Tagged: Censorship Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Mázsa Péter 09:38 on 2011.12.12 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , , , ,   

    Hunger strike of Nagy Navarro Balázs leader of a hungarian media Trade Union:

    Cf. the original shot…

    … and it’s censored version aired on MTV and Duna TV:

    Cameron and Amexrap signal their explicit discontent:

     
  • Mázsa Péter 08:54 on 2011.11.17 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Hungarian Media Law: International Mission Condemns Chilling Effect and Calls for Change 

    Budapest, November 16, 2011

    Hungary’s new model of media regulation is creating a chilling effect and undermining freedom of expression said an international partnership mission comprised of leading press freedom and media development organizations today.

    The partnership mission to Hungary, which took place from November 14th to 16th, included meetings with lawyers, journalists, editors, professional associations, representatives of civil society, the new media authorities, and the government representative to discuss the situation regarding the enactment and implementation of the new media law, which went into effect on January 1, 2011.

    “The confluence of a difficult regulatory environment, deteriorating economic conditions, technological change and convergence in media, and a lack of unity and solidarity within the professional community has created a perfect storm that threatens the future of independent journalism in Hungary,” said Aidan White, head of the mission and an expert with the Media Diversity Institute.

    Since the legislation was passed in December of last year, it has received widespread criticism from the international community, including the Council of Europe, the European Parliament, the Media Representative of the OSCE, the United Nations special rapporteur on freedom of expression, and all leading press freedom and human rights organizations.

    Key findings of the partnership mission include:

    • The media regulation, particularly with regard to protection of sources, is incompatible with European and international law;
    • The legislation provides limited possibilities for judicial review of the decisions of the media authority and the media council;
    • The forms of co-regulation that have been developed in response to the legislation are not substitutes for self-regulation and are effectively outsourcing censorship with the co-operation of national and international media owners alike;
    • The licensing regime in Hungary has the potential to undermine the promotion of diversity and pluralism, which is an obligation under European and international treaties; and
    • Questions remain over the capacity of the reorganized system of public service media to provide pluralist, diverse and quality information as a public good.

    “We believe that the concerns expressed by the international community remain valid and we commit ourselves to continue to monitor the impact of the legislation in the coming months,” continued Mr. White.

    “We further call on the Hungarian government to openly engage in further dialogue with these experts and to consider changes to remedy the significant failings of the current legislation.”

    The International Partnership Mission of freedom of expression and media development groups consisted of:

    Article 19 http://www.article19.org
    Freedom House http://freedomhouse.org
    Index on Censorship http://indexoncensorship.org
    Independent Journalism Centre Moldova http://ijc.md
    International Press Institute http://freemedia.at
    International Media Support http://i-m-s.dk
    European Federation of Journalists http://europe.ifj.org
    Media Diversity Institute http://media-diversity.org
    Open Society Media Programme http://www.soros.org/initiatives/media
    Network for Reporting on Eastern Europe http://n-ost.org
    South East Europe Media Organisation http://seemo.org
    South East European Network for Professionalisation of Media http://seenpm.org

     
  • Mázsa Péter 19:57 on 2011.03.10 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship,   

    #Censorship in #Hungary: European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2011 on media law in Hungary 

    [Press release: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/en/pressroom/content/20110310IPR15259/html/Hungarian-media-needs-to-be-changed-further-says-European-Parliament ]

    [Original:]

    P7_TA-PROV(2011)0094
    Media law in Hungary
    European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2011 on media law in Hungary

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to Articles 2, 3, 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Articles 49, 56, 114, 167 and 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) relating to respect for and the promotion and protection of fundamental rights, in particular freedom of expression and information and the right to media pluralism,
    – having regard to Directive 2010/13/EU of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive – AVMSD),
    – having regard to the European Charter on Freedom of the Press of 25 May 2009, to the Commission’s working document on media pluralism in EU Member States (SEC(2007)0032), to the ‘three-step approach to media pluralism’ defined by the Commission, and to the independent study carried out on behalf of the Commission and finalised in 2009,
    – having regard to its resolutions of 22 April 2004 on the risks of violation in the European Union and particularly in Italy of freedom of expression and information [OJ C 104 E, 30.4.2004, p. 1026.], of 25 September 2008 on concentration and pluralism in the media in the European Union [Texts adopted, P6_TA(2008)0459.], and of 7 September 2010 on journalism and new media – creating a public sphere in Europe,
    – having regard to the statements by the Commission, to the parliamentary questions tabled and debates held in the European Parliament on 8 October 2009, regarding freedom of information in Italy, and on 8 September 2010, and to the discussions held in the joint meeting of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE Committee) and the Committee on Culture and Education (CULT Committee) on 17 January 2011 regarding the Hungarian media law,
    – having regard to the decision by the LIBE Committee to request the Fundamental Rights Agency to issue an annual comparative report on the situation with regard to media freedom, pluralism and independent governance in the EU Member States, including indicators,
    – having regard to the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, in particular Articles 5(2), 7, and 11 thereof,
    – having regard to Rule 110(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

