential therefore to protect journalists’ capability to collect, fact-check and analyse information, including information imparted confidentially. In particular, media service providers and journalists (including those operating in non-standard forms of employment, such as freelancers) should be able to rely on a robust protection of journalistic sources and communications, including against 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’ freedom 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 contributes to the protection of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter.

Or. en

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 18

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 the internal media market, by ensuring that citizens and businesses have access to universal and varied offers including quality information, balanced 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, 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 negotiations. The requirements laid down in this Regulation do not affect the application of the State aid rules as applied on a case-by-case basis or the competence of Member States to define a broad and dynamic remit, organise and 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

Or. en

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) It is important to ensure that national and regulatory systems in Europe should operate in a manner that ensures effective editorial independence and integrity. Media integrity can be supported by promoting editorial independence by news media companies, in particular through internal safeguards. Media service providers are encouraged to adopt proportionate measures to guarantee, that editorial staff to operate freely. These measures can help to improve competitive conditions in the internal market and improve the quality of services. In view of these considerations, media service providers should also ensure transparency of actual or potential conflicts of interest to their service recipients.

Or. en

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 20 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(20 a) The freedom, independence and pluralism of the media should be reinforced by encouraging media service providers providing news and current affairs to develop and adopt an ethical charter and ensure compliance with ethical principles, specifying the rights and obligations of journalists, executives, editors and shareholders. This charter is to be developed in cooperation with organizations or associations of journalists, shareholders, directors and editors of publications and newsrooms and established with reference to the main ethical principles specific to the journalistic profession; in addition to the general principles of independence, freedom and reliability of information.

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 21

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 Council50 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 Regulation51 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.

deleted

__________________

50 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19-76).

51 OJ C , , p. .

Or. en

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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. Therefore, given the importance and the extensive nature of the new tasks conferred by this Regulation to these authorities, directly or indirectly, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the financial, human and technical resources of the national regulatory authorities or bodies are adequately and sufficiently increased. Moreover, within the framework of the applicable public function, and budgetary regulations, the National Regulatory Autority should have full authority over the recruitment and management of the staff, who should be hired under clear and transparent rules. The National Regulatory Autority should also have full autonomy and decision-making control in terms of management of internal structure, organization, and procedures for the effective performance of their duties and the effective exercise of their powers. Without prejudice to national budgetary rules and procedures, National Regulatory Autorities should have allocated a separated annual budget. Member states should ensure that national authorities are granted full autonomy in the spending of the allocated budget for the purpose of carrying out their duties. Any control on the budget of the National Regulatory Autorities should be exercised in a transparent manner. Annual accounts of regulatory Authorities should have an ex post control by an independent auditor, and should be made public. Considering that the press publications are traditionally not subject to regulatory oversight, for the purpose of Chapter III, Section 2 of this Regulation, “media service” shall be understood as any media service with the exception of media services providing press publications, unless otherwise specified.

Or. en

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(22 a) 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. It is moreover justified by the fact that the Board will take over the missions of ERGA as established by Directive 2010/13/EU, that shall not be modified by this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 23

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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, 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.

Or. en

Amendment 16

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) 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 on its own initiative or upon the Commission’s request in the cases envisaged by this Regulation. In order to effectively and independently fulfil its tasks, the Board should be able to rely on the expertise and human resources of a body of the Union, an independent Bureau dedicated to the Board. The Bureau of the European Board for Media Services should provide administrative and organisational support to the Board, and help the Board in carrying out its tasks.

Or. en

Amendment 17

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 28

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(28) Ensuring a consistent regulatory practice regarding this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, and to contribute to ensuring a convergent implementation of EU media law, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular regulatory issues affecting a significant number of Member States or those with a cross-border element. This is the case in particular for national measures taken under Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU on the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest. 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 achieving a level playing field in the internal market and compliance with the fundamental right to receive information under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Given the possible impact of the national measures taken under Article 7a on the functioning of the internal media market, guidelines by the Commission would be important to achieve legal certainty in this field. 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.

(28) Ensuring an effective application of this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU is essential. For this purpose, the Commission may issue guidelines on matters covered by both this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU when needed. When deciding to issue guidelines, the Commission should consider in particular 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 achieving a level playing field in the internal market and 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 be without effect to existing national prominence 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.

Or. en

Amendment 18

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(29) In order to ensure a level playing field in the provision of diverse audiovisual media services in the face of technological developments in the internal market, it is necessary to find common technical prescriptions for devices controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services or carrying digital signals conveying the audiovisual content from source to destination. In this context, it is important to avoid diverging technical standards creating barriers and additional costs for the industry and consumers while encouraging solutions to implement existing obligations concerning audiovisual media services.

(29) In order to ensure a level playing field in the provision of diverse audiovisual media services in the face of technological developments in the internal market, it is necessary to find common technical prescriptions for devices, including remote controls, controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services or carrying digital signals conveying the audiovisual content from source to destination. In this context, it is important to avoid diverging technical standards creating barriers and additional costs for the industry and consumers while encouraging solutions to implement existing obligations concerning audiovisual media services.

Or. en

Amendment 19

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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 either established outside of the EU, established outside of the EU but under jurisidiction of an EU Member State through the AVMSD satellite criteria or established in the EU, irrespective of the means and distribution or access, that target or reach 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, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. In this regard, the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies to face together possible 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 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 , pursuant to the opinion of the Board, should also be available to guarantee the ‘effet utile’ of the relevant national measures, in compliance with Union law. Following a request of the authority or body from another Member State, the competent national authority or body could be invited by the Board to undertake certain measures, where the threats stemming from such media services are prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union.. 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.

Or. en

Amendment 20

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(30 a) The implication of the Board should be limited to what is stricly necessary and therefore should be trigerred following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure. Once adopted, the opinions of the Board should be taken into utmost account by the national regulatory authorities or bodies concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 21

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 30 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(30 b) In order to foster the coherence of decisions and facilitate the eventual cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies, the Board should develop a set of basic criteria on the service provider and the service provided. Those criteria should be used by national regulatory authorities or bodies, when a media service provider from outside of the Union seeks jurisdiction in one of the Member States, or when it is already under the jurisdiction of a Member State. The criteria should inter alia cover content, ownership, economic and financial connections, editorial independence or lack thereof from the third country state and should allow relevant authorities or bodies to identify, and if needed prevent, the entry into the EU market, of media service providers which present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, public health, or where their programs contain incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence.

