The major news in the Hungarian media market in recent days has been the acquisition of Ringier Hungary’s media portfolio by Indamedia Group, which operates Index. The takeover of Index.hu was the last major development in the Hungarian media market, and now Index, which has become closely aligned with Fidesz, is acquiring Blikk. Written by Gábor Polyák.

The acquisition of Ringier’s Hungarian interests was analysed from an economic perspective in an article by Ágnes Urbán, published earlier. However, the deal is also interesting from a regulatory perspective. From a legal perspective, this transaction requires approval under competition law and media law. Competition law approval can be granted by the Hungarian Competition Authority (GVH), while media law approval can be granted by the Media Council. Of course, in the coming days, the Fidesz government may still declare that this acquisition, similar to the establishment of the Central European Press and Media Foundation in 2018, is of national strategic importance, and on this basis, it may take the procedure away from the competition authority. However, in the current legal situation, even a national strategic classification would not prevent the Media Council from proceeding.

81%

Év végéig még

23 491 573 forint

hiányzik a

költségvetésünkből.

Támogasd az Átlátszó

tényfeltáró munkáját!

atlatszo.hu/tamogatom

What has changed compared to 2018? The European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) came into force in August this year, which, among other things, contains mandatory and directly applicable provisions in all EU member states regarding media market concentrations.

Based on the 2010 Media Act, the Hungarian Media Council has issued binding statements on all market concentrations involving at least two groups of companies that bear editorial responsibility and whose primary purpose is to disseminate media content to the public via an electronic communications network or printed press product. However, this was not a separate procedure, but a so-called specialised authority opinion issued in the context of an investigation conducted by the GVH. Therefore, if the GVH did not pursue competition law proceedings, either because the merger did not reach the competition law threshold or because the government classified the transaction as being of national strategic importance, then no media law investigation could take place either. In the meantime, the Hungarian Competition Authority announced that it would not initiate a competition law investigation into the matter, as its calculations indicated that the transaction did not exceed the threshold specified in Hungarian competition law.  

Nevertheless, the EMFA requires the assessment of any media market concentration that could have a significant impact on media pluralism and editorial independence. This obligation cannot be overridden, even if the transaction is classified as of national strategic importance. If the government attempts to do so, the European Commission is obliged to initiate infringement proceedings.

As a specialised authority, the Media Council examined whether „the level of independent sources of opinion after consolidation ensures the right to diverse information in the relevant market for media content services.” However, the Media Council seriously abused this power, on the one hand to ensure the smooth expansion of pro-government media, and on the other hand to prevent the emergence of strong independent players. There was no publicly disclosed and professionally sound methodology behind the decisions. In fact, the decisions facilitating the expansion of pro-government media were always made in the form of half-page resolutions without justification, and did not include any professional considerations.

In contrast, EMFA expects transparent, objective, proportionate, as well as non-discriminatory regulation of media market concentrations, and links the assessment of the impact of media market concentration on media pluralism and editorial independence to pre-published, objective, non-discriminatory, and proportionate criteria. The European regulation, therefore, requires the use of a clear methodology that is known in advance to the parties concerned, for which the European Commission may provide guidelines. However, the Commission has not yet published such guidelines; nevertheless, it is important to emphasise that the Hungarian Media Council has not published its own methodology. This in itself precludes the assessment of the merger from being carried out in accordance with European rules.

When assessing media market concentrations, the EMFA considers that the following elements should be taken into account:

• the expected impact of the media market concentration on media pluralism, including its effects on the formation of public opinion and on the diversity of media services and the media offering on the market, taking into account the online environment and the parties’ interests in, links to, or activities in other media or non-media businesses;
• the safeguards for editorial independence, including the measures taken by media service providers with a view to guaranteeing the independence of editorial decisions;
• whether, in the absence of the media market concentration, the parties involved in the media market concentration would remain economically sustainable, and whether there are any possible alternatives to ensure their economic sustainability;
• where relevant, the findings of the Commission’s annual rule of law report concerning media pluralism and media freedom; and
• where applicable, the commitments that any of the parties involved in the media market concentration might offer to safeguard media pluralism and editorial independence.

The merger will create a media market player that is the market leader in the tabloid daily newspaper market, one of the largest players in the online news portal market, and a significant player in the women’s magazine market. Although Blikk is not primarily a public affairs daily newspaper, it still plays a significant role in public affairs reporting. An appropriate methodology would be needed to evaluate this kind of significance.