    A. whereas the European Union is founded on the values of democracy and the rule of law, as stipulated in Article 2 TEU, and consequently guarantees and promotes freedom of expression and of information, as enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and in Article 10 of the ECHR, and recognises the legal value of the rights, freedoms and principles as set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which it has also demonstrated by acceding to the ECHR, for which media freedom and pluralism are essential prerequisites, and whereas these rights include freedom to express opinions and freedom to receive and communicate information without control, interference or pressure from public authorities,
    B. whereas media pluralism and freedom continue to be matters of grave concern in the EU and its Member States, notably in Italy, Bulgaria, Romania, the Czech Republic and Estonia, as highlighted by the recent criticism of the media law and constitutional changes enacted in Hungary between June and December 2010 which has been voiced by international organisations, such as the OSCE and the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, by a large number of international and national journalists’ organisations, by editors and publishers, by NGOs active in the areas of human rights and civil liberties, and by Member States and the Commission,
    C. whereas the Commission raised concerns and requested information from the Hungarian Government regarding the conformity of the Hungarian media law with the AVMSD and the acquis communautaire in general, notably in relation to the obligation to offer balanced coverage applicable to all audiovisual media service providers, and also questioned whether that law complied with the principle of proportionality and respected the fundamental right to freedom of expression and information enshrined in Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the country-of-origin principle and registration requirements, and whereas the Hungarian Government responded by providing further information and by commencing the process of amending the law to address the points raised by the Commission,
    D. whereas the OSCE expressed serious reservations regarding the scope of the Hungarian laws (material and territorial scope), freedom of expression and the regulation of content, the appointment of one person to act as the national media and telecommunications authority, and compliance with the principles governing public-service broadcasting [Analysis and assessment of a package of Hungarian legislation and draft legislation on media and telecommunications, prepared by Dr Karol Jakubowicz for the OSCE.], indicating that the new legislation undermined media pluralism, abolished the political and financial independence of the public-service media and cemented the negative features for the free media in the long term, and that the Media Authority and Media Council were politically homogeneous [Letter of 14 January 2010 from the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media to the Chair of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.] and exerted pervasive and centralised governmental and political control over all media; whereas further concerns included the disproportionate and extreme penalties imposed for debatable and undefined reasons, the lack of an automatic procedure for suspending penalties in the event of an appeal to the courts against a Media Authority ruling, the violation of the principle of the confidentiality of journalistic sources and the protection of family values,
    E. sharing the serious reservations expressed by the OSCE in relation to the politically homogeneous composition of the Media Authority and Media Council, the timeframe, the exertion of a pervasive and centralised governmental, judicial and political control over all media, the fact that the most problematic features of the legislation contravene OSCE and international standards on freedom of expression, for example by doing away with the political and financial independence of public-service media, the scope of the regulation (material and territorial), and the decision not to define key terms, making it impossible for journalists to know when they may be breaking the law,
    F. whereas the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights called on the Hungarian authorities, when reviewing the media law, to take account of Council of Europe standards on freedom of expression and media pluralism, the relevant recommendations of the Committee of Ministers and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and, in particular, the binding standards set out in the ECHR and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights; whereas he referred to the use of unclear definitions which are open to misinterpretation, the establishment of politically unbalanced regulatory machinery with disproportionate powers which is not subject to full judicial supervision, threats to the independence of public-service broadcast media, and erosion of the protection of journalists’ sources; whereas he also stressed the need for all relevant stakeholders, including opposition parties and civil society, to be able to participate in a meaningful manner in the review of this legislation, which regulates such a fundamental aspect of the functioning of a democratic society [ http://www.coe.int/t/commissioner/News/2011/110201Hungary_en.asp ],
    G. whereas, in a second opinion issued on 25 February 2011, the Commissioner for Human Rights recommends a ‘wholesale review’ of the Hungarian media law package, with the objectives, inter alia, of reinstating precise legislation promoting a pluralistic and independent media, and strengthening the guarantees that media regulatory mechanisms will be immune from political influence [ https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1751289 ]; whereas he further states that the media in Hungary must be able to perform their role as watchdog in a pluralistic democratic society and that in order to achieve this, Hungary should abide by its commitments as a member state of the Council of Europe and make the most of that organisation’s expertise in the fields of freedom of expression and media independence and pluralism,
    H. whereas the Hungarian media law should consequently be suspended as a matter of urgency and reviewed on the basis of the Commission’s, OSCE’s and Council of Europe’s comments and proposals, in order to ensure that it is fully in conformity with EU law and European values and standards on media freedom, pluralism and independent media governance,
    I. whereas, despite repeated calls by Parliament for a directive on media freedom, pluralism and independent governance, the Commission has up to now delayed this proposal, which has become increasingly necessary and urgent,
    J. whereas the Copenhagen criteria for EU membership, as established in June 1993 at the Copenhagen European Council, relating to freedom of the press and freedom of expression should be upheld by all EU Member States and enforced through relevant EU legislation,
    K. whereas, in paragraphs 45 and 46 of its judgment in joined Cases C-39/05 P and C-52/05 P, the Court of Justice has held that access to information enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process and guarantees that the administration enjoys greater legitimacy and is more effective and more accountable to the citizen in a democratic system and that it ‘is a precondition for the effective exercise of citizens’ democratic rights’,

    1. Calls on the Hungarian authorities to restore the independence of media governance and halt state interference with freedom of expression and ‘balanced coverage’, and believes that over-regulation of the media is counterproductive, jeopardising effective pluralism in the public sphere;

    2. Welcomes the Commission’s cooperation with the Hungarian authorities to bring Hungarian media law into conformity with EU Treaties and law, and the commencement of the amending process at national level;

    3. Deplores the Commission’s decision to target only three points in connection with the implementation of the acquis communautaire by Hungary and the lack of any reference to Article 30 of the AVMSD, which has the effect of limiting the Commission’s own competence to scrutinise Hungary’s compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights when implementing EU law; urges the Commission to examine Hungary’s compliance with the liability arrangements laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce and Hungary’s transposition of the EU framework decisions on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (2008/913/JHA) and on combating terrorism (2008/919/JHA), which include references to freedom of expression and circumventions of the rules on media freedom;

    4. Calls on the Commission to continue the close monitoring and assessment of the conformity of Hungarian media law as amended in accordance with European legislation, particularly with the Charter on Fundamental Rights;

    5. Calls on the Hungarian authorities to involve all stakeholders in the revision of the media law and of the Constitution, which is the basis for a democratic society founded on the rule of law, with appropriate checks and balances to safeguard the fundamental rights of the minority against the risk of the tyranny of the majority;

    6. Calls on the Commission to act, on the basis of Article 265 TFEU, by proposing a legislative initiative pursuant to Article 225 TFEU on media freedom, pluralism and independent governance before the end of the year, thereby overcoming the inadequacies of the EU’s legislative framework on the media, making use of its competences in the fields of the internal market, audiovisual policy, competition, telecommunications, State subsidies, the public-service obligation and the fundamental rights of every person resident on EU territory, with a view to defining at least the minimum essential standards that all Member States must meet and respect in national legislation in order to ensure, guarantee and promote freedom of information and an adequate level of media pluralism and independent media governance;

    7. Calls on the Hungarian authorities to review the media law further on the basis of the comments and proposals made by the European Parliament, the Commission, the OSCE and the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, the recommendations of the Committee of Ministers and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the case law of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights and, in the event that it is found to be incompatible with the letter or spirit of the Treaties or EU law, the Charter of Fundamental Rights or the ECHR, to repeal and not to apply the law or those elements thereof that are found to be incompatible;

    8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Council of Europe, the governments and parliaments of Member States, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the OSCE and the Council of Europe.