Or. en

Amendment 22

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 31

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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 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 and shall contribute in an appropriate manner to the plurality of the media. Also in view of users’ freedom of information, where providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines consider that content provided by such media service providers is incompatible with their terms and conditions, they should duly consider freedom and pluralism of media, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 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 and very large search engines should submit the statement of reasons and allow the media service provider a 48-hour period to respond, prior to the restriction taking effect without prejudice to their obligations under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. This Regulation is without prejudice to very large online platforms or search engines obligations to take expeditious measures either against illegal content disseminated through its service. In cases where the content is not infringing national or EU law, the content shall not be suspended during the dialogue between the provider of very large online platform and search engine and the media service provider. In this Regulation, suspension includes practices such as removal of content, downranking content, limiting visibility of content and labelling content (for example as misleading or harmful).

__________________

54 Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 57-79).

Or. en

Amendment 23

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 32

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

Or. en

Amendment 24

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 33

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 (including the supervision by an audiovisual media regulatory authority or body, or a press council), and which supervision they are subject to, while at the same time 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, the recognition of the status of press publication used by media service providers in certain Member States 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. In order for the self-declaration system to work effectively and be as fair and transparent as possible, media service provide should have the possibility to appeal against the refusal by very large online platforms or search engine to accept their declaration. An external complaint mechanism should be therefore guaranteed in each Member State and handled by one or several independent authorities or bodies, such as press councils or audiovisual media regulatory authorities or bodies. The Commission should develop guidelines setting out the concrete modalities and basic requirements for these external complaint mechanisms.

Or. en

Amendment 25

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 34

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(34) This Regulation recognises the importance of self-regulatory mechanisms in the context of the provision of media services on very large online platforms. They represent a type of voluntary initiatives, for instance in a form of codes of conduct, which enable media service providers or their representatives to adopt common guidelines, including on ethical standards, correction of errors or complaint handling, amongst themselves and for themselves. Robust, inclusive and widely-recognised media self-regulation represents an effective guarantee of quality and professionalism of media services and is key for safeguarding editorial integrity.

(34) This Regulation recognises the importance of self-regulatory mechanisms in the context of the provision of media services on very large online platforms and very large search engines. They represent a type of voluntary initiatives, for instance in a form of codes of conduct, which enable media service providers or their representatives to adopt common guidelines, including on ethical standards, correction of errors or complaint handling, amongst themselves and for themselves. Robust, inclusive and widely-recognised media self-regulation represents an effective guarantee of quality and professionalism of media services and is key for safeguarding editorial integrity.

Or. en

Amendment 26

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 35

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 and very large search engines 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 terminating any unjustified restrictions and avoiding them in the future. Providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines should engage in such exchanges in good faith, paying particular attention to safeguarding media freedom and freedom of information. In accordance with Regulation 2022/2065, and without prejudice to the right of efective judicial redress, media service providers should have access to the certified out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism in case a provider of very large online platform or a very large search engine decides to suspend or other restict content;

Or. en

Amendment 27

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation. The Commission may, where relevant, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act] and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.

(36) Building on the useful role played by ERGA in monitoring compliance by the signatories of EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Board should, at least on a yearly basis, organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and very large search engines, discuss experience and best practices related to the application of the relevant provisions of this Regulation and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including those aimed at countering disinformation, as well as to assess possible negative effects of these initiatives or of content moderation policies by very large online platforms on the freedom and pluralism of the media. Providers of very large online platforms and search engines should be entitled to participate in the meetings organised by the Board and to engage in the dialogue in good faith. The Commission should, examine the reports on the results of such structured dialogues when assessing systemic risks and emerging issues across the Union under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065] and may ask the Board to support it to this effect.

Or. en

Amendment 28

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 36 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(36 a) In order to ensure that the Board involvement and contribution in the relationship between the providers of very large online platforms and search engines with media service providers in the online environment is as effective and useful as possible, it is of utmost importance that the Board, upon request, is entitled to receive all the necessary information from the providers of very large online platforms and search engines, including the exchange of information between the providers of very large online platforms and search engines and the medias services providers.

Or. en

Amendment 29

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, dedicated buttons on remote controls, 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.

Or. en

Amendment 30

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(37 a) Recipients of media services increasingly face difficulties in identifying who bears the editorial responsibility for the content or services they consume, in particular when they access media services through connected devices or online platforms. Failure to clearly indicate editorial responsibility for media content or services (e.g., through incorrect attribution of logos, trademarks, or other characteristic traits) deprives recipients of media services of the possibility to understand and assess the information they receive, which is a prerequisite for forming well-informed choices and opinions and consequently to actively participate in democracy. Recipients of media services should therefore be enabled to easily identify the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility over any given media service on all devices and user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services.

Or. en

Amendment 31

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 37 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(37 b) Audiovisual media services are subject to various obligations to meet important public policy goals such as supporting cultural diversity and a pluralistic media environment. It is therefore important that devices be designed in a way that ensures fair access to audiovisual media services, from the perspective of both viewers and media service providers. Logical channel numbers allow viewers to directly access the audiovisual media service via numeric pads. However, certain device manufacturers remove numeric pads to divert viewers towards manufacturer-controlled user interfaces. Keeping numeric pads to access logical channel numbers directly on remote controls will ensure that device manufacturers allow fair and direct access to audiovisual media services.

Or. en

Amendment 32

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 38

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can negatively affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market. They include, for example, rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors; they also include decisions related to licensing, authorisation or prior notification for media service providers. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non-discrimination and proportionality.

(38) Different legislative, regulatory or administrative measures can affect or even restrict transborder operations of news and current affairs programs of media service providers in the internal market. They include, for example, rules to limit the ownership of media companies by other companies active in the media sector or non-media related sectors. In order to mitigate their potential negative impact on the functioning of the internal market for media services and enhance legal certainty, it is important that such measures comply with the principles of objective justification, transparency, non-discrimination and proportionality.

Or. en

Amendment 33

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 39

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) With the exception of the rules defined by the Member States pursuant to Directive 2010/13/EU, it is also key that the Board is empowered to issue an opinion 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 for its services provided outside the national borders, or when the concerned media service provider has a significant influence on the formation of public opinion in that Member State, or if it is preventing a media service provider established in one Member State to provide services or start operations in another Member State.

Or. en

Amendment 34

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 40

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 therefore provide for rules and procedures in their legal systems to ensure assessment of market concentrations that could have a significant impact on pluralism or editorial independence. Such rules should take into account sectoral specificities, including the economic sustainability of the sector as a whole. 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. 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 or very large online platforms carrying content provided by media service providers and very large online search engines which control access and visibility to the content of media service providers. 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.

Or. en

Amendment 35

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 41

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 be involved in the assessment of the impact of 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 market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence are set out in advance.

Or. en

Amendment 36

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 42

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(42) When a media market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200455 , 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 protecting 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 market concentration constitutes a concentration falling within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/200455 , 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 market concentrations on media pluralism should therefore be aimed at protecting 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.

__________________

55 Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) (OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1-22).

