The EU’s Chance to Curb Media Capture

On 31 October 2025, the Swiss media group Ringier bought its whole Hungarian media portfolio – together with the tabloid Blikk – to Indamedia, an Orbán-government-aligned group that already controls 18 on-line publications and platforms, together with the main information outlet Index and the foremost non-public tv channel TV2. For the previous fifteen years, the European Union appeared largely powerless because the “predator of press freedom”, Viktor Orbán systematically undermined media freedom and pluralism in Hungary and concentrated unprecedented ranges of informational energy within the arms of his authorities and its  enterprise allies. What emerged was not merely a distorted media market, however a politically engineered public sphere that repeatedly escaped the attain of EU regulation and uncovered the Union’s vulnerability to deliberate media seize. But the newly adopted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) may mark a turning level, probably breaking new constitutional floor for the EU in safeguarding media freedom and pluralism. Past its internal-market and competition-law devices, the Union now possesses a legally binding framework able to stopping additional erosion of media pluralism and supporting the eventual restoration of media independence. The EMFA establishes frequent guidelines that may stop market distortions and manipulation of public opinion, whereas additionally addressing broader rule-of-law considerations arising from politically orchestrated media transactions.

Predator of press freedom

After fifteen years of Orbán’s rule, the state of affairs remains to be alarming. Orbán, typically described as “predator of press freedom”, has steadily undermined media pluralism and independence via a wide selection of regulatory, financial, and authorized measures. From 2010 onwards, starting with the adoption of a brand new media regulation, Orbán systematically constructed a extremely concentrated media panorama – a improvement that put the EU to the check of declining democracy inside a Member State. The EU’s powerlessness rapidly grew to become obvious: EU regulation provided no instrument to successfully handle the state of affairs, and the Fee was unable to reply in any significant approach. Right now, nonetheless, the state of affairs is completely different. The EU now has a brand new software within the type of the European Media Freedom Act, and there’s a rising recognition that merger management itself carries a constitutional perform in safeguarding media pluralism. Whereas EU-level and nationwide merger management function as constitutionally decoupled programs, reflecting completely different forms of capitalism and constitutionalism, we argue that this newly rising constitutional framework, most notably via the EMFA, can handle the each the financial and rule-of-law considerations raised by such transactions.

Acquisition of Blikk

Blikk is Hungary’s most-read day by day newspaper with a big on-line viewers. It’s a tabloid overlaying a variety of subjects, from present affairs to leisure, together with studies on corruption, however like many different tabloids, it’s with out specific political content material. It’s a commercially viable outlet with an unlimited readership that features many undecided voters, who usually are not acutely aware media shoppers, and stay in any other case disengaged in political discourse. Consequently, buying Blikk is a politically instrumental transfer to affect public opinion.

Each Ringier and Indamedia publicly denied any political motivation behind the transaction. Nonetheless, Indamedia is 50% owned by Miklós Vaszily, a pro-government businessman who additionally serves as CEO of the pro-government broadcaster TV2. This acquisition can hardly be seen as something apart from an extra step in consolidating media beneath house owners carefully aligned with the Orbán authorities, additional decreasing unbiased media.

With the acquisition of Blikk, the information market in Hungary turns into extra concentrated. Each Index and Blikk are among the many 5 most-read on-line information websites, and Blikk is the most-read day by day newspaper in Hungary. Blikk is a market chief, and its on-line platform has grown fashionable, underscoring its strategic relevance for Orbán: the dissemination of government-aligned messaging via such extensively learn and influential outlet can considerably affect public opinion. Furthermore, whereas most captured media retailers at present stay nearly totally depending on state promoting and politically motivated spending, Blikk is economically viable by itself.

The timing of the acquisition, occurring lower than six months earlier than the April 2026 parliamentary elections through which the ruling Fidesz social gathering faces its most vital problem in over a decade, additional highlights its political salience. The sale is extensively seen as an effort by Orbán’s allied enterprise community and home oligarchs to additional consolidate management over the Hungarian media panorama. The mixed financial and political relevance of this acquisition should be thought-about when assessing Indamedia’s buy of Blikk. The transaction consolidates each financial and political energy within the Hungarian media panorama with far-reaching, short- and long-term implications.

A strategic transaction

The acquisition matches squarely the Hungarian authorities’s well-established playbook of media-capture technique of the previous 15 years: media titles beforehand owned by overseas buyers leaving the market have been acquired via strategic transactions led by enterprise actors, instantly or not directly linked to the federal government or the Prime Minister. These acquisitions have been usually adopted by a constant sample of intervention: new editorial management, recalibration of editorial coverage, the suppression of criticism and investigative reporting, and substitute with government-aligned content material.