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&type=TA&reference=20110310&secondRef=TOC

     
  • Mázsa Péter 11:42 on 2011.02.23 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Cenzúratörvény / Censorship law in Hungary: Nyílt levél Neelie Kroes uniós biztosnak / Letter to Neelie Kroes, European Digital Agenda Commissioner 

    A TASZ álláspontja szerint a kormány médiatörvény módosítási szándékai nemcsak elégtelenek, de helyenként még szigorúbb feltételeket írnának elő, mint a jelenleg hatályos törvény.

    Neelie Kroes digitális politikáért felelős EU-biztos, az Európai Bizottság alelnöke januárban vizsgálatot indított a magyar médiatörvények európai uniós joggal való összhangja miatt. A Kormány módosítási javaslatot készített a törvényről, amely sajtóhírek szerint Neelie Kroes támogatását élvezik. A TASZ szerint a módosítások nemcsak az Uniós Biztos kifogásait nem orvosolják, de helyenként még a hatályos szabályozásnál is korlátozóbb eredménnyel járna elfogadásuk.

    Így például a kormány módosítási javaslata szerint a televíziók és rádiók esetén a tájékoztatási kötelezettséget új szabály határozná meg, az arányosság és a demokratikus közvélemény biztosítása érdekében. Ez azonban még közvetlenebb tartalmi beavatkozást jelent a média szerkesztési szabadságába, mint a hatályos szabály. A TASZ reméli, hogy az arányosság nem jelenti a politikai pártok hatalmi helyzete szerinti arányosságot a tájékoztatás tekintetében. A demokratikus közvélemény követelményét pedig a világon még sehol sem tudták kielégítően törvényben definiálni, pontosan azért, mert nem lehet: éppen attól demokratikus egy közvélemény, hogy az nem törvényben kerül meghatározásra.

    A származási ország elvével kapcsolatban a kormány javaslata ugyan megoldaná a televíziók és a lekérhető szolgáltatások esetében az uniós joggal való harmonizációt, azonban a módosítás felemásra sikerült, így a Médiahatóság továbbra is felléphet a külföldi rádiókkal, valamint az online és nyomtatott sajtóval szemben.

    A regisztrációs kötelezettségre vonatkozó szabályok változása pedig azt eredményezi, hogy egy újabb, 1 millió forintig terjedő pénzbíráság kivetésére adna lehetőséget a törvény.

    A TASZ nyílt levelében azt kéri Kroes biztostól, hogy folytassa a tárgyalásokat a kormánnyal és vizsgálatát terjessze ki további érintett uniós jogszabályok vizsgálatára, valamint a sajtó- és szólásszabadság szempontjából is vizsgálja a magyar törvényt. http://tasz.hu/szolasszabadsag/tasz-nyilt-levelet-irt-mediatorveny-modositasa-miatt-neelie-kroes-unios-biztosnak

    A nyílt levél teljes szövege: http://tasz.hu/files/tasz/imce/kroes_level_magyar0223.pdf

    The HCLU [Hungarian Civil Liberties Union] wrote a letter to Neelie Kroes to express our grave concern about the amendment proposed to the Hungarian Press and Media Act and the Media Services and Mass Media Act by the Hungarian government which it has been said is supported by Commissioner Kroes.

    The HCLU’s position is that Hungarian media laws constitute violations of European Directives in many details as well as that of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Furthermore some points of the proposed amendments are even more restrictive on freedom of the press than the earlier versions. http://tasz.hu/en/freedom-of-speech/letter-neelie-kroes-european-digital-agenda-commissioner

    Letter to Neelie Kroes download: http://tasz.hu/files/tasz/imce/kroes_letter_0223.pdf

     
  • Mázsa Péter 14:27 on 2011.02.15 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    EU-parlament: Négypárti közös indítvány egy tökösebb uniós álláspontra a magyar médiatörvénnyel kapcsolatban 

    Az indítványról csütörtökön dél és egy között szavaz az EU-Parlament.

    A 4 pártnak összesen 358 szavazata van a 736-ból (48%), +11 szavazat (=369) kéne az 50% + 1 szavazathoz.

    Részletek:

    JOINT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
    14.2.2011

    pursuant to Rule 110(4) of the Rules of Procedure
    replacing the motions by the following groups:
    Verts/ALE (B7‑0103/2011)
    ALDE (B7‑0104/2011)
    GUE/NGL (B7‑0107/2011)
    S&D (B7‑0112/2011)

    on media law in Hungary

    […]

    European Parliament resolution on media law in Hungary

    The European Parliament,

    […]

    1. Calls on the Hungarian authorities to restore the independence of media governance and halt state interference with freedom of expression and balanced media coverage, and believes that over-regulation of the media is counterproductive, jeopardising effective pluralism in the public sphere;

    2. Welcomes the Commission initiative to request clarifications on the Hungarian media law and its conformity with EU Treaties and law and the announcement made by the Hungarian authorities in relation to their readiness to amend the law;

    3. Deplores the Commission’s decision to target only three points in connection with the implementation of the acquis communautaire by Hungary and the lack of any reference to Article 30 of the AVMSD, which has the effect of limiting the Commission’s own competence to scrutinise Hungary’s compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights when implementing EU law; urges the Commission to examine Hungary’s compliance with the liability arrangements laid down in Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce and Hungary’s transposition of the EU framework decisions on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law (2008/913/JHA) and on combating terrorism (2008/919/JHA), which include references to freedom of expression and circumventions of the rules on media freedom;

    4. Calls on the Commission to proceed in a swift and timely manner with its thorough examination of the issue of bringing the Hungarian media law into conformity with European legislation, particularly the Charter on Fundamental Rights, to set a tight deadline for the Hungarian authorities to change the law, and should the deadline not be met, initiate infringement proceedings;

    5. Calls on the Hungarian authorities to involve all stakeholders in the revision of the media law and of the Constitution, which is the basis for a democratic society founded on the rule of law, with appropriate checks and balances to safeguard the fundamental rights of the minority against the risk of the tyranny of the majority;

    6. Calls on the Commission to act, on the basis of Article 265 TFEU, by proposing a legislative initiative pursuant to Article 225 TFEU on media freedom, pluralism and independent governance before the end of the year, thereby overcoming the inadequacies of the EU’s legislative framework on the media, making use of its competences in the fields of the internal market, audiovisual policy, competition, telecommunications, State subsidies, the public-service obligation and the fundamental rights of every person resident on EU territory, with a view to defining at least the minimum essential standards that all Member States must meet and respect in national legislation in order to ensure, guarantee and promote freedom of information and an adequate level of media pluralism and independent media governance;