Or. en

Amendment 37

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 43

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) Media play a decisive role in shaping public opinion and helping citizens participate in democratic processes. 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 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 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 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. In any event, the Commission retains the possibility to issue its own opinions following the opinions drawn up by the Board.

Or. en

Amendment 38

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 44

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) 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, focusing on activities directly related to the provision of media services, such as the provision of information, taking into account of the online environment and the important role of public service media providers. Concurrently, it should be considered whether other media outlets, providing different and alternative content, would still coexist in the given market(s) after the 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 editorial decisions of the acquired or merged entity. The existing or envisaged internal safeguards aimed at preserving independence of the 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.

Or. en

Amendment 39

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 45

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. It is a crucial tool to evaluate the performance of media content and understand the preferences of audiences in order to plan the future production of content. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers and advertisers, should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players that have emerged in the media ecosystem provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market.

(45) Audience measurement has a direct impact on the allocation and the prices of advertising, which represents a key revenue source for the media sector. Accordingly, media market players, in particular media service providers, right holders and advertisers should be able to rely on objective audience data stemming from transparent, unbiased and verifiable audience measurement solutions. However, certain new players such as very large online platforms and very large search engines provide their own measurement services without making available information on their methodologies. This could result in incomparable measurement systems and information asymmetries among media market players and in potential market distortions, to the detriment of equality of opportunities for media service providers in the market. To secure impartiality in measurement, audience measurement should be carried out by independent third parties or self-regulatory bodies.

Or. en

Amendment 40

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 46

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(46) In order to enhance the verifiability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX [Digital Markets Act], including those concerning ranking or self-preferencing.

(46) In order to enhance the verifiability and reliability of audience measurement methodologies, in particular online, transparency obligations should be laid down for providers of audience measurement systems that do not abide by the industry benchmarks agreed within the relevant self-regulatory bodies. Under these obligations, such actors, when requested and to the extent possible, should provide advertisers and media service providers or parties acting on their behalf, with information describing the methodologies employed for the measurement of the audience. The information must be as granular as the information on methodologies published by self-regulatory bodies that govern the agreed industry standards on audience measurement. Such information could consist in providing elements, such as the size of the sample measured, the definition of the indicators that are measured, the metrics, the measurement methods and the margin of error as well as the measurement period. The obligations imposed under this Regulation are without prejudice to any obligations that apply to providers of audience measurement services under Regulation 2019/1150 or Regulation (EU) 2022/XX [Digital Markets Act], including those concerning ranking or self-preferencing.

Or. en

Amendment 41

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 47

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self-regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non-discrimination and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.

(47) Codes of conduct, drawn up either by the providers of audience measurement systems or by organisations or associations representing them, can contribute to the effective application of this Regulation and should, therefore, be encouraged. Self-regulation has already been used to foster high quality standards in the area of audience measurement. Its further development could be seen as an effective tool for the industry to agree on the practical solutions needed for ensuring compliance of audience measurement systems and their methodologies with the principles of transparency, comparability, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non-discrimination and verifiability. When drawing up such codes of conduct, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders and notably media service providers, account could be taken in particular of the increasing digitalisation of the media sector and the objective of achieving a level playing field among media market players.

Or. en

Amendment 42

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 48

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(48) State advertising is an important source of revenue for many media service providers, contributing to their economic sustainability. Access to it must be granted in a non-discriminatory way to any media service provider from any Member State which can adequately reach some or all of the relevant members of the public, in order to ensure equal opportunities in the internal market. Moreover, State advertising may make media service providers vulnerable to undue state influence to the detriment of the freedom to provide services and fundamental rights. Opaque and biased allocation of state advertising is therefore a powerful tool to exert influence or ‘capture’ media service providers. The distribution and transparency of state advertising are in some regards regulated through a fragmented framework of media-specific measures and general public procurement laws, which, however, may not cover all state advertising expenditure nor offer sufficient protection against preferential or biased distribution. In particular, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council56 does not apply to public service contracts for the acquisition, development, production or co-production of programme material intended for audiovisual media services or radio media services. Media-specific rules on state advertising, where they exist, diverge significantly from one Member State to another.

(48) State funding, inluding state advertising is an important source of revenue for many media service providers, contributing to their economic sustainability. Access to it must be granted in a non-discriminatory way to any media service provider in order to ensure equal opportunities in the internal market. Moreover, State funding may make media service providers vulnerable to undue state influence to the detriment of the freedom to provide services and fundamental rights. Opaque and biased allocation of state funding is therefore a powerful tool to exert influence or ‘capture’ media service providers. The distribution and transparency of state funding, in particular advertising are in some regards regulated through a fragmented framework of media-specific measures and general public procurement laws, which, however, may not cover all state funding or advertising expenditure nor offer sufficient protection against preferential or biased distribution. In particular, Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council56 does not apply to public service contracts for the acquisition, development, production or co-production of programme material intended for audiovisual media services or radio media services. Media-specific rules on state funding, where they exist, diverge significantly from one Member State to another.

__________________

56 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65-242).

Or. en

Amendment 43

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 49

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(49) In order to ensure undistorted competition between media service providers and to avoid the risk of covert subsidies and of undue political influence on the media, it is necessary to establish common requirements of transparency, objectivity, proportionality and non-discrimination in the allocation of state advertising and of state resources to media service providers for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising, including the requirement to publish information on the beneficiaries of state advertising expenditure and the amounts spent. It is important that Member States make the necessary information related to state advertising publicly accessible in an electronic format that is easy to view, access and download, in compliance with Union and national rules on commercial confidentiality. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the State aid rules, which are applied on a case-by-case basis.

(49) In order to ensure undistorted competition between media service providers and to avoid the risk of covert subsidies and of undue political influence on the media, it is necessary to establish common requirements of transparency, objectivity, proportionality and non-discrimination in the allocation of state funding and of state resources to media service providers for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them, including the requirement to publish information on the beneficiaries of state funding expenditure and the amounts spent. It is important that Member States make the necessary information related to state advertising publicly accessible in an electronic format that is easy to view, access and download, in compliance with Union and national rules on commercial confidentiality. This Regulation shall not affect the application of the State aid rules, which are applied on a case-by-case basis.

Or. en

Amendment 44

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 50

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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 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.

Or. en

Amendment 45

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. This Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market for media services, including the establishment of the European Board for Media Services, while preserving the quality of media services.

Or. en

Amendment 46

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a a) Directive 2001/29/EC;

Or. en

Amendment 47

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a b) Directive 2010/13/EU and Directive (EU) 2018/1808, with the exception of Article 27 of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 48

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point a c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a c) Directive 2019/789/EU;

Or. en

Amendment 49

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Services Act];

(d) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;

Or. en

Amendment 50

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 2 – point e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [the Digital Markets Act];

(e) Regulation (EU) 2022/1925;

Or. en

Amendment 51

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II and Section 5 of Chapter III, provided that those rules comply with Union law.

