EU European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)

Article 12 requires the Board to set up a consultation mechanism with media service providers, civil society organisations and other relevant stakeholders. Article 13 lists the Board's tasks: support the application of the Regulation, exchange best practice among NRAs, opinions on matters of media regulation under Article 16, opinions on national measures affecting media-service providers under Article 21, opinions on media market concentrations under Article 23, opinions on relevance of EMFA Article 14-17 cooperation cases, structured dialogue under Article 19 with VLOPs, monitoring exercise under Article 26.

• Participation records in the Article 12 consultation mechanism
• Records of Article 21 + 23 opinions affecting the entity's services or transactions

Article 14 sets the structured-cooperation framework: an NRA may request assistance from the NRA of another Member State to ensure effective application of EMFA across borders. Article 15 specifically governs cross-border requests for enforcement of obligations of video-sharing platform providers (VSPs) under AVMSD: where an NRA considers that a VSP under the jurisdiction of another Member State is failing to comply with AVMSD Article 28b protection-measure obligations, it requests the home-country NRA to take action; the home-country NRA must act, with the Board as a coordination forum.

• Internal procedure to receive and respond to Article 14-15 cross-border cooperation requests where the entity is a VSP provider

• VSP provider with no procedure to handle Article 15 home-country-NRA requests

Article 16 enables the Commission, on its own initiative or upon request from the Board or an NRA, to issue guidance on matters of media regulation, including on Article 4 (rights of media service providers), Article 6 (duties), Article 18 (VLOP content moderation), Article 20 (right to customise) and Article 22 (concentrations). Article 17 governs the coordination of measures concerning media services from outside the Union that present a serious and grave risk of prejudice to public security, the protection of public health, or to the fundamental rights as enshrined in the Charter.

• Tracking of any Article 16 Commission guidance affecting the entity's services
• Records of any Article 17 third-country-media coordination affecting the entity (e.g. operator from outside the Union with EU-targeted services)

Article 7 designates the national regulatory authorities or bodies referred to in Article 30 of the AVMSD as the competent authorities under EMFA. They cooperate to monitor and ensure consistent application of the Regulation across the Union, exchange information, and contribute to the Board. Member States ensure their NRA / NRB has the necessary powers, including investigative + corrective powers + the ability to take preventive measures.

• Identification of the AVMSD Article 30 NRA / NRB for each Member State the entity operates in
• Engagement records with the NRA / NRB on EMFA matters

• Engagement only with general media-policy bodies rather than the Article 7 NRA

Article 8 establishes the European Board for Media Services (the Board), replacing the AVMSD ERGA structure for EMFA matters. Article 9 ensures the Board acts in full independence and seeks no instructions from any government, Union institution or other public or private body. Article 10 sets the Board's structure: composed of one representative of the national regulatory authority or body of each Member State, with the Commission as observer; chairperson + vice-chairperson elected for two-year mandates. Article 11 sets the secretariat (provided by the Commission, functionally independent of the Commission for the Board's tasks).

• Records of any Board consultations or opinions involving the entity (industry hearing, expert input, observer position)

Article 26 requires the Commission to ensure that an independent monitoring exercise is carried out, including risks to the functioning of the internal market for media services and to media pluralism and editorial independence in the Union. Member States and the Board cooperate with the monitoring; results are published annually.

• Cooperation records with the Article 26 monitoring exercise where the entity is a media-service provider, VLOP, or NRA

Article 27 requires the Commission to evaluate the Regulation by 8 August 2028 and every four years thereafter, in particular regarding the effective application of Articles 4, 5, 6, 18 + 19. The Commission reports to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, with proposals where appropriate.

• Tracking of the Commission's Article 27 evaluation cycle

Article 28 amends the AVMSD (Directive 2010/13/EU): inserts a new Article 7e on standardised classification information for content harmful to minors; replaces / strengthens Article 30b on the ERGA-to-Board transition. EMFA takes over from AVMSD on cross-border NRA cooperation on VSP matters via the Board structure (Article 15 above).

• Tracking of AVMSD changes inserted by Article 28 (in particular the new Article 7e classification regime + the Article 30b ERGA-to-Board transition)

Article 29 provides that the Regulation entered into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal (7 May 2024) and applies from 8 August 2025, with the following exceptions: Article 3, Article 4(1)-(2), and Article 6(3) apply from 8 November 2024; Article 7(2)-(5), Article 8, Article 9, Article 10, Article 11(1)-(2) + (4)-(7), and Article 26(1)-(3) + (5)-(7) apply from 8 February 2025; Article 11(3) and Article 26(4) apply from 8 August 2025.