    7. Calls on the Hungarian authorities, in the event that the media law is found to be incompatible with the letter or spirit of the Treaties or EU law, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights, to repeal and not to apply the law or those elements thereof that are found to be incompatible, in accordance with the comments and proposals made by the European Parliament, the Commission, the OSCE and the Council of Europe Commissioner on Human Rights, the recommendations of the Committee of Ministers and Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, and the case-law of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights;

    8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Council of Europe, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Fundamental Rights Agency, the OSCE and the Council of Europe. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=P7-RC-2011-0103&language=EN

     
    • admin 19:59 on 2011.02.15 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    • Pásztor Szilárd 15:40 on 2011.02.19 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Jé, csak nem maguk az előterjesztők kérték a szavazás elhalasztását? :)
      Kíváncsian várom, hogy az EU-s elvtársakban hogyan csapódik le idővel, hogy a magyar elvtársaik falnak vezették őket ezzel a médiatörvény ürügyén rendezett hisztivel.
      Mivel mostanra kiderült, hogy pusztán néhány apró technikai módosításban tudott megtestesülni a nagy kritikai szellem (hogy azért valami egeret mégis vajúdjanak a hegyek, ha már…), zavarában az EU is nekiállt magyarázni arról, hogy meg kéne nézni az összes ország médiaszabályozását, és ezzel elismerte, hogy a magyar törvény semmiben sem lépi túl a széleskörű gyakorlatot.
      Azt viszont tudhatjuk, hogy ha minden országot egyszerre akarnak felülvizsgálni, akkor annak, főleg az erős tagállamok érdekei miatt, milyen vége lesz: pontosan semmilyen.
      A szavazás elhalasztásával, azaz gyakorlatilag végleges sutba dobásával egy dologban bizonyult okosabbnak a nyugati ballib oldal a magyarnál: észreveszik, ha döglött lovon ülnek, és végre leszállnak róla.

  • Mázsa Péter 13:45 on 2011.02.15 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship,   

    Hungary has been attacked under the disguise of the media law, Hungarians’ democratic commitment has been questioned, the respect due to Hungary and Hungarians has been violated. The government has beaten back this attack. We made the argument of the attackers ridiculous, we have claimed and commanded due respect for Hungarians, we have made our inviolable self-esteem evident. Nobody will mop the floor with this government the way they have done with our inept and hapless predecessors. We will not accept any country or community as an inspector placed above us. So as nobody misunderstands: democracy does not exist in Hungary because anyone expects it from us or forces it upon us. Brussels is no Moscow. We have organised Hungary in the spirit of democratic life and freedom because us Hungarians like to live in freedom and democracy.

    PM Orbán, 14 February 2011
     
    • Pásztor Szilárd 15:45 on 2011.02.19 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Yes, my feelings had been hurt when an Austrian newspaper depicted Hungary as a hairy Neanderthal man who had just beaten “freedom of speech” to a compost mulch, or by a British clerk whose name I forgot but who said Hungary should take a bath before joining the European community.
      Most of the ‘critic voices’ (read: defamation) was not directed against the Hungarian government, but against Hungary as a whole.

  • Mázsa Péter 13:26 on 2011.02.14 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    [Video, in English] Ronald Dworkin előadása Kis János bevezetőjével:

    Az előadás teljes leirata innen érhető el: http://amexrap.org/fal/1pont-a-demokraciarol-szolo-budapesti-dworkin-eloadasrol

     
  • Mázsa Péter 10:26 on 2011.01.22 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Guardian: Orban was threatening the EU “Orbán made clear he would cause maximum embarrassment if Brussels insisted on meddling in his domestic policies. “If you mix up the two, obviously I am ready to fight … It won’t just be detrimental or damaging to Hungary alone but … to the EU as a whole,” he said in Strasbourg. It was an extraordinary statement: in effect, the EU’s standard-bearer was threatening the EU. […]

    The impact of Orbán’s behaviour on EU influence in the world is another worrying issue. Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, has warned Europe’s collective authority in dealing with abusive regimes could be undermined. If Hungary’s flouting of EU standards goes unpunished, other EU states with questionable human rights and civil liberties practices may feel encouraged to persist. And what is EU candidate Turkey, often accused of curtailing media freedoms, to make of it all? […]

    The controversy has sparked an overdue discussion about maintaining common standards, Dennison said. “Until recently EU governments and the Commission have found it inappropriate to discuss domestic affairs at a European level, and certainly not in public … Instead they operate a gentlemen’s club …” she said in an ECFR analysis. But now, outrage over Orbán’s antics suggested “the long-standing civil society message [is] finally being heard: that breaches of the EU’s fundamental values, even in only one member state, are still a source of collective shame.” ”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/20/hungary-eu-media-law

    In Hungarian: http://hvg.hu/vilag/20110121_ep_guardian_orban_

     
  • admin 19:34 on 2011.01.21 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Amexrap: Thank you Mr Ambassador 

    “Statement by Ambassador Kelly on Media Freedom in Hungary

    United States Mission to the OSCE
    As delivered by Ambassador Ian Kelly
    to the Permanent Council, Vienna
    January 20, 2011

    Statement on Media Freedom in Hungary

    The United States wishes to register its concern over the new media law in Hungary. As a close ally and friend, we call on Hungary to uphold media freedom at home and throughout the region given its participation in the OSCE and as current President of the European Union. The passage of the new media law has raised significant international concern about the future of freedom of expression in Hungary. We note the visit to Budapest earlier this week of OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Dunja Mijatovic and the concerns she previously outlined regarding media pluralism and possible risks to the financial, political, and editorial independence of media outlets under this new law. The United States cares deeply about freedom of expression, including press freedom, as a right that is central to democracy.

    We therefore urge Hungarian officials to consider the concerns raised about the law, including those cited by Ms. Mijatovic, and ensure that freedom of expression, including media freedom, is fully respected in Hungary – a country long recognized as a leader in the fight against totalitarianism.

    Thank you Mr. Chairman.”

    http://www.america.gov/st/texttrans-english/2011/January/20110120145809su2.721369e-02.html

    [Via Karli Gyula Sámuel]

     
  • Mázsa Péter 00:34 on 2011.01.20 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , , Français   

    Videó, EU-Parlament, Cohn-Bendit: “Felfogja-e Orbán Úr, hogy mi, az EU a totalitarizmus ellen születtünk meg?! / Do you understand Mr Orban that we, the EU were born against totalitarianism?!” 

