EU media ‘freedom law’ allows for journalist arrests if justified by ‘public interest’

On Friday, the so-called “European Media Freedom Act“ came into full force.

This means that the entire regulation must be implemented in all 27 member states. EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen praised the law’s entry into force on Friday on X:

“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.“

The EU praises the fact that this regulation is supposedly intended to strengthen source protection and journalism. Article 4 states, for example, that journalists must not be pressured into disclosing their sources through the use of spy software or arrests. However, the EU also allows exceptions to this prohibition: thus stating that arrests, sanctions or interceptions of journalists are allowed if “provided for under Union or national law“ and “justified by an overriding reason in the general interest in individual cases and […] proportionate“.

The use of “intrusive surveillance software“ may also be used for these purposes. The EU regulation allows the surveillance software to be used when investigating certain crimes that carry at least a maximum sentence of three years in prison in a member state. According to the EU arrest warrant regulation, crimes include terrorism or human trafficking as well as “racism and xenophobia“.

In addition, national lists should be created in which the owners and addresses of the media are noted, as stated in Article 6. Numerous regulations are made regarding the handling of disinformation. It is said that “global online platforms“ act as a “gateway to media content“ – with business models “that tend to prevent access to media services and increase polarizing content and disinformation“.

A free and independent press is an essential pillar of our democracy.

With our European Media Freedom Act we want to improve its protection.

So journalists can continue their crucial work in safety, without interference or intimidation.

— Ursula von der Leyen (@vonderleyen) August 8, 2025

According to the EU, there are media providers who would systematically spread disinformation and exploit the freedom of the internal market. That is why the EU directive recommends greater cooperation between national regulatory authorities. It is recommended that an EU authority meet once a year with internet platforms, representatives of media services such as newspapers or radio and civil society organizations to, among other things, monitor the implementation of initiatives to combat disinformation. This could be done, for example, by the “European Media Services Board“, which is supposed to be given the tasks of the “European Regulatory Group for Audiovisual Media Services (ERGA)“.

The “European Media Services Board“ is formally independent, but it is made up of representatives of the national regulatory authorities and a representative of the EU Commission. Each member of the committee has one vote and decisions are made with a two-thirds majority. The EU Commission also provides the secretariat for the committee, as stated in the Media Freedom Act. The Commission therefore has two options for influencing the work of the committee.

The body is tasked with advising the EU Commission and promoting cooperation between national regulatory authorities. In Germany, the 14 state media authorities are the national regulatory authority. Regulations relating to media pluralism should be harmonized across the EU.

The regulation also aims to strengthen the role of the public media. Article 5 of the regulation states that the managing directors of public media bodies should be appointed “on the basis of transparent, open, effective and non-discriminatory procedures“. Funding states that it should ensure that broadcasters have “adequate, sustainable and predictable financial resources“.

The European Union, through the Freedom of the Media Act and other levers such as the Media Services Panel, is working to address perceived disinformation and set standards for journalism. “Trustworthy media“ should be promoted. The cross-border work of regulatory authorities should be strengthened. What claims to be a strengthening of journalism could further limit it.