Negotiators from the Council of the EU and the European Parliament will meet again on 29 November for a second round of inter-institutional negotiations (‘trilogues’) on the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) (see EUROPE 13278/19).
The co-legislators will attempt to reach a compromise on a number of points, including the allocation of public funds for advertising, the European Media Services Committee and the rights of media service providers. The stated aim is to reach a political agreement at the third trilogue, already scheduled for 15 December.
With regard to the allocation of public funds for online advertising, the European Parliament would like to see additional requirements introduced, with the aim of preserving fairness and improving transparency, in exchange for which it would be prepared to abolish the 15% threshold it has introduced for the distribution of public funds allocated by public authorities or entities to a single media service provider for state advertising purposes.
The Council of the EU also accepted the European Parliament’s requests concerning the disclosure of advertising revenues received from public authorities and third country entities, and information relating to media ownership. National databases on media ownership should be developed. However, the Spanish Presidency of the Council of the EU suggests that the development of these databases be assigned to national regulatory bodies or other competent authorities, and that Member States be given flexibility in their implementation.
In addition, the co-legislators will have to find common ground on the provisions relating to the measures that media service providers could take to guarantee editorial independence (article 6).
The European Parliament wanted the obligation for media service providers to give easy access to certain information, such as their legal name or the names of their direct owners, to apply to those providing “news and current affairs content”. The Council of the EU intended to extend it to all media service providers. The Commission has invited the negotiators to consider the possibility of accepting this part of the text as published in its initial proposal, which provides for the exemption of micro-enterprises. The European Parliament was open to this option.
The structure of the European Board for Media Services remains unclear
Discussions will also focus on the European Board for Media Services. On this point, the Council of the EU believes that the European Parliament’s amendments, which seem to suggest the creation of a new agency, go too far. The future structure, as described in the Commission’s proposal, is intended to “replace and succeed the European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA)”.
The Presidency of the Council of the EU intends to maintain its position on the creation of a new structure, to oppose it and thus reject the European Parliament’s amendments aimed at giving the body a legal personality.
It also believes that it should be up to the Committee’s Board of Directors to decide on its structures, internal governance and working methods. The Council of the EU could nevertheless accept some of the European Parliament’s amendments, in particular the collaboration with experts from the press sector, and include some new functions, such as promoting the exchange of best practice in the field of media literacy.
Negotiators from the Council of the EU and the European Parliament will also have to agree on the rights of media service providers. This article will be negotiated on 15 December – at the same time as the recitals and leftovers from the second trilogue – in the presence of representatives of the European Parliament’s Committees on Culture (‘CULT’) and Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (‘LIBE’).
Several Member States were also pushing for a relaxation of bans on the use of certain methods to monitor the media or conduct investigations. The Council of the EU could agree to introduce a requirement for prior judicial authorisation for intrusive surveillance software against media service providers, as well as a requirement for periodic review.
At the next trilogue, the co-legislators are also expected to return to several aspects of the text that have been validated at a technical level since the first round of negotiations, such as guarantees for the independent operation of public service media providers, national regulatory authorities or bodies, and the assessment of mergers on the media market. (Original version in French by Thomas Mangin)