• Compliance calendar reflecting the staggered application dates: 7 May 2024 entry into force, 8 Nov 2024 (Art 3, 4(1)-(2), 6(3)), 8 Feb 2025 (Board operationalisation), 8 Aug 2025 (general application)

• Compliance plan that treats 8 August 2025 as the only date
• Late operationalisation of Article 4(1)-(2) protections (applied from 8 Nov 2024)

Article 1 sets out the subject matter and scope. The Regulation lays down common rules for the proper functioning of the internal market for media services and establishes the European Board for Media Services (the Board), while preserving the editorial independence and the pluralism of media services. The scope covers media service providers (audiovisual + audio + print + online) operating in the internal market and very large online platforms making such services available. Article 2 supplies definitions, in particular media service / media service provider / editorial decision / public service media provider / VLOP (per the DSA) / programme / audience measurement / state advertising / spyware.

• Internal scope determination identifying whether the entity is a media service provider, public service media provider, VLOP, audience-measurement operator, or state-advertising allocator
• Definitions glossary aligning the entity's terminology to Article 2 (in particular 'editorial decision' and 'spyware')

• Service description that does not commit to an Article 2 role

Article 18 imposes obligations on VLOPs (as designated under the DSA) to protect content of media service providers from arbitrary moderation. VLOPs must: (1) provide a self-declaration function for media service providers (Article 18(1)) allowing them to identify themselves as media-service providers and to commit to editorial responsibility + control mechanisms + independence; (2) prior to suspending or restricting the visibility of content provided by a self-declared media-service provider, give the provider an opportunity to react to the notification within 24 hours (or shorter in case of crisis) before the action is taken, and provide a statement of reasons; (3) provide a priority complaint mechanism (Article 18(4)) for self-declared media-service providers; (4) report aggregate statistics on the application of Article 18 (Article 18(6)) to the Board annually.

• Self-declaration channel published by the VLOP for media-service providers (Article 18(1))
• 24-hour reaction window procedure prior to content restriction (Article 18(2))
• Priority complaint mechanism (Article 18(4)) operational
• Annual Article 18(6) statistics reported to the Board

• VLOP that restricts content from self-declared media-service providers without offering the 24-hour reaction window
• No priority complaint mechanism for media-service providers
• Treating media-service providers identically to other users in content-moderation flows

Article 19 requires the Board to organise, at least once a year, a structured dialogue between providers of VLOPs, representatives of media service providers and representatives of civil society, in order to: (a) discuss experience with the application of Article 18 + EMFA; (b) explore best practices for the application of EMFA in the VLOP environment; (c) facilitate access to diverse offers of independent media on VLOPs; (d) promote AVMSD Article 28b application in cross-border situations. The Commission reports on the outcome to the European Parliament and to the Council.

• Records of the entity's participation in the Article 19 annual structured dialogue (VLOP-side, media-side, civil-society-side)

Article 20 requires Member States to take measures to ensure that users can easily change the default settings of any device or user interface, controlling or managing access to and use of audiovisual media services, with a view to enabling the customisation of the media offering in accordance with the users' interests or preferences in compliance with Union law. Article 20(3) requires manufacturers and developers to take into account the right to customise when designing such devices or interfaces.

• Default-settings configurability records where the entity manufactures or develops smart-television / set-top-box / streaming-stick devices or interfaces
• Article 20(3) design records demonstrating consideration of the right to customise

• Smart-TV interface that locks users into a specific default media offering without easy customisation

Article 21 imposes a transparency + reasoned-decision regime on national legislative, regulatory or administrative measures liable to affect the operation of media-service providers in the internal market. Such measures must be duly justified and proportionate, contain detailed reasons, and be communicated to the Board which may issue an opinion within 14 days (the standstill period). The Board may identify a serious risk to media pluralism and to the proper functioning of the internal market for media services.

• Tracking of any Article 21 national measures affecting the entity
• Engagement with the Board where the entity's interests are affected by a notified national measure

Article 22 requires Member States to provide in their national legal order rules and procedures for the assessment of media market concentrations that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence, in addition to any general competition / merger control review. Article 22(1) lists the criteria the assessment must consider (impact on market pluralism, on editorial independence, on the safeguards under Article 6, etc.). Article 23 enables the Board, on its own initiative or upon request of the Commission, to draw up an opinion on a media market concentration where it could affect the functioning of the internal market for media services; Member States and the parties consider the opinion.

