MEP Geoffroy Didier (EPP, French) presented his draft opinion on the Media Freedom Act (MFA) to the European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market (IMCO) on Tuesday 28 March. For him, the objective of the text “remains laudable and timely” provided that it does not “harmonise everything at all costs”.
His priorities are to include digital platforms in the scope of application, to preserve national media specificities and to ensure consistency with European legislation. These priorities are broadly shared by all political groups.
Platforms
The rapporteur proposes to include platforms, search engines and social networks in the regulation. In view of their “predominant place” in information and disinformation, “they should be regulated”, he put forth. In particular, he suggests “clarifying” the obligations relating to audience measurement, stressing that these should apply to digital actors.
Alex Agius Saliba (S&D, Maltese), for his part, called for “looking at the impact of acquisition of large tech companies that carry media content and/or advertising, therefore competing directly” with the media.
National specificities
Furthermore, Mr Didier argued that the harmonisation of European rules should not be to the detriment of successful media systems or national specificities. While the sector is “de facto segmented” between Member States and even between regions, this segmentation “rests on linguistic and cultural foundations that are often long-standing, powerful and relevant”, he insisted.
He also intends to separate newspapers from broadcasting, which “do not operate in the same way, operate in different markets [and] are regulated by different systems”.
Legal coherence
Finally, the rapporteur wishes to “respect the existing European legal framework” and, in particular, the acquis of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD). He called for “maximum independence for the European Committee for Media Services”, the future replacement of ERGA.
Andrus Ansip (Renew Europe, Estonian) proposed using the EMFA to cover the blind spots of the DSMA, i.e. media located in the EU and “systematically engaged” in disinformation, but broadcasting their content outside the Union.
However, the MEP was also sceptical about potential overlaps with the Digital Services Act (DSA), in particular regarding the obligation for platforms to inform the media before suspending their content (“media privilege”). This provision is similar to the “media exemption”, which was removed from the DSA and which raises questions “about creating privileged content and easily exploitable loopholes for bad actors in the fight against disinformation”, Agius Saliba criticised.
Mr Didier defended his proposal which clarified the initial text by giving the media a 48-hour deadline to respond to the statement of reasons for suspension as well as the contact details of media regulators. The objective, he insisted, is to allow reputed media to “challenge unilateral decisions of certain platforms, which refuse dialogue”.
Read the draft opinion: https://aeur.eu/f/63k (Original version in French by Hélène Seynaeve)