C4C’s Comments on the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)

In this position paper, C4C expresses its believe that Articles 17 and 18 of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) cannot be salvaged or improved and should hence be deleted for the following reasons:

  1. The DSA and the P2B Regulation suffice and there is no need for a specific media content
    moderation privilege: the DSA ink is barely dry, yet another unnecessary layer of complexity
    could get added with Article 17 of the EMFA and creating a narrower right applicable to less
    platforms than the P2B Regulation makes no sense.
  2. Articles 17 and 18 of the EMFA raise multiple questions to solve a non-existent problem.
    There should be no privilege: (1) for certain actors, as making some actors more important
    means the speech of others is automatically of less value; (2) for media, as this creates an
    easily exploitable loophole in the fight against disinformation; (3) for media on VLOPs as this
    creates a provision resting on the wrong scope at both ends; and (4) as such a privilege is
    extremely difficult to combine with the multiple other obligations platforms have.
  3. The introduction of these articles in the EMFA brings us back on the slippery slope from
    media privilege to media exemption
    /must-carry, a path that has already been clearly
    condemned by EU legislators.

Similar views have been expressed by a group of civil society organisations.

C4C shared this position in its response to the European Commission’s feedback opportunity on the EMFA proposal.