3. This Regulation shall not affect the possibility for Member States to adopt more detailed rules in the fields covered by Chapter II, Section 5 of Chapter III, and Article 24 provided that those rules comply with Union law.

Or. en

Amendment 52

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1) ‘media service’ means a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty, where the principal purpose of the service or a dissociable section thereof consists in providing programmes or press publications to the general public, by any means, in order to inform, entertain or educate, under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider;

Or. en

Amendment 53

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(1 a) “News and Current affairs” means the news and current affairs as defined into Directive 2019/789/EU

Or. en

Amendment 54

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 remit under national law and receives national public funding for the fulfilment of such a remit;

Or. en

Amendment 55

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 a) ‘publishing director’, means the legal representative of the media service provider who assumes legal and other responsibility for the provision of a media service;

Or. en

Amendment 56

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) ‘editor’ means a natural person or a number of natural persons possibly grouped in a body, regardless of its legal form, status and composition, that takes or supervises editorial decisions within a media service provider;

(7) ‘editorial manager’ means a natural person or a number of natural persons possibly grouped in a body, regardless of its legal form, status and composition, that takes or supervises editorial decisions within a media service provider;

Or. en

Amendment 57

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9) ‘editorial responsibility’ means the exercise of effective control both over the selection of the programmes or press publications and over their organisation, for the purposes of the provision of a media service, regardless of the existence of liability under national law for the service provided;

(9) ‘editorial responsibility’ means the exercise of effective control both over the selection of the programmes or press publications contents and over their organisation, for the purposes of the provision of a media service;

Or. en

Amendment 58

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9 a) ‘online platform’ means a service as defined in Article 3, point (i) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065;

Or. en

Amendment 59

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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];

Or. en

Amendment 60

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10 a) ‘provider of very large search engine‘ means a provider of a search engine that has been designated as a very large search engine pursuant to Article 33(4) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065

Or. en

Amendment 61

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) ‘media market concentration’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service provider;

(13) ‘market concentration with a significant impact on media pluralism’ means a concentration as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 involving at least one media service provider or one provider of very large online platform or one provider of very large online search engine, transnational and which has a significant impact on the structure of european media market;

Or. en

Amendment 62

Proposal for a regulation

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, production or distribution of content;

(14) ‘audience measurement’ means the activity of collecting, interpreting or otherwise processing data about the number and characteristics of users of media services and of users of online platforms, to determine the audience size, reach and frequency for the purposes of decisions regarding advertising allocation or prices or the related planning, buying, selling, production or distribution of content;

Or. en

Amendment 63

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Rights of recipients of media services

Rights of recipients of media services and prominence of media services of general interest

Or. en

Amendment 64

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse.

1. Recipients of media services in the Union shall have the right to receive a plurality of news and current affairs content, produced with respect for editorial freedom of media service providers, to the benefit of the public discourse.

2. In line with paragraph 1, and in view of ensuring better consumer protection, reducing obstacles in the internal market for media services, ensuring techonolgical neutrality and aiming at giving consumers access to a broad range of information sources, Member States shall take measures to ensure the appropriate prominence of media services of general interest, based on general principles.

Or. en

Amendment 65

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Public service media providers shall provide in an impartial manner a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in accordance with their public service mission.

1. Public service media providers shall provide a plurality of information and opinions to their audiences, in an impartial and independent manner, in accordance with their public service remit.

Or. en

Amendment 66

Proposal for a regulation

Article 5 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service mission. Those resources shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.

3. Member States shall ensure that public service media providers have adequate and stable financial resources for the fulfilment of their public service remit and to meet the objectives therein. Those resources and the process by wich they are allocated shall be such that editorial independence is safeguarded.

Or. en

Amendment 67

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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) when the media service provider is a legal person, its name, registered office, legal form and the names of its legal representative and, where applicable, of the natural or legal persons holding at least 10% of its capital;

Or. en

Amendment 68

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content shall take measures that they deem appropriate with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions. In particular, such measures shall aim to:

2. Without prejudice to national constitutional laws consistent with the Charter, media service providers providing news and current affairs content are encouraged to take self-regulatory measures that they deem appropriate with a view to protecting the independence of editorial decisions. In particular, such measures may aim to:

Or. en

Amendment 69

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) guarantee that editors are free to take individual editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity; and

(a) protect the freedom of editorial managers and, where applicable, publishing directors to take editorial decisions in the exercise of their professional activity especially through the exercise of the responsibility entrusted to the publishing director; and

Or. en

Amendment 70

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) ensure disclosure of any actual or potential conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.

(b) disclose conflict of interest by any party having a stake in media service providers that may affect the provision of news and current affairs content.

Or. en

Amendment 71

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b a) develop codes of conduct, in cooperation with organisations or associations of journalists, shareholders, publishing directors and editorial managers of publications and newsrooms, establishing the essential principles of independence, freedom and reliability of information, and specify the rights and obligations of journalists, executives, editors and shareholders. The Commission shall encourage all the actors referred to endorse the commitments stated in the codes of conduct, and to comply with them.

Or. en

Amendment 72

Proposal for a regulation

Article 6 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The obligations under this Article shall not apply to media service providers that are micro enterprises within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2013/34/EU.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 73

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation.

1. The national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU shall be responsible for the application of Chapter III of this Regulation except if stated differently in this chapter.

Or. en

Amendment 74

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Member States shall ensure that the national regulatory authorities or bodies have adequate financial, human and technical resources to carry out their tasks under this Regulation.

3. Member States shall ensure that the national regulatory authorities or bodies have adequate financial, human and technical resources to carry out their tasks conferred under this Regulation. The organisational and functional autonomy of the national regulatory authorities or bodies shall be guaranteed.

Or. en

Amendment 75

Proposal for a regulation

Article 7 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3 a. Within one year after the entry into application of this Regulation pursuant to Article 28(2), the Commission shall assess the implementation of this Article. To this end, Members States shall send all relevant information to the Commission upon its request.

Or. en

Amendment 76

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Board shall replace and succeed the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) established by Directive 2010/13/EU.

2. The Board shall replace and succeed the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA) established by Directive 2010/13/EU. However, a separate agenda shall be kept by the Board as for the implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU which is a Directive involving specificities due to the implementation process by the Member States.

Or. en

Amendment 77

Proposal for a regulation

Article 8 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. The Board’s competence shall be limited to the Audiovisual media services, unless otherwise specified in this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 78

Proposal for a regulation

Article 9 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.

