- The EMFA, which came into force on Aug. 8, was introduced by the European Commission to protect journalistic independence, increase transparency and combat state interference in media across the EU.
- Despite banning spyware and coercion of journalists, Article 4 permits surveillance and legal action if deemed in the “general interest,” covering broadly defined crimes like “racism and xenophobia,” raising concerns over misuse.
- The act requires EU countries to maintain detailed media ownership records and targets “disinformation,” potentially threatening dissenting or minority media voices critical of the EU or governments.
- The European Media Services Board, meant to regulate implementation, is nominally independent but administratively controlled by the Commission, prompting fears of centralized narrative control.
- While EU leaders, including Ursula von der Leyen, praise the act as protective, commentators like Cindy Harper argue it enables surveillance, censorship and state dominance over media under the guise of safeguarding democracy.
A newly enacted European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), hailed as a major step forward for press freedom in Europe, is now under fire for containing provisions that could do the opposite – empower governments to surveil, silence and sanction journalists.
The EMFA, which officially enters into full force on Aug. 8, was designed to strengthen media independence, protect journalistic sources and combat state interference across the European Union. The European Commission presented the EMFA as a “historic” law that will defend media pluralism, safeguard editorial independence and increase transparency in media ownership and state advertising.
However, the law contains controversial clauses – buried in the broader legal framework – that leave the door open to state intervention against journalists.
For instance, the EMFA prohibits certain intrusions, including the use of spyware or coercing reporters to reveal sources, but Article 4 states that authorities can override these protections for “overriding reasons in the general interest.” This catch-all clause permits surveillance or legal action against journalists if national or EU law allows it, and if authorities claim it’s “proportionate.” It applies to investigations involving crimes with potential prison sentences of three years or more – a category that includes not just terrorism or trafficking, but also offenses like “racism and xenophobia,” which are vaguely defined and open to misuse.
The act also mandates that all EU countries create registries of media owners, addresses and corporate structures to promote transparency, but it as an invitation for state surveillance and political targeting.
Another contentious section targets so-called “disinformation,” accusing some outlets of manipulating the EU’s single market by spreading falsehoods. This framing could be used to crack down on dissenting or minority media voices, especially those critical of the EU or national governments. (Related: Pollak: Media, tech self-censorship over ‘whistleblower’ marks death of free press in United States.)
EMFA could become a tool for control, not protection
In line with the enactment, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, hailed the legislation on X, formerly known as Twitter.
“A free and independent press is an essential pillar of our democracy. With our European Media Freedom Act, we want to improve their protection. This allows journalists to continue their important work safely and without disruption or intimidation,” von der Leyen posted.
However, Cindy Harper argued in her article for Reclaim the Net that though the newly created European Media Services Board is formally independent, it is still administratively controlled by the European Commission. Harper wrote that despite its stated goal of protecting press freedom, the act’s structure grants the EU a significant power to control media narratives, potentially enabling surveillance, censorship and state interference.
“Despite being sold as a shield for press freedom, the structure of the act gives Brussels and national authorities the ability to decide which voices remain active and which can be silenced. By allowing arrests, surveillance and tighter state involvement in the media landscape, it risks turning from a safeguard into a tool for control,” Harper concluded.
Visit Collapse.news for similar stories.
Big Tech and mainstream media have started firing employees. Watch this video.
This video is from the Thisisjohnwilliams channel on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
Daniel Bobinski: The free press is integral to a free society – Brighteon.TV.
Israel seizes equipment from the Associated Press in latest assault on free speech and the press.
TURLEY: Post-decency politics: House Democrats use hearing to attack both free speech and a free press.
SMOKE & MIRRORS: Anti-TikTok “bill” is actually secretive legislation to help US government censor US citizen’s right to free speech and free press.
Justice Dept. faces allegations of First Amendment free speech, press violations in Project Veritas case.
Sources include:
ReclaimtheNet.org
EuropeanCommission.eu
Brighteon.com
Read full article here