Notable examples embody the 2016 sale of Népszabadság, additionally previously owned by Ringier, to Mediaworks, a government-connected firm that closed the paper shortly thereafter. These instances exemplify a centrally managed and coordinated system technique, designed, sanctioned, and executed from the best ranges of political energy. By way of this equipment, the Fidesz authorities and its allied enterprise community have absorbed a unprecedented share of the Hungarian media market: an estimated 80% of the media market now falls beneath direct or oblique authorities affect, additional bolstered by management of the general public broadcaster, regulatory seize, and the strategic use of state promoting to help pro-government retailers.

The rapid implications of this acquisition relate to its short-term electoral worth. Nonetheless, the transaction not solely reinforces the federal government’s capability to affect media narratives, but in addition kinds a part of a broader technique to consolidate commercially viable, high-reach media property and entrench affect even within the occasion of political turnover. Therefore, the acquisition embeds sturdy financial and political energy inside the Hungarian media ecosystem, successfully insulating key sources from future adjustments in political energy.

This acquisition raises a elementary query regarding the financial dimension of the rule of regulation: how can a extremely concentrated economic system, specifically a media market marked by excessive political seize, be deconcentrated following a doable political transition? What authorized, regulatory, and institutional mechanisms could be required to revive media pluralism and freedom?

The constitutional function of merger management

In assessments of media mergers, the regulatory perform of merger management is usually emphasised, however its constitutional function is essential to the financial dimension of the rule of regulation. Merger management screens concentrations in markets and assesses the potential amplification or discount of financial energy ensuing from transactions. Its perform, nonetheless, extends past financial issues to embody political and social penalties for residents. By controlling extreme financial focus, merger management can decentralize financial energy and broaden financial alternatives for corporations, thereby supporting a democratic political order. Concentrated financial energy can reinforce the political affect of capital and instantly have an effect on residents’ elementary rights associated to media pluralism and entry to dependable info.

Merger management safeguards democratic processes and establishments by mitigating the danger that dominant actors exert disproportionate affect over political processes or public opinion. On this approach, merger management preserves each financial integrity in markets and the broader democratic order.

The intersection of democracy, rule of regulation and financial coverage have change into more and more related on the EU degree, as evidenced by the heightened deal with media pluralism within the present revision of the EU Merger Tips. The Fee’s assessment of the EU Merger Tips, launched in Might 2025, acknowledges that merger management can instantly help media plurality. Media pluralism is a key concern in merger management as a result of concentrated media and AI markets can restrict info range and disproportionately affect public opinion.

Nonetheless, merger management is “an space of historic divergence” and merger management programs differ considerably throughout jurisdictions on account of being embedded inside native forms of capitalism and nationwide constitutional constructions. Nationwide utility is basically indifferent from direct EU oversight as a result of the monitoring of mergers is split between the European Fee and Member States in response to quantitative thresholds. The Fee has unique competence over mergers with a “Group dimension,” whereas Member States apply their nationwide merger guidelines to concentrations that don’t meet this threshold. Conversely, the Fee lacks jurisdiction beneath the EU Merger Regulation for mergers with no Group dimension, and doesn’t have the competence to assessment the Indamedia-Blikk acquisition. Furthermore, not like within the areas of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, there isn’t any established system of cooperation between nationwide competitors authorities and the European Fee in merger management. This enforcement framework allows Member States to authorise nationwide champions and to accommodate public-interest issues beneath nationwide regulation, that are particularly distinguished within the media sector, reflecting the intersection of financial and constitutional regulation.

Hungary’s framework for assessing media concentrations

In Hungary, media concentrations are examined by each the competitors authority and the media regulator. The Hungarian Media Act lays down substantive and procedural authorized safeguards to handle media market focus and its potential impression on media pluralism and editorial independence. The substantive guidelines are in Articles 67-70, whereas pursuant to Article 171 of the Hungarian Media Act, the Media Council acts as a Particular Authority in merger proceedings. The Hungarian Competitors Authority (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal, GVH) should search the Council’s opinion and will not prohibit a merger if the Council considers that the variety of unbiased media sources within the related market stays adequate to make sure range of data. The Media Council’s place is binding on the Competitors Authority.

Within the present case, the GVH has, nonetheless, introduced that the merger didn’t require notification as a result of the mixed turnover of the undertakings involved didn’t attain the statutory threshold beneath the Hungarian Competitors Act. Consequently, the GVH is not going to examine the doable detrimental results of the merger on competitors. But, in response to Article 24(4) of the Hungarian Competitors Act, even concentrations under the notification threshold should be notified whether it is “not evident that the transaction wouldn’t considerably scale back competitors within the related market, specifically via the creation or strengthening of a dominant place”. Accordingly, it isn’t clear that Hungarian merger management guidelines wouldn’t apply to this transaction, highlighting a spot within the enforcement framework with implications for each market and media pluralism. This produces a now-notorious state of affairs in Hungary: when assessing media mergers, the issue lies not within the absence of substantive or procedural guidelines, however within the lack of credible enforcement and establishments.