• Article 22 national-rules engagement where the entity is party to a media market transaction
• Records of any Article 23 Board opinion affecting the entity

• Media market transaction analysed only under general competition law without Article 22 media-pluralism assessment

Article 24 requires providers of proprietary audience-measurement systems to provide media service providers and advertisers, on their request and free of charge, with accurate, detailed, comprehensive, intelligible and updated information on the methodology used by their audience-measurement systems. Article 24(2) requires that proprietary measurement systems comply with industry-developed self-regulatory codes of conduct where they exist. Article 24(3) governs cross-border consistency: NRAs and the Board promote best practices.

• Article 24 methodology-disclosure procedure where the entity provides audience-measurement
• Records of methodology disclosures provided to media-service providers + advertisers

• Proprietary audience-measurement methodology not disclosed on request

Article 25(1) requires public funds or any other consideration or advantage granted by public authorities or by public entities controlled by such authorities to media service providers, online platforms or audience-measurement providers for state advertising / supply / service contracts, to be allocated according to objective, proportionate and non-discriminatory criteria. Article 25(2) requires public information on the criteria + amount allocated + recipients on a yearly basis. Article 25(4) requires Member States to designate an independent authority to monitor compliance.

• Annual public disclosure of state-advertising allocation per Article 25(2) where the entity is a public authority
• Article 25 procurement procedure for state-advertising contracts
• Engagement with the Article 25(4) independent monitoring authority

• State-advertising allocation by political or non-objective criteria
• No annual public disclosure of allocations

Article 3 requires Member States to respect the right of recipients of media services to have access to a plurality of editorially independent media content and to ensure that framework conditions are in place to safeguard that right, in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. (Applies from 8 November 2024.)

• Internal note demonstrating respect for the Article 3 right to pluralistic media (especially relevant where the entity is a Member-State public body or a VLOP)

Article 4(1)-(2) (applying from 8 November 2024) require Member States to respect the effective editorial freedom and independence of media service providers in the exercise of their professional activities. Article 4(3)-(4) prohibit Member States and any public authorities from: (a) obliging media service providers, their staff or their associates to disclose information identifying or making identifiable a source, or any related communications; (b) detaining, sanctioning, intercepting communications, or carrying out surveillance of media service providers or family members for the purpose of obtaining information; (c) deploying intrusive surveillance software (spyware) on devices used by media service providers, their staff or their associates, except where strictly necessary in a specific case by judicial authorisation for investigating a serious crime listed in Article 4(4)(c), and w

• Internal policy implementing the Article 4(3)-(4) protections where the entity is a media service provider (legal-counsel hotline for source-disclosure requests; spyware-detection program; coordination with national journalist-protection authorities)
• Records of any Article 4 challenges raised and Article 4(5) judicial-review proceedings
• Vendor-management controls to prevent deployment of spyware on staff devices

• Source-disclosure cooperation with state authorities without an Article 4(5) judicial-review process
• Use of intrusive surveillance technologies on media-service-provider devices without an Article 4(4)(c) authorisation
• No internal escalation process for surveillance-of-journalist concerns

Article 5 requires Member States to ensure that public service media providers are editorially and functionally independent and provide impartially a plurality of information and opinions. Article 5(2) requires transparent and non-discriminatory appointment of heads of management + members of the supervisory boards. Article 5(3) (applying from 8 November 2024) requires adequate, sustainable and predictable funding allocated through transparent and objective procedures, sufficient to ensure operational independence and the ability to develop. Article 5(4) requires Member States to designate an independent authority to monitor compliance.

• Where the entity is a public service media provider: appointment / dismissal procedures aligned with Article 5(2)
• Multi-annual funding settlement evidence aligned with Article 5(3)
• Engagement with the Member State Article 5(4) independent monitoring authority

• Political appointments / dismissals of PSM management without Article 5(2) safeguards
• Single-year political funding settlements without Article 5(3) sustainability

Article 6 sets duties on media service providers. Article 6(1)-(2) require easy and direct access to information about: (a) legal name + contact details; (b) name of direct or indirect owners holding ownership enabling them to exercise influence on the operation and strategic decision-making, including direct or indirect ownership by a Member State or public-sector entity, and the percentages thereof; (c) the beneficial owners as defined in Directive (EU) 2015/849; (d) annual reports on conflicts of interest. Article 6(3) (applying from 8 November 2024) imposes editorial decision-making integrity: providers must guarantee that individual editorial decisions can be freely taken within the established editorial line and ensure transparency of any actual or potential conflict of interest. Article 6(4) requires editors and journalists to be involved in the design of internal rules safeguardi

• Article 6(1) ownership-transparency disclosures on the entity's website (legal name, direct/indirect owners, beneficial owners under AMLD)
• Conflict-of-interest annual report
• Editorial decisions framework involving editors + journalists (Article 6(4))

• Hidden direct / indirect ownership
• No annual conflict-of-interest reporting
• Editorial-line override of individual editorial decisions