Of course, we are not familiar with the agreement between Ringier and Indamedia, so we cannot know whether the editorial staff of the former Ringier newspapers will receive any real guarantees that their independence will be preserved. But from a business perspective, joint content production and content sharing may be the most important benefits of the merger.

 The Media Council must also consider whether the media outlets concerned would remain economically viable. The crisis in the print media has naturally not spared Blikk, whose circulation is steadily declining. However, there is no indication that Ringier’s Hungarian interests are generating losses, partly thanks to government advertising.

All these aspects could be properly taken into account in a thorough investigation, the outcome of which would be irresponsible to predict. Nevertheless, the methodological background necessary for a thorough investigation is certainly lacking.

Of the above considerations, we have the most reliable information on the findings of the annual rule of law reports concerning press freedom. The summary of the 2025 country report states:

“The threats to media pluralism highlighted in previous Rule of Law Reports have remained unaddressed. No measures have been adopted or are planned to regulate the channelling of state advertising to media outlets, to guarantee the functional independence of the media authority, and to ensure the editorial and financial independence of public service media. Journalists continue to face numerous and serious challenges to their work. Journalists and media outlets have been investigated by the Sovereignty Protection Office for allegedly ‘serving foreign interests’, and access to public interest events and press conferences continues to be selectively denied. While the accelerated treatment of court cases related to access to information continues, the scope of access to information remains limited, especially as regards public funding.”

Based on this, any media market movement that strengthens the positions of media outlets close to Fidesz must be treated with considerable caution. A Fidesz-affiliated company’s expansion is precisely what is happening in the Ringier-Indamedia deal. In addition to being a 50 per cent owner of Indamedia, Miklós Vaszily is one of Fidesz’s most important media market experts, who has proven himself as the head of propaganda outlet Origo, the former Echo TV, TV2, and MTVA, and leaked recordings reveal that Orbán’s richest oligarch, Lőrinc Mészáros, was, at least for a time, the main financier of Index.

An important safeguard is the mandatory consultation between the national authority and the European Media Services Authority in all Member State proceedings. According to the EMFA, if a media market merger is likely to affect the functioning of the European internal market for media services, the national regulatory authority or body concerned must consult the Board in advance on its draft assessment or draft opinion. For a concentration to have an impact on the European market, it is not necessary for the undertakings concerned to operate in several European Member States. It is sufficient that a dominant player is created or strengthened in a given Member State, as this affects the scope for action of potential European investors. Furthermore, Ringier is a media company present in several EU countries. The Media Council, therefore, cannot avoid consultation at the European level.

In this case, the Media Council is obliged to take the Board’s opinion into account „to the fullest extent possible.” If it does not follow the opinion in whole or in part, it must submit a reasoned explanation to the Board and the Commission within the deadline set by the Board in its rules of procedure, explaining its position. Unfortunately, the EMFA stops here and does not clarify the further course of the procedure or the Commission’s possible right of veto, so it is unclear what will happen if the Media Council ultimately disregards the European interpretation.

The European Broadcasting Union and the European Commission may still form their own opinion even if the Media Council finds that the Ringier-Indamedia merger has no European impact and does not initiate consultation itself. It seems unlikely that a player with strong political ties in the Hungarian media market would escape the Commission’s attention. In this case, however, the Commission will only publish its own opinion, which is even less binding on the Media Council than in the previous procedure.

Nevertheless, it can be said that it would be quite unpleasant for the parties involved if a European-level interpretation were to conclude that the merger is not in line with European legal requirements. On this basis, any Hungarian competitor could challenge the Media Council’s decision in a Hungarian court of law. In 2016, the Supreme Court stated that „In areas of regulation where the protected interest is market competition, there are also legal implications, especially if the regulation is EU-based, which may give rise to the recognition of the right to searchability.” Beyond legal considerations, Ringier must also consider how to protect its reputation in other EU member states.

We cannot say with complete certainty that the European Union will be able to stop the Ringier-Indamendia merger, but it will certainly make it more difficult. Currently, the Hungarian legal system does not comply with EMFA rules, and the Media Council is therefore unable to make a lawful decision on the matter. The most effective way to challenge this is through the European Commission. If the Media Council makes a decision despite this, that decision will be unlawful and will have no legal consequences. This poses a significant risk to the parties involved in the merger, particularly Ringier.