    Français: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eLObE7EWro

    Vö.: “Orbán Viktor megvédte Magyarországot Strasbourgban” http://www.kormany.hu/hu/miniszterelnokseg/hirek/mediatorveny-orban-viktor-megvedte-magyarorszagot-strasbourgban
    Vö.: http://amexrap.org/fal/horror

     
    • Stankovits György 08:34 on 2011.01.20 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Tudod mi jutott eszembe ennek a beszédnek a felvezetéséről? Kb ez: “vannak rendes cigányok, én is ismerek ilyeneket, de…” Szóval ilyen szellemiségű volt ez a beszéd.

      • Mázsa Péter 23:43 on 2011.01.23 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Státuszban kb el is találtad. A magyarok, mint Európa cigányai: ez a magyaroknak, mint az enyhén szólva nem éppen a tolaranciaszintjükről http://amexrap.org/fal/megdobbento-adatok (10-11. dia) híres versenyzőknek pontosan kifejezi, mi a státuszunk a Lajtától nyugatra.

        + az Ipolytól délre.

    • Barnuska 12:37 on 2011.01.20 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Szuper ez a video…
      főleg a médiatörvény kapcsán, csak azt nem értem miért nincs meg Orbán Viktor válasza. Kiegyensúlyozottság ugyebár…
      khmm…
      audetur altera pars…
      azaz hallgattassék meg a másik fél is.
      ja, hogy az már nem demokratikus, meg nem európai. fújjj

    • petfold 16:43 on 2011.01.20 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Mondjuk jobb lett volna, ha nem “Dany le Rouge” mondja, még ha igaza is van.

  • Mázsa Péter 14:21 on 2011.01.19 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    Videó, EU Parlament: Mit kapott ma Orbán?

     
  • Mázsa Péter 14:39 on 2011.01.13 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    Freedom House: Magyarországon is jelentősen csorbult a demokrácia / Hungary: 1 of the 25 countries listed as declining in their levels of freedom 

    [English below]

    Tavaly 25 országban – köztük Magyarországon – jelentősen csorbult a politikai és a civil polgárjogok érvényesülése, és ez a demokratikus világ kevés komoly ellenállásába ütközött – állapította meg csütörtökön nyilvánosságra hozott éves jelentésében a Freedom House washingtoni székhelyű, nemzetközi jogvédő szervezet.

    “Nem csak arról van szó, hogy ellenfeleink általában véve az elnyomás eszközéhez nyúlnak, hanem arról is, hogy korábban soha nem tapasztalt agresszivitással és magabiztossággal teszik ezt. A demokratikus közösség pedig nem képes felnőni a feladathoz”, meglehetősen vérszegényen reagál – jelenti ki David J. Kramer, a szervezet ügyvezető igazgatója.

    “A tekintélyelvű hatalmak sokkal könnyebben tudják elnémítani belföldi bírálóikat, ha a nemzetközi porondon nem ütköznek ellenállásba” – jelentette ki Arch Puddington, a Freedom House kutatási igazgatója a jelentést kísérő közleményében.

    A helyzet a következő országban romlott: Afganisztán, Bahrein, Burundi, Kambodzsa, Elefántcsontpart, Dzsibuti, Egyiptom, Etiópia, a Fidzsi-szigetek, Franciaország, Bissau-Guinea, Haiti, Magyarország, Irán, Kuvait, Lettország, Madagaszkár, Mexikó, Ruanda, Srí Lanka, Szváziföld, Thaiföld, Ukrajna, Venezuela és Zambia.

    Twenty-five countries showed significant declines in democracy in 2010 with little serious resistance from the democratic world, the watchdog group Freedom House reported Thursday. […]

    “Our adversaries are not just engaging in widespread repression, they are doing so with unprecedented aggressiveness and self-confidence,” said David J. Kramer, executive director of the group. “And the democratic community is not rising to the challenge.” […]

    “Authoritarian regimes will have a much freer hand to silence their domestic critics if there is no resistance from the outside world,” said Arch Puddington, director of research at Freedom House in a statement accompanying the annual report on the levels of freedom in countries.

    The 25 countries listed as declining in their levels of freedom were Afghanistan, Bahrain, Burundi, Cambodia, Ivory Coast, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, France, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Hungary, Iran, Kuwait, Latvia, Madagascar, Mexico, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Thailand, Ukraine, Venezuela and Zambia. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/13/AR2011011300028.html

     
  • Mázsa Péter 14:19 on 2011.01.13 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship,   

    Leading Austrian Newspapers to Carry IPI / RSF / Austrian GPA Journalists’ Union Insert Calling on Hungarian Government to Withdraw New Media Legislation 

    IPI Urges Hungary to Uphold Democracy

    Leading Austrian newspapers are to carry on Thursday an IPI Austria insert calling on the Hungarian government to withdraw recently-passed media legislation heavily criticised by top EU politicians, the OSCE, journalists and a host of press freedom and freedom of expression groups.

    The insert – signed by the IPI Austria National Committee, Reporters without Borders and the Austrian GPA Journalists’ Union – warns that the new legislation constitutes a fundamental threat to press freedom, and therefore to democracy, by muzzling journalists and introducing censorship.

    Recalling the “heroic” role played by Hungary in throwing off the yoke of Communism, and evolving peacefully into a democracy, the insert urges the Hungarian government to strengthen – and not weaken – democracy within the European Union.

    “Suggestions by top Hungarian politicians that the legislation could conceivably be changed are not enough,” the insert says. It calls on the Hungarian government to withdraw the legislation and to replace it with legislation whose conformance with democratic principles is not in question.

    IPI Austria National Committee head Gerfried Sperl, who initiated the insert, said: “The Hungarian nation has in its history always fought for democracy and freedom of speech. The government of Hungary should strengthen democracy and not weaken it.”

    “This declaration is also a message to all Austrian politicians who from time to time try to initiate laws which reduce freedom of the media.”

    IPI Press Freedom Manager Anthony Mills said: “The many leading Austrian newspapers running this insert on Thursday are – along with the statement’s signatories – sending a powerful message in support of press freedom in Hungary. We urge the Hungarian government to take note of the grave concerns expressed in the statement, and to ensure that press freedom – and with it, democracy – are upheld.”