The Board shall act in full independence when performing its tasks or exercising its powers conferred upon it by this Regulation. In particular, the Board shall, in the performance of its tasks or the exercise of its powers, neither seek nor take instructions from any government, institution, person or body. This shall not affect the competences of the Commission or the national regulatory authorities or bodies in conformity with this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 79

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Board shall be composed of representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

1. The Board shall be composed of high-level representatives of national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Or. en

Amendment 80

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair. The Board shall elect a Chair from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair shall be two years.

4. The Board shall be represented by its Chair or its Vice-Chairs. The Board shall elect a Chair and up to four Vice-Chairs from amongst its members by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights. The term of office of the Chair and the Vice-Chairs shall be two years.

Or. en

Amendment 81

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in all activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board. The Board shall consult the Commission in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.

5. The Commission shall designate a representative to the Board. The representative of the Commission shall participate in activities and meetings of the Board, without voting rights. The Chair of the Board shall keep the Commission informed about the ongoing and planned activities of the Board, in particular in preparation of its work programme and main deliverables.

Or. en

Amendment 82

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.

6. The Board may invite experts and observers to attend its meetings.

Or. en

Amendment 83

Proposal for a regulation

Article 10 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights, in agreement with the Commission.

8. The Board shall adopt its rules of procedure by a two-thirds majority of its members with voting rights.

Or. en

Amendment 84

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Board shall have a secretariat, which shall be provided by the Commission.

1. The Board shall be supported by an independent bureau.

Or. en

Amendment 85

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The main task of the secretariat shall be to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.

2. The main task of the bureau shall be to provide administrative and organisational support to the Board in order to contribute to the execution of the tasks of the Board laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2010/13/EU.

Or. en

Amendment 86

Proposal for a regulation

Article 11 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The secretariat shall provide administrative and organisational support to the activities of the Board. The secretariat shall also assist the Board in carrying out its tasks.

3. The bureau shall act on the instructions of the Board and shall have sufficient human and financial resources allocated to it.

Or. en

Amendment 87

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and of national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall:

Without prejudice to the powers granted to the Commission by the Treaties, the Board shall promote the effective and consistent application of this Regulation and the consistent implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU throughout the Union. The Board shall:

Or. en

Amendment 88

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) support the Commission, through technical expertise, in ensuring the correct application of this Regulation and the consistent implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU across all Member States, without prejudice to the tasks of national regulatory authorities or bodies;

(a) support the Commission, through technical expertise, in ensuring the correct application of this Regulation for audiovisual media services and the consistent implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU across all Member States, without prejudice to the tasks of national regulatory authorities or bodies;

Or. en

Amendment 89

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 and national rules applicable to audiovisual media services, including this Regulation and Directive 2010/13/EU, in particular as regards Articles 3, 4 and 7 of that Directive;

Or. en

Amendment 90

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 its own initiative or where requested by it, on regulatory, technical or practical aspects pertinent to the consistent application of this Regulation for audiovisual media services and implementation of Directive 2010/13/EU as well as all on other matters related to audiovisual 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;

Or. en

Amendment 91

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;

(d) on its own initiative, or when requested by the Commission, provide opinions on the technical and factual issues that arise with regard to Article 2(5c), Article 3(2) and (3), Article 4(4), point (c) and Article 28a(7) of Directive 2010/13/EU;

Or. en

Amendment 92

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

(e) draw up opinions with respect to:

Or. en

Amendment 93

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point e – point iii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(iii) national measures concerning media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation;

(iii) national measures concerning audiovisual media service providers established outside of the Union, in accordance with Article 16(2) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 94

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

(f) on its own initiative, or upon request of the Commission, draw up opinions with respect to:

Or. en

Amendment 95

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point i

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(i) national measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 20(4) of this Regulation;

(i) national measures which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market, in accordance with Article 20(4) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 96

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point f – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) media market concentrations which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;

(ii) market concentrations with a significant impact on media pluralism which are likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, in accordance with Article 22(1) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 97

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point g

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(g) draw up opinions on draft national opinions or decisions assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such a concentration may affect the functioning of the internal market, in accordance with Article 21(5) of this Regulation;

(g) draw up opinions on draft national opinions or decisions assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable market concentration where such a concentration may affect the functioning of the internal market, in accordance with Article 21(5) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 98

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point h – point ii

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ii) factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation;

(ii) factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of market concentrations, in accordance with Article 21(3) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 99

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point k

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(k) coordinate national measures related to the dissemination of or access to content of media service providers established outside of the Union that target audiences in the Union, where their activities prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, in accordance with Article 16(1) of this Regulation;

(k) coordinate national measures related to the dissemination of or access to content of audiovisual media service providers established outside of the Union that target audiences in the Union, where their activities prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, in accordance with Article 16(1) of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 100

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point l

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(l) organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and of civil society, and report on its results to the Commission, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation;

(l) organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and of civil society, in accordance with Article 18 of this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 101

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(m) foster the exchange of best practices related to the deployment of audience measurement systems, in accordance with Article 23(5) of this Regulation.

(m) foster the exchange of best practices and encourage compliance with existing codes of conduct related to the deployment of audience measurement systems, in accordance with Article 23(5) of this Regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 102

Proposal for a regulation

Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point m a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(m a) In so far as necessary in order to achieve the objectives set out in this Regulation and carry out its tasks, and without prejudice to the competences of the Member States and the institutions of the Union, the Board, in consultation with the Commission, may cooperate with competent Union bodies, offices, agencies and advisory groups, with competent authorities of third countries and with international organisations.

To that end, the Board may establish working arrangements.

Or. en

Amendment 103

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation or mutual assistance at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.

1. A national regulatory authority or body may request (‘requesting authority’) cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) at any time from one or more national regulatory authorities or bodies (‘requested authorities’) for the purposes of exchange of information or taking measures relevant for the consistent and effective application of this Regulation or the national measures implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.

Or. en

Amendment 104

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where a national regulatory authority or body considers that there is a serious and grave risk of prejudice to the functioning of the internal market for media services or a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, it may request other national regulatory authorities or bodies to provide accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, while ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression.

2. Where a national regulatory authority or body considers that there is a serious and grave risk of prejudice to the functioning of the internal market or a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence, it may request other national regulatory authorities or bodies to provide accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, while ensuring compliance with fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression.

Or. en

Amendment 105

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Requests for cooperation or mutual assistance, including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it.

3. Requests for cooperation (exchange of information and/or mutual assistance) , including accelerated cooperation or mutual assistance, shall contain all the necessary information, including the purpose of and reasons for it.

Or. en

Amendment 106

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b a) the request was not duly justified and proportionate.

Or. en

Amendment 107

Proposal for a regulation

Article 13 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue, in agreement with the Commission, an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.