What has modified over the previous yr is that, inside the EU, a broader constitutional house has emerged that strengthens the function of media pluralism in each democracy and the economic system, and affirms its financial, social, and political significance. The constitutional perform of nationwide merger management is now strengthened by the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), which establishes a regulatory framework to handle media-specific dangers arising from concentrations. In power since August 2025, the EMFA obliges all Member States to introduce safeguards towards media seize and to make sure the efficient safety of media pluralism.

EMFA’s function in media-merger oversight

The EMFA launched for the primary time a soft-harmonization strategy to media concentrations, setting an obligation on the Member States to introduce nationwide guidelines for assessing media market concentrations primarily based on frequent standards and procedures. The EMFA requires a case-by-case evaluation of plurality, primarily based on a number of components that transcend the financial standards of conventional competition-oriented analysis to evaluate the impression of media mergers on media pluralism. The media plurality check beneath Article 22 EMFA requires assessing a focus’s impression on editorial independence, possession affect, and variety of data.

Nonetheless, the media plurality check is just not self-executing. Its effectiveness will depend on Member States designating an unbiased media authority, adopting clear procedures, and offering a transparent methodology to evaluate media pluralism. Among the many many questions raised by Article 22 EMFA, one has obtained much less consideration: enforcement, which is now central to Hungary’s case. The independence of the Hungarian Media Council has been critically questioned over time, and its operation beneath political affect undermines successfully assessing media concentrations. Furthermore, the Hungarian authorities has taken no steps to implement the EMFA provisions and has not printed any methodology for media pluralism assessments, which may represent a failure to adjust to its obligations beneath the European Media Freedom Act. As a substitute, it introduced a case earlier than the CJEU searching for annulment of virtually your entire EMFA.

This underscores the essential, although restricted, enforcement function of the European Media Board and the Fee. Whereas the European Media Board can not block a merger, it’s answerable for the constant and efficient utility of the Regulation and as such, can challenge opinions, request info, and publicly assess whether or not a nationwide authority correctly applies Article 22 EMFA. On the premise of Article 23 EMFA, the European Media Board can challenge an opinion by itself initiative or on the request of the European Fee. Contemplating the impression of the proposed merger in Hungary, this has been urged as an necessary first case for the Board, which ought to immediately begin its personal evaluation.

The European Media Board can current its evaluation to the Hungarian Media Council, which is, beneath EMFA guidelines, obliged to take its opinion “to the fullest extent doable”. If the Media Council disregards the opinion, it should submit its reasoning to each the European Media Board and the Fee, explaining why the opinion was not adopted.

Making its findings public, the European Media Board may improve transparency and put political stress on the nationwide regulator. Furthermore, the Fee may provoke infringement proceedings if Hungary continues to fail to adjust to its obligations beneath the EMFA. For instance, by not consulting the European Media Board, by missing a technique for the plurality check, or by conducting no pluralism evaluation in any respect. Lastly, Article 3 EMFA, which ensures entry to a pluralistic media surroundings, might be strategically mobilized by rivals of Blikk, and different events, together with journalists or civil society organizations.

Conclusion

The acquisition of Blikk additional consolidates each financial leverage and opinion-shaping energy inside government-aligned constructions, thereby narrowing the already restricted house for unbiased journalism and genuinely pluralistic public discourse. It constitutes a strategically vital instrument for structurally embedding, government-aligned affect over the Hungarian media panorama and public opinion, each now and after a possible political transition.

Whereas neither the European Media Board nor the Fee has publicly commented on the merger but, it’s clear that the Indamedia-Blikk acquisition may provide the litmus check of EMFA addressing media concentrations that elevate clear dangers for media pluralism.

This acquisition is just not merely an inner matter for Hungary; it needs to be a trigger for concern at each the EU degree and for the Union itself. There may be now ample proof that Orbán’s consolidation of media energy is extending into different EU Member States in addition to the Western Balkans, influencing media pluralism and press freedom past Hungary’s borders. Hungarian-backed media takeovers within the Balkans have uncovered a important hole in Europe’s defenses towards media seize. The Hungarian affect has additionally reached pan-European establishments: Euronews is now 98% owned by ALPAC Capital, an funding fund with vital financing hyperlinks to Viktor Orbán’s ecosystem.

It is a essential second for the EU. Confronted with clear geopolitical and geoeconomic challenges, the Indamedia–Blikk acquisition presents a decisive case through which the Union can, and should, stand agency, defending media pluralism, democracy, the rule of regulation, and the integrity of its financial mannequin.