    The insert is to appear in the following Austrian newspapers: Die Kleine Zeitung; Die Presse; Der Standard; Kurier; Salzburger Nachrichten; Wirtschaftsblatt; Oberösterreichische Nachrichten; Neues Volksblatt; Tiroler Tageszeitung; Vorarlberger Nachrichten; Wiener Zeitung.

    This press release is supported by IPI’s affiliate, the South and East Europe Media Organisation (SEEMO).” http://www.freemedia.at/singleview/5272/

     
  • Mázsa Péter 10:32 on 2011.01.11 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Felhívás az európai intézményekhez – Appeal to the European Institutions 

    Kedves Barátaink,

    Az alulírottak részt vettek a közép- és kelet-európai kommunista rendszerek elleni demokratikus ellenzéki mozgalmakban. Azért harcoltunk, hogy nemzeteink csatlakozhassanak az európai demokráciák közösségéhez. Nem feledtük el, hogy hataloméhes kormányzatok képesek elrabolni az alapvető jogokat.

    Ezúttal egyenesen az Európai Unió szeme láttára rombolják le a demokrácia garanciáit, holott ezt a szövetséget éppen annak a biztosítására hozták létre, hogy közös értékeink oszthatatlanok maradjanak.

    Súlyos veszélybe került a szabadságban egyesült Európa célkitűzése. Megtörtént az, amit az Európai Unió hivatott megakadályozni, és amit sokan elképzelhetetlennek tartottak: az Unió határain belül, a 2004 óta tagállam Magyarországon, felszámolták a liberális demokráciát.

    Mindössze húsz évvel a kommunizmus bukása után Magyarország egyébként demokratikusan megválasztott kormánya, visszaélve törvényhozási többségével, módszeresen leépíti a demokrácia fék- és ellensúlyrendszerét, eltörli az alkotmányos korlátokat, és a kormányzó párt uralma alá hajtja az összes hatalmi ágat, a független intézményeket és a sajtót.

    Az Európai Parlamenthez, az Európai Bizottsághoz és az Európai Tanácshoz fordulunk, továbbá minden olyan európai kormányhoz és párthoz, amelyek számára fontos Európa igazi egysége. Erőteljes fellépésre kérjük Önöket annak érdekében, hogy a demokrácia Európáját ne téríthessék el céljától.

    Tarthatatlan, hogy kötelező európai normák csak a gazdaság területén alkalmazhatók a tagállamokra. Védhetetlen, hogy csak a csatlakozás előtt álló országoknak szabunk mércét a demokratikus értékek betartására, de zavarodottan szemléljük csupán, ha egy tagországban nyíltan semmibe veszik ezeket az értékeket.

    Számonkérhetővé kell tennünk a nehezen kivívott szabadságjogokat! Közös európai értékrendünk csak akkor valóságos, ha közös jogrend is védelmezi.

    Kérjük az európai intézményeket, hogy kerüljék el a Magyarországon elkövetett hibát: ne áldozzák fel a közös értékek tiszteletben tartását pártpolitikai csatározások vagy a soros európai elnökség vélt presztízse kedvéért. A konzervatívok, szociáldemokraták, liberálisok, zöldek fogjanak össze — ahogyan e felhívás aláírói tették — s fejlesszenek ki távlatos védelmet Európa közös demokráciájának lerombolása ellen.

    Ha valahol cenzúra van Európában, akkor mindenütt az van; az alkotmányos korlátok ledöntése minden más nemzetet túszul ejt; az alapjogok megtagadása egy országban minden európai polgárt megaláz. Ha akár egyetlen nemzet bizalma is megrendül az iránt, hogy Európa képes megvédeni a demokráciát, az a “demokrácia-deficit” újabb vádjához és végül Európa demokratikus küldetésének globális kétségbe vonásához vezet.

    Felszólítjuk tehát Európa parlamenti képviselőit, biztosait, kormányait és pártjait, hogy állítsanak fel világos normarendszert a demokratikus értékek — a pluralizmus, a szólásszabadság, az egyéni jogok, a hatalmi ágak elválasztása, az igazságszolgáltatás függetlensége — tiszteletben tartására. Az európai intézményeknek képessé kell válniuk arra, hogy megnevezzék és megszégyenítsék a normák áthágóit, s így nemzeteink továbbra is az Unióhoz fordulhassanak iránymutatásért a szabadságjogok megőrzéséért vívott mindennapi harcukban.

    In English:

    Dear Friends,

    We the undersigned are members and supporters of the democratic movements that fought against the Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe — fought for our nations to join the community of European democracies. We can never forget the risk of losing basic rights to power-hungry governments.

    This time, the destruction of democracy’s guarantees is enfolding right before the eyes of the European Union, the very alliance founded to ensure that respect for our common values remains indivisible.

    Today, the goal of a Europe united in liberty is in grave danger. What the European Union meant to prevent, and what many thought to be impossible, has now materialized: a full-fledged illiberal democracy inside its own borders — in Hungary, an EU member state since 2004.

    Just 20 years after communism collapsed, Hungary’s government, though elected democratically, is misusing its legislative majority to methodically dismantle democracy’s checks and balances, to remove constitutional constraints, and to subordinate to the will of the ruling party all branches of power, independent institutions, and the media.

    We turn to the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the European Council, as well as to all European governments and political parties that care for Europe’s true unity. We call on you to take resolute action to keep our Europe of democracy on track!

    It is untenable that binding EU criteria only apply to the economy of member states. It is indefensible that we set benchmarks of compliance with democratic values only until a nation joins the Union, but stand baffled when those values are blatantly disregarded in a member state.

    Our hard-won freedoms need to be made accountable! There exist no common European democratic values if they are not served by a common European law.

    We ask the European Institutions not to repeat the mistake that was committed in Hungary: respect for our common values must not be jeopardized for the sake of party political fights or the mistaken prestige of the rotating European Presidency.

    Conservatives, Social Democrats, Liberals and Greens must unite, just as we the undersigned have, in developing a forward-looking defence against the demolition of Europe’s shared democracy.
    Censorship anywhere in Europe is censorship everywhere; the removal of constitutional constraints holds all our nations hostage; the denial of basic rights in one country humiliates all Europeans. Any member nation’s shaken trust in Europe’s capacity to stand up for democracy will lead to further charges of “democracy deficit” at the European level, and will end up in a global mistrust for Europe’s democratic vocation.

