
According to Freedom House, the country’s media is only "partly free," with no outright censorship but significant imbalances in media pluralism. Pro-government outlets dominate the market, financially outcompeting smaller, independent players. Regulatory authorities exhibit bias, and state advertising heavily favors government-friendly media, exacerbating inequities. Independent journalism is not suppressed through overt violence or imprisonment but is curbed by indirect economic and systemic pressures. Rural and less-educated populations, in particular, are less exposed to diverse media narratives, as government-controlled narratives dominate public discourse.
According to the authors of the article, EMFA is ill-equipped to address these structural issues. Reliance on member states to implement and enforce regulations is particularly problematic in contexts like Hungary, where the government has little incentive to foster genuine media pluralism. A recent study suggests that pro-government journalists stress that they enjoy complete editorial freedom, though most also conceded adapting content to suit their publisher's or advertisers' requirements. Many independent journalists from small news outlets operating in reliance on donations from readers show more interest in being free of government financial resources. Interestingly, both pro-government and independent journalists acknowledge some degree of self-censorship, due either to market pressures or expectations from publishers. This, in turn, undermines the balance of the media environment, encouraging an atmosphere where content friendly to the government prevails.
Most Hungarian journalists are very skeptical that EMFA will improve the situation. They believe that the legislation does not tackle the systemic differences in funding that independent media receive compared to pro-government outlets. Thus, many journalists are advocating for direct EU funding for independent outlets, which they believe would be far more effective.
While the EMFA introduces some important principles for media independence, its dependency on the implementation by member states limits its effectiveness in environments like Hungary. Without dealing with the systemic funding and market imbalances, the act itself does little to strengthen independent journalism in Hungary. More concretely, direct EU financial support for independent outlets might prove to be more useful in protecting media pluralism and freedom.
Tags: Hungary Media capture Media freedom Media pluralismThe content of this article can be used according to the terms of Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) . To do so use the the wording "this article was originally published on the Resource Centre on Media Freedom in Europe" including a direct active link to the original article page.