7. Where the requesting authority does not consider the measures taken by the requested authority to be sufficient to address and reply to its request, it shall inform the requested authority without undue delay, explaining the reasons for its position. If the requested authority does not agree with that position, or if the requested authority’s reaction is missing, either authority may refer the matter to the Board. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of that referral, the Board shall issue an opinion on the matter, including recommended actions. The requested authority shall do its outmost to take into account the opinion of the Board.

Or. en

Amendment 108

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The requested national authority or body shall, without undue delay and within 30 calendar days, inform the requesting national authority or body about the actions taken or planned pursuant to paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 109

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.

3. In the event of a disagreement between the requesting national authority or body and the requested authority or body regarding actions taken or planned, or a refusal to take action, pursuant to paragraph 1, either authority or body may refer the matter to the Board for mediation in view of finding an amicable solution.

Or. en

Amendment 110

Proposal for a regulation

Article 14 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. If no amicable solution has been found following mediation by the Board, the requesting national authority or body or the requested national authority or body may request the Board to issue an opinion on the matter. In its opinion the Board shall assess whether the requested authority or body has complied with a request referred to in paragraph 1. If the Board considers that the requested authority has not complied with such a request, the Board shall recommend actions to comply with the request. The Board shall issue its opinion, in agreement with the Commission, without undue delay.

Or. en

Amendment 111

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

(a) the appropriate prominence of audiovisual media services of general interest under Article 7a and Article 13.1 of Directive 2010/13/EU and its proper application and enforcement;

Or. en

Amendment 112

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) making information accessible on the ownership structure of media service providers, as provided under Article 5(2) 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, as well as their subsidiaries, sister companies and parent companies.

Or. en

Amendment 113

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Commission may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU. The Board shall assist the Commission in this regard, where requested.

3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue an opinion on any matter related to the application of this Regulation and of the national rules implementing Directive 2010/13/EU.

Or. en

Amendment 114

Proposal for a regulation

Article 15 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Board shall foster cooperation between media service providers, standardisation bodies or any other relevant stakeholders in order to facilitate the development of technical standards related to digital signals or design of devices or user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services.

4. The Board shall facilitate cooperation between media service providers, standardisation bodies or any other relevant stakeholders in order to promote the development of EU-wide harmonised technical standards related to digital signals or design of devices or user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services.

Or. en

Amendment 115

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Coordination of measures concerning media service providers established outside the Union

Coordination of measures concerning media service providers established or originating from outside the Union

Or. en

Amendment 116

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Coordination of measures concerning media service providers established outside the Union

Coordination of measures concerning media service providers originated from outside the Union

Or. en

Amendment 117

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Board shall coordinate measures by national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by 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, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security and defence.

1. The Board shall facilitate the cooperation between national regulatory authorities or bodies related to the dissemination of or access to media services provided by media service providers established or originating from outside the Union that, irrespective of the means of distribution or access, target or reach audiences in the Union where, inter alia in view of the nature of the control that may be exercised by third countries over them, such media services prejudice or present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health, or where their programs include incitement to violence or hatred or public provocation to commit a terrorist offence. At the request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Boards rules of procedure, the Board may issue an opinion on the measured to be coordinated.

Or. en

Amendment 118

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Without prejudice to the possibility of a direct request from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent national regulatory authority or body pursuant to art.13(2) of this Regulation, where an audiovisual media service provider established or originating from outside the Union falls under the territorial jurisdiction of an EU Member State according to Article 2 of AVMSD and without prejudice to the procedures foreseen under article 3 of the AVMS Directive, a national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination may request the Board to issue an opinion inviting the authorities or bodies of the competent Member State to take appropriate measures against the media service provider.

The requests from the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination to the competent the national regulatory authority or body shall contain all the necessary information, including at least the original decision of the national regulatory authority or body of a country of destination accompanied by a translation to a commonly agreed language, as well as the necessary evidence underlying that decision such as recordings.

The involvement of the Board shall be trigerred following a request of a minimum number of Board members to be defined in the Board’s Rules of procedure together with the relevant processes. When preparing its opinion, the Board shall confirm that the following conditions are met:

(i) there is substantiated evidence that the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security, including the safeguarding of national security and defence, public health or the content of the audiovisual media service provider manifestly, seriously and gravely infringes article 6(1) of AVMSD.

(ii) the audiovisual media service is prejudicing or presenting a serious and grave risk of prejudice for several Member States or the Union.

Or. en

Amendment 119

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 b. The coordination of measures and the opinions of the Board shall be without prejudice to the competence and responsibility of the Member States to assess the risks and threats to their public security and national defence, which may be posed by media services originating outside from the EU.

Or. en

Amendment 120

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Board, in agreement with the Commission, may issue opinions on appropriate national measures under paragraph 1. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board.

2. All competent national authorities, including the national regulatory authorities or bodies, shall do their utmost to take into account the opinions of the Board issued according to paragraph 1 and 1a.

Or. en

Amendment 121

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 16 a

When taking a decision regarding the jurisdiction (inter alia through licensing or registration) over an audiovisual media service provider originating from outside of the Union, the competent regulatory authority or body shall, without prejudice to the national legislation, do its utmost to take into account a set of basic principle-based criteria concerning the service and the service provider to be developed by the Board.

Or. en

Amendment 122

Proposal for a regulation

Article 16 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 16 b

Member States shall ensure that, when relevant, national regulatory authorities or bodies, when deciding to take action against a media service provider originating from outside of the Union, have the legal basis to take into account:

(i) a decision taken against that provider by a national regulatory authority or body from another Member State, and/or

(ii) an opinion of the Board relating to that provider and taken on the grounds of this article

Or. en

Amendment 123

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Content of media service providers on very large online platforms

Content of media service providers on very large online platforms or very large search engines

Or. en

Amendment 124

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Providers of very large online platforms shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:

1. Providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to declare that:

Or. en

Amendment 125

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

(c) 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, widely recognised and accepted in the relevant media sector in one or more Member States for the exercise of editorial responsibility and editorial standards.

Or. en

Amendment 126

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. For the purpose of point (c), providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines shall provide a functionality allowing recipients of their services to indicate the contact details of the relevant national regulatory authorities or bodies or representatives of the co- or self-regulatory mechanisms. These contact details shall be made public.

Or. en

Amendment 127

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where a provider of very large online platform decides to suspend the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, without that content contributing to a systemic risk referred to in Article 26 of the Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], it shall take all possible measures, to the extent consistent with their obligations under Union law, including Regulation (EU) 2022/XXX [Digital Services Act], to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150, prior to the suspension taking effect.

2. Where a provider of very large online platform or very large search engine decides to suspend or otherwise restrict the provision of its online intermediation services in relation to any content provided by a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article, on the grounds that such content is incompatible with its terms and conditions, it shall take all possible measures :

a) to communicate to the media service provider concerned the statement of reasons accompanying that decision, as required by Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and Article 17(3) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065,

b) to provide the media service provider with 48 hours to reply to the statement of reasons.

The content shall not be suspended or otherwise restricted during the 48 hours period referred to in point (b), unless the content infringes national law of the country of origin and/or EU law.

Or. en

Amendment 128

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. When providers of a very large online platform subsequently decide to suspend or otherwise restrict content of a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this article, it shall provide in writing a detailed statement of reasons.

Or. en

Amendment 129

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Providers of very large online platforms shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.

3. Providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines shall take all the necessary technical and organisational measures to ensure that complaints under Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 and/or Article 20 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 by media service providers that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article are processed and decided upon with priority and without undue delay.

Or. en

Amendment 130

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform frequently restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content provided by the media service provider without sufficient grounds, the provider of very large online platform shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding them in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.

4. Where a media service provider that submitted a declaration pursuant to paragraph 1 considers that a provider of very large online platform or very large search engine restricts or suspends the provision of its services in relation to content provided by the media service provider, the provider of very large online platform or very large search engine shall engage in a meaningful and effective dialogue with the media service provider, upon its request, in good faith with a view to finding an amicable solution for immediatly terminating unjustified restrictions or suspensions and avoiding unjustified interferences in the future. The media service provider may notify the outcome of such exchanges to the Board.

Or. en

Amendment 131

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Providers of very large online platforms shall make publicly available on an annual basis information on:

5. Providers of very large online platforms or very large search engines shall make publicly available on, at least, an annual basis, detailed information on:

Or. en

Amendment 132

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the number of instances where they imposed any restriction or suspension on the grounds that the 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

Or. en

Amendment 133

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the grounds for imposing such restrictions.

(b) the grounds for imposing such restrictions; and

Or. en

Amendment 134

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. the instances and grounds for refusing to accept the declarations made by any media service providers in accordance with paragraph 1a of this Article.

Or. en

Amendment 135

Proposal for a regulation

Article 17 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission may issue guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1.

6. With a view to facilitating the consistent and effective implementation of this Article, the Commission shall adopt an implementing act that issues guidelines to establish the form and details of the declaration set out in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 136

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference.

1. The Board shall regularly organise a structured dialogue between providers of very large online platforms and very large search engines, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society to discuss experience and best practices in the application of Article 17 of this Regulation, to foster access to diverse offers of independent media on very large online platforms and to monitor adherence to self-regulatory initiatives aimed at protecting society from harmful content, including disinformation and foreign information manipulation and interference as well as possible negative effects of these initiatives or of content moderation policies by very large online platforms on the freedom and pluralism of the media.

Or. en

Amendment 137

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Providers of very large online platforms and search engines shall be entitled to participate in the meetings organised by the Board and shall engage in the dialogue in good faith.

Or. en

Amendment 138

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogue to the Commission.

2. The Board shall report on the results of the dialogue to the Commission. The Commission shall take this report into account for its assessment of the compliance of the very large online platforms and search engines with their obligations relating to systemic risks mitigation pursuant to article 35 of the Digital Services Act.

Or. en

Amendment 139

Proposal for a regulation

Article 18 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. Providers of very large online platforms and search engines shall provide the Board with all the necessary information, when requested, for the purpose of the involvement of the Board pursuant to articles 17(4) and 18(1) and (2) of this regulation.

Or. en

Amendment 140

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a of Directive 2010/13/EU.

1. Users shall have a right to easily change the default settings of any device, user interface and remote control controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services in order to customise the audiovisual media offer according to their interests or preferences in compliance with the law. This provision shall not affect national measures implementing Article 7a, among others, of Directive 2010/13/EU.

Or. en

Amendment 141

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. When placing the devices and user interfaces referred to in paragraph 1 on the market, manufacturers and developers shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change the default settings controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered.

2. When placing the devices, remote controls, and user interfaces referred to in paragraph 1 on the market, manufacturers and developers shall ensure that they include a functionality enabling users to freely and easily change the default settings controlling or managing access to and use of the audiovisual media services offered.

Or. en

Amendment 142

Proposal for a regulation

Article 19 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article 19 a

Right to identify the provider of a media service

1. Recipients of media services shall have a right to easily identify the media service provider on any device or user interface controlling or managing access to and use of media services.

2. Manufacturers of devices and providers of user interfaces controlling or managing access to and use of media services shall ensure that the identity of the media service provider bearing the editorial responsibility for the content or services is clearly visible alongside the content and services offered.

Or. en

Amendment 143

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect the operation of media service providers in the internal market shall be duly justified and proportionate. Such measures shall be reasoned, transparent, objective and non-discriminatory.

1. Any legislative, regulatory or administrative measure taken by a Member State that is liable to affect operations of news and current affairs programs of audiovisual media service providers in the internal market shall be non-discriminatory, duly justified, proportionate and minimise disruptions on the freedom to provide news and currents affairs. Such measures shall be reasoned, adequate, transparent, and objective.

Or. en

Amendment 144

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Any national procedure used for the purposes of the preparation or the adoption of a regulatory or administrative measure as referred to in paragraph 1 shall be subject to clear timeframes set out in advance.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 145

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Without prejudice and in addition to its right to effective judicial protection, any media service provider subject to an administrative or regulatory measure referred to in paragraph 1 that concerns it individually and directly shall have the right to appeal against that measure to an appellate body. That body shall be independent of the parties involved and of any external intervention or political pressure liable to jeopardise its independent assessment of matters coming before it. It shall have the appropriate expertise to enable it to carry out its functions effectively.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 146

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.

4. The Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion where a national legislative, regulatory or administrative measure referred to in paragraph 1. Following the opinion of the Board, and without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.

Or. en

Amendment 147

Proposal for a regulation

Article 20 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Where a national authority or body adopts a measure that affects individually and directly a media service provider and is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concerned.

5. Where a national authority or body adopts a measure referred to in paragraph 1 that affects individually and directly operations of news and current affairs programs of a media service provider and is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services, it shall communicate, at the request of the Board, and where applicable, of the Commission, without undue delay and by electronic means, any relevant information, including the summary of the facts, its measure, the grounds on which the national authority or body has based its measure, and, where applicable, the views of other authorities concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 148

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Assessment of media market concentrations

Assessment of market concentrations with a significant impact on media pluralism

Or. en

Amendment 149

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure an assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:

Member States shall provide, in their national legal systems, substantive and procedural rules which ensure an assessment of market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. These rules shall:

Or. en

Amendment 150

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 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;

Or. en

Amendment 151

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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 objective, non-discriminatory and proportionate criteria for notifying 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.

Or. en

Amendment 152

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d a) take into account the media market in its entirety, including the online environment, very large online platforms and very large search engines.

Or. en

Amendment 153

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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, 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, in particular very large online platforms and very large search engines, the advertisement market and the parties’ interests, links or activities in other media or non-media businesses;

Or. en

Amendment 154

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams and the existence of measures by media service providers taken with a view to guaranteeing the independence of individual editorial decisions;

(b) the safeguards for editorial independence, including the impact of the concentration on the functioning of the editorial teams;

Or. en

Amendment 155

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(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.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 156

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of media market concentrations on media pluralism and editorial independence by the national regulatory authorities or bodies.

3. The Commission, assisted by the Board, may issue guidelines on the factors to be taken into account when applying the criteria for assessing the impact of market concentrations with a significant impact on media pluralism.

Or. en

Amendment 157

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The national regulatory authority or body shall consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable media market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.

4. The national regulatory authority or body may consult the Board in advance on any opinion or decision it aims to adopt assessing the impact on media pluralism and editorial independence of a notifiable market concentration where such concentrations may affect the functioning of the internal market.

Or. en

Amendment 158

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Within 14 calendar days from the receipt of the consultation referred to in paragraph 4, the Board shall draw up an opinion on the draft national opinion or decision referred to it, taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission.

5. In case the Board is consulted according to paragraph 4, it shall draw up an opinion on the draft national opinion or decision referred to it, taking account of the elements referred to in paragraph 2 and transmit that opinion to the consulting authority and the Commission within 14 calendar days from the receipt of the consultation.

Or. en

Amendment 159

Proposal for a regulation

Article 21 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6. The national regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 4 shall take utmost account of the opinion referred to in paragraph 5. Where that authority does not follow the opinion, fully or partially, it shall provide the Board and the Commission with a reasoned justification explaining its position within 30 calendar days from the receipt of that opinion. Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.

6. The national regulatory authority or body referred to in paragraph 4 may take account of the opinion referred to in paragraph 5. Without prejudice to its powers under the Treaties, the Commission may issue its own opinion on the matter.

Or. en

Amendment 160

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Opinions on media market concentrations

Opinions on market concentrations with a significant impact on media pluralism

Or. en

Amendment 161

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. In the absence of an assessment or a consultation pursuant to Article 21, the Board, upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence, where a media market concentration is likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services. The Board shall base its opinion on the elements set out in Article 21(2). The Board may bring media market concentrations likely to affect the functioning of the internal market for media services to the attention of the Commission.

1. The Board, acting on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, shall draw up an opinion on the impact of a market concentration with a significant impact on media pluralism, likely to affect the functioning of the internal market. The Board may bring market concentrations significantly impacting media pluralism and likely to affect the functioning of the internal market to the attention of the Commission.

Or. en

Amendment 162

Proposal for a regulation

Article 22 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. Opinions by the Board and, where applicable, by the Commission shall be made publicly available.

3. Opinions by the Board and by the Commission shall be made publicly available.

Or. en

Amendment 163

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non-discrimination and verifiability.

1. Audience measurement systems and methodologies shall comply with principles of transparency, comparability, impartiality, inclusiveness, proportionality, non-discrimination and verifiability.

Or. en

Amendment 164

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Without prejudice to the protection of undertakings’ business secrets, providers of proprietary audience measurement systems shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers and advertisers, as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.

2. Providers of proprietary audience measurement systems developed without market governance or outside of European or national industry standards agreed by the relevant national self-regularory bodies shall provide, without undue delay and free of costs, to media service providers, advertisers, and right holders as well as to third parties authorised by media service providers and advertisers, accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and up-to-date information on the data collected and on the methodology used by their audience measurement systems. This provision shall not affect the Union’s data protection and privacy rules.

Or. en

Amendment 165

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2 a. The information provided pursuant the paragraph 2 shall have the same level of detail as the standards on audience measure used in the relevant sector, or by the self-regulatory bodies of the relevant sector or imposed by the regulatory body of the relevant sector, allowing for an independent audit.

Or. en

Amendment 166

Proposal for a regulation

Article 23 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, their representative organisations and any other interested parties, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.

3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall encourage the drawing up of standards, codes of conduct and compliance with existing codes of conduct by providers of audience measurement systems, together with media service providers, online platforms, their representative organisations and any other interested parties, that are intended to contribute to compliance with the principles referred to in paragraph 1, including by promoting independent and transparent audits.

Or. en

Amendment 167

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Allocation of state advertising

Allocation of state funding

Or. en

Amendment 168

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Public authorities, including 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 local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their advertising expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:

2. Public authorities, including 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 local governments of territorial entities of more than 1 million inhabitants, shall make publicly available accurate, comprehensive, intelligible, detailed and yearly information about their expenditure allocated to media service providers, which shall include at least the following details:

Or. en

Amendment 169

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 2 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the legal names of media service providers from which advertising services were purchased;

(a) the legal names of media service providers that received state funding;

Or. en

Amendment 170

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall monitor the allocation of state advertising in media markets. In order to assess the accuracy of the information on state advertising made available pursuant to paragraph 2, national regulatory authorities or bodies may request from the entities referred to in paragraph 2 further information, including information on the application of criteria referred to in paragraph 1.

3. National regulatory authorities or bodies shall monitor the allocation of state funding in media markets. In order to assess the accuracy of the information on state funding made available pursuant to paragraph 2, national regulatory authorities or bodies may request from the entities referred to in paragraph 2 further information, including information on the application of criteria referred to in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 171

Proposal for a regulation

Article 24 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The allocation of state resources to media service providers for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them other than state advertising shall be subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 1. This Article shall not affect the application of the State aid rules.

4. The allocation of state resources to media service providers for the purpose of purchasing goods or services from them shall be subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 1. This Article shall not affect the application of the State aid rules

Or. en

Amendment 172

Proposal for a regulation

Article 25 – paragraph 3 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

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

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

Or. en

ANNEX: LIST OF ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The following list is drawn up on a purely voluntary basis under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur. The rapporteur has received input from the following entities in the preparation of the opinion:

Entity

Alliance de la Presse d’Information Générale

France Télévisions

Association of Commercial Television (ACT)

Coopérative de la presse Magazine

Groupe Bouygues/TF1

Radio France

Autorité de régulation de la communication audiovisuelle et numérique (Arcom)

Eurocinéma

Messageries Lyonnaises de la Presse

Fédération Nationale de la Presse d’information Spécialisée (FNPS)

European Magazine Media Association & European Newspapers Publishers Association (EMMA/ENPA)

News Media Europe

Google/YouTube

The Walt Disney Company

European Broadcasting Union

Société des Auteurs, Compositeurs et Éditeurs de Musique (SACEM)

Vivendi/Canal +