    We call on European Parliamentarians and Commissioners, on Europe’s governments and parties to build clear standards of compliance with the values of democracy: pluralism, freedom of speech, individual liberties, separation of powers, and independence of justice. The European Institutions should be able to name and shame the transgressors, so that our nations may continue to look to the Union for guidance in their daily struggle to keep freedoms alive.

    Issued by – Kibocsátók:

    Attila Ara-Kovács
    Stephan Bickhardt
    Kathrin Bickhardt-Schulz
    Marianne Birthler
    Martin Böttger
    Martin Bútora
    Zora Bútorová
    György Dalos
    Gábor Demszky
    Christian Dietrich
    Frank Ebert
    Smaranda Enache
    Zsuzsa Gáspár
    Konstanty Gebert
    Joachim Goertz
    Árpád Göncz
    Éva Cs. Gyimesi
    Christian Halbrock
    Miklós Haraszti
    Katrin Hattenhauer
    Václav Havel
    Gerold Hildebrand
    Róza Hodosán
    Milan Horáček
    Dorothea Höck
    Péter Hunčik
    Christian Jansen
    Christoph Kaehler
    Agneša Kalinová
    Gisela Kallenbach
    Wojciech Kamiński
    László Kasza
    János Kenedi
    Michael Kleim
    György Konrád
    Ferenc Kőszeg
    Ivan Krastev
    Miroslav Kusý
    Júlia Lángh
    Doris Liebermann
    Jan Lityński
    Bálint Magyar
    Wojciech Maziarski
    Markus Meckel
    Adam Michnik
    Rudi Molt
    Petra Morawe
    Rainer Müller
    Wolfgang Obermair
    Iván Pető
    Andrei Pleşu
    Catrinel Pleşu
    Gerd Poppe
    László Rajk
    Lutz Rathenow
    István Rév
    Tom Sello
    Barbara Sengewald
    Matthias Sengewald
    Julia Sherwood
    Jiřina Šiklová
    Martin M. Šimečka
    Marta Šimečková
    Hans Sinn
    Aleksander Smolar
    Tamás St. Auby
    Sándor Szilágyi
    Wolfgang Templin
    Petr Uhl
    Esther-Marie Ullman-Goertz
    Matthias Voigt
    Reinhard Weißhuhn
    Henryk Wujec

    Supported by – Támogatók:

    Ludmila Alekseeva
    Wolfgang Eichwede
    Timothy Garton Ash
    Arsenij Roginskij
    Jacques Rupnik
    Irina Scherbakowa

    http://www.iprotest.hu/

     
  • Mázsa Péter 00:31 on 2011.01.10 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    South Park – Blackout for Hungary

    [click on the picture]
    [via Maróy Ákos]

     
  • Mázsa Péter 11:34 on 2011.01.08 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    Just imagine a situation, where you are living in a neighbourhood where a guy is walking around with a huge gun but he says he’s a good guy and will not use it. How worried would you be? The government too, says that it’s a good guy and will not use the massive fines in the new media law to stifle views it does not like.

    Gábor Horváth, deputy editor of the daily Népszabadság
     
  • Mázsa Péter 11:21 on 2011.01.08 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Elkúrtuk / We fucked it up.

    PM Ferenc Gyurcsány, May 2006 & Tamás Fellegi, a minister of the Orbán-government, January 2011
     
  • Mázsa Péter 15:40 on 2011.01.07 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, , ,   

    Censorship law, European Union (Hungary): quotations & comments 

    Almost full text of

    Quotations:

    Act on the freedom of the press (cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak ) and the fundamental rules on media content:

    “TITLE I DEFINITION OF TERMS
    Article 1 […] 6. Printed press materials: Individual issues of daily newspapers and other periodicals as well as on-line newspapers and news portals provided as a service for profit, for the content of which a natural or legal person or a business association without legal personality bears editorial responsibility, the primary objective of which is to distribute textual or image contents to the public for information, entertainment or training purposes in a printed form or via an electronic communications network.” –

    i.e., blogs with ads are “printed press materials”.

    “TITLE II SCOPE OF THE ACT
    Article 2 (1) This Act shall apply to media services and printed press materials provided by a media content provider established in the Republic of Hungary.
    (2) For the purposes of this Act, a media content provider shall be deemed as established in the Republic of Hungary when it meets the following criteria: […]
    c) when either the central seat of executive management or the place where editorial decisions are made is located in the territory of the Republic of Hungary, with the majority of the media content provider’s staff being employed in the territory of the Republic of Hungary”

    “Article 3 […] (4) In case of violation of this Act, the Media Council of the National Media and Infocommunications Authority may proceed and apply sanctions in accordance with the provisions of the Media Act on official proceedings.” –

    Only Fidesz nominees were elected to the Media Council, meaning that no places were left for the opposition or the Fidesz alliance (KDNP) party.

    “TITLE III FREEDOM OF THE PRESS
    Article 4 […] (3) The exercise of the freedom of the press may not […] violate public morals […].” –

    i.e., sensibility of churches and of the majority.

    “Article 5 (1) The Act may set official registration as a precondition for […] the publication of printed press materials.” –

    e.g. blogs, see the definition above

    “Article 6 – (3) In exceptionally justified cases, courts or authorities may – in the interest of protecting national security and public order or uncovering or preventing criminal acts – require the media service provider and any person employed by or engaged, in any other legal relationship intended for the performance of work, with the media content provider to reveal the identity of the informant.”

    “TITLE VI OBLIGATIONS OF THE PRESS
    Article 13 (1) All media content providers shall provide authentic, rapid and accurate information on local, national and EU affairs and on any event that bears relevance to the citizens of the Republic of Hungary and members of the Hungarian nation.
    (2) Linear and on-demand media content providers engaged in news coverage operations shall provide comprehensive, factual, up-to-date, objective and balanced coverage on local, national and European issues that may be of interest for the general public and on any event bearing relevance to the citizens of the Republic of Hungary and members of the Hungarian nation.”

    “Article 16
    The media content provider shall respect the constitutional order of the Republic of Hungary […].” –

    the ruling Fidesz party, based on its supermajority in Parliament, have radically limited the scope of constitutional supervision in the country, effectively suspending what was a constitutional democratic republic
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9ac8db2a-f1af-11df-bb5a-00144feab49a.html , and de facto pushing national-corporatist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism values on us. Actually, they are creating a new constitution for Hungary, alone, based on de jure these values as well.

    Should we respect a national-corporatist order, be it however constitutional?

    “Article 17 […] (2) The media content may not offend […] against – whether expressedly or by implication – […] any majority as well as any church or religious groups.” – no comment.

    Act on media services and mass media:

    [No comment]:

    “General Provisions
    Article 41 […] (4) The Authority shall keep an administrative register of […]
    i) online media products and news portals.”

    “Article 187
    (1) In case of repeated infringement, the Media Council and the Agency shall have the right to impose a fine on the senior officer of the infringing entity in an amount not exceeding HUF 2,000,000 [EUR 7,000], in line with the gravity, nature of the infringement and the circumstances of the particular case. […]

    Cf. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=GDP/capita+Hugary+/+GDP/capita+UK

    (3) The Media Council and the Agency […] shall have the right to impose the following legal consequences: […]
    b) it may impose a fine on the infringer in line with the following limits:
    ba) in case of infringement by a JBE media service provider and the media service provider under the regulations on the limitation of media market concentration, the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 200,000,000 [more than EUR 700,000]; […]
    bc) in case of a newspaper of nationwide distribution, the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 25,000,000 [EUR 90,000]; […]
    bf) in case of an online media product, the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 25,000,000 [EUR 90,000];
    bg) in case of a broadcaster, the fine shall be an amount not exceeding HUF 5,000,000;
    bh) in case of an intermediary service provider, the fine shall be of an amount not exceeding HUF 3,000,000 […]
    d) it may suspend the exercise of the media service provision right for a specific period of time”

    “Responsibility of the broadcasters and intermediary service providers for the broadcasting of media services and media products
    Article 188
    (1) The broadcaster and the intermediary service provider shall be responsible for the broadcasting of media services and media products in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (2)-(4) and Article 189.
    (2) The broadcaster may be obliged to suspend or terminate the broadcasting of media services in accordance with Article 189.
    (3) The intermediary service provider may be obliged to suspend the broadcasting of media services and online media products in accordance with Article 189.
    (4) The broadcaster shall not be responsible for the content of the programme of the media service provider resident in a state party to the Agreement on the European Economic Area and European Convention on Transborder Television and in its supplementary Protocol signed in Strasbourg on 5 May 1989 and promulgated by Act 49 of 1998. The broadcaster, however, may be obliged to suspend the broadcasting of the media service under Article 189, taking into account of the provisions of Articles 176–180.

    Article 189
    (1) When the Media Council resorts to the legal consequence against the media service provider […] the broadcaster shall […] terminate the broadcasting of the media service covered in the resolution as defined in the request.
    (2) When […] the […] the media service provider fails to fulfil the terms of the final and executable resolution specifying also legal consequences at the request of the Media Council or the Agency, the broadcaster […] shall suspend the broadcasting of the media service covered in the resolution as defined in the request. […]
    (4) When — in case of an online media product — […] the publisher fails to fulfil the terms of the final and
    executable resolution specifying also legal consequences at the request of the Media Council or the Agency, the broadcaster […] shall suspend the broadcasting of the media product covered in the resolution as defined in the request.
    […]
    (6) When the broadcaster and/or the intermediary service provider fails to fulfil the provisions of the request defined in paragraph (1)–(4), the Media Council or the Agency shall institute ex officio administrative proceedings against the broadcaster or the intermediary service provider and shall have the right to apply the legal consequences defined in Article 187 (3) (bg) or (bh).”

    INTERPRETATION
    Section 203 […]
    30. Intermediary service provider shall mean the service provider providing services in connection with the information society, which
    a) is engaged in the transmission of the information supplied by the recipient of services through a telecommunications network or the provision access to the telecommunications network (mere conduit and network-access);
    b) […] (caching);
    c) is engaged in the storage of the information supplied by the recipient of the service (hosting);
    d) […] (search services). […]

    42. Media content shall mean any content offered in the course of media services and in media products. […]

    60. Media product shall mean individual issues of dailies or other periodical papers, internet newspapers or news portals, which are offered as a business service, for the contents of which a natural or legal person, or a business entity with no legal personality has editorial responsibility, and the primary purpose of which is to convey contents consisting of text or images to the general public with the aim of providing information, pleasure or education, in a printed format or through any electronic telecommunications network. […]”

    In Hungarian:

    Cf.: http://www.ekint.org/ekint_files/File/hungarian%20ngos%20assessing%20the%20second%20wave%20of%20legislation.pdf

     
  • Mázsa Péter 00:41 on 2011.01.07 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    […] This is untrue. […]

    John Micklethwait, Editor-in-chief (The Economist): Viktor Orbán and Hír TV
     
  • Mázsa Péter 10:37 on 2011.01.06 Permalink | Log in to leave a Comment
    Tags: Censorship, ,   

    PM Viktor Orban: “If the European Union says that Hungary’s new media law needs to be changed, the government will accept that and adhere to it. We are part of the EU, there are rules of the game.” http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE7050DR20110106

     
    • Mázsa Péter 10:57 on 2011.01.06 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      “egy közigazgatási minisztériumi vezető […] szerint a kormány csakis akkor fog módosítani a szabályozáson, ha arra jogilag kötelezi majd valami – például egy európai bizottsági vizsgálat nyomán indult eljárás. “Ez azonban rendkívül hosszadalmas, maga a procedúra is eltart több évig, de még itt sem tartunk, hiszen még a vizsgálat sem indult el” – tette hozzá a forrás, aki biztos abban, hogy az Európai Bizottság nem is talál majd fogást a törvényen. “A jogszabály eddigi bírálói sem konkrét pontokat kifogásoltak, hanem magát a rendszert, a médiahatóság és a közszolgálati média átalakítását is érintő ‘politikai terméket'” – érvelt a politikus. Személyes véleménye szerint a törvény egyébként két ponton “lehetne necces”: a sajtótermékekre kiszabható bírság mértéke és a bírságkiszabás objektív kritériumainak hiánya miatt, szerinte azonban ezek mindegyikére van európai példa, amelyekbe eddig semmilyen uniós szerv “nem kötött bele”.” http://www.origo.hu/itthon/20110105-fideszes-kritika-es-kormanyzati-reakcio-a-mediatorveny-koruli-viharra.html

    • Mázsa Péter 16:15 on 2011.01.06 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Update: PM Orban: “If this (or that) passage of the Hungarian media act should be amended, then the media laws in France, Germany and the Danish media laws should be changed too as there is nothing in our legislation that is not in their media laws” http://www.reuters.com/article/idAFTRE7051OY20110106

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
Get